WASPI - Women Against State Pension Inequality
monkeyspanner
Posts: 2,124 Forumite
WASPI accept that state pension age must rise as people live longer. But feel that it's unfair that women were not informed personally in 1995 and 2011 when fundamental changes were made.
https://www.facebook.com/WASPI-Women-Against-State-Pension-Inequality-877054125688402/timeline/
These changes affect over 500,000 women born during the 1950's
Please sign the online petition at:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776
https://www.facebook.com/WASPI-Women-Against-State-Pension-Inequality-877054125688402/timeline/
These changes affect over 500,000 women born during the 1950's
Please sign the online petition at:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776
0
Comments
-
I have joined this group on Twitter. They are gaining lots of support on there.0
-
Also being discussed on several threads on the Pensions board.0
-
I recall that, when they revised my SPA beyond 60, that I don't remember having received a letter telling me about it. I think I only knew because I read the newspaper articles about it.
Otherwise I could have been sitting there, in all innocence, still expecting to get it at 60th birthday.
You would have thought they would have received enough flack that they wouldn't repeat the "not informing people" about it!
I'm not quite sure what this petition might achieve in hindsight - ie complaining the Government didn't inform us personally as they should have?0 -
moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »I recall that, when they revised my SPA beyond 60, that I don't remember having received a letter telling me about it. I think I only knew because I read the newspaper articles about it.
Otherwise I could have been sitting there, in all innocence, still expecting to get it at 60th birthday.
You would have thought they would have received enough flack that they wouldn't repeat the "not informing people" about it!
I'm not quite sure what this petition might achieve in hindsight - ie complaining the Government didn't inform us personally as they should have?
Perhaps nothing, but hopefully the government might think twice about pushing through another measure like this without sufficient notice. There is a review of pension age due in 2017. There is also a planned pension age change of 66 to 67 between 2026 and 2028. Will the government think they can change the schedule of the 66 to 67 age change? If they do it will be within the 10 year notice period recommended.
The much trailed "Single Tier" new state pension to be introduced in 2016 is not "Single Tier" and many will be assessed under the old state pension rules because this produces a higher pension figure.. Many are not aware of how this new pension will work including most of the DWP staff (if my conversations with DWP are anything to go by).0 -
monkeyspanner wrote: »WASPI accept that state pension age must rise as people live longer. But feel that it's unfair that women were not informed personally in 1995 and 2011 when fundamental changes were made.
https://www.facebook.com/WASPI-Women-Against-State-Pension-Inequality-877054125688402/timeline/
These changes affect over 500,000 women born during the 1950's
Please sign the online petition at:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776
The Facebook campaign and the petition seem to contradict one another - which one is correct?
1. The petition which states;
"The Government must make fair transitional arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951 who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA)."
OR
2. The Facebook campaign which states their aim is to;
"put all women born in the 1950s (on or after 6 April 1951) affected by the changes to the State Pension Age in exactly the same position of they would have been in if they had been born on or before 5 April 1950."
The 2nd one and comments on Facebook seems to suggest that compensation for anything up to 6 years ( ie £36k or more ) is being campaigned for.
However this seems to be at odds with the petition that asks for fair transitional arrangements.
So which is it?0 -
TBH I knew about these state pension change - but then I am Radio 4 Listener. Agree should have had an individualised letter then all this would have gone away.
I have worked anyway until 65 - purely for selfish reasons. I have also taken measures that I will have extra pension in my 70's - and yes, this has meant monetary sacrifices. I am really glad that now I can leave my 'pension' to my sons if I die before 750 -
The Facebook campaign and the petition seem to contradict one another - which one is correct?
1. The petition which states;
"The Government must make fair transitional arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951 who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA)."
OR
2. The Facebook campaign which states their aim is to;
"put all women born in the 1950s (on or after 6 April 1951) affected by the changes to the State Pension Age in exactly the same position of they would have been in if they had been born on or before 5 April 1950."
The 2nd one and comments on Facebook seems to suggest that compensation for anything up to 6 years ( ie £36k or more ) is being campaigned for.
However this seems to be at odds with the petition that asks for fair transitional arrangements.
So which is it?
Good point - and they do need to sort out that credibility gap there.
Fingers crossed for the 2nd option personally - as, at a very rough guesstimate right now - I must have lost about £20,000 income with the raising of my SPA.:eek:0 -
Strange that they are not also campaigning for men born in the 50s to be put in the same position they were in but that's women's "equality" campaigners for you0
-
moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »Fingers crossed for the 2nd option personally - as, at a very rough guesstimate right now - I must have lost about £20,000 income with the raising of my SPA.:eek:
I can't agree with the 2nd option as age 60 has never been the state pension age for those women for 20 years.
The acceleration towards age 66 I can agree with as there was far too little notice given and for some meant an 18 month increase as opposed to 12 months.
The petition states WASPI agrees with state pension equalisation and fair transitional arrangements but its aim is to have neither of those for 1950s women.
What about 1950s men, 1960s mean and women? When does it become fair?0 -
I can't agree with the 2nd option as age 60 has never been the state pension age for those women for 20 years.
The acceleration towards age 66 I can agree with as there was far too little notice given and for some meant an 18 month increase as opposed to 12 months.
The petition states WASPI agrees with state pension equalisation and fair transitional arrangements but its aim is to have neither of those for 1950s women.
Imho, the petition is muddled in its thinking and I'm really concerned about the differing points between the petition and what this group say on FB.moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »Fingers crossed for the 2nd option personally - as, at a very rough guesstimate right now - I must have lost about £20,000 income with the raising of my SPA.:eek:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.4K Spending & Discounts
- 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 172.8K Life & Family
- 247.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards