MSE News: Women's state pension petition gathers over 50,000 signatures

molerat

MrsM received the letter March 2012. I don't remember receiving one and it is not in my SP file - I would have put it there if I had received one but we were aware of the changes anyway

mumps

jem16 wrote: »

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/283806/response/693705/attach/2/FoI%203231.pdf

An extract from the above link;

In addition, the Department wrote to individuals affected by State Pension age changes. Mail campaigns took place between 2009 and 2013 and covered all women born between 6th April 1950 and 5th April 1960, along with men born between 6th December 1953 and 5th April 1960.

I thought they had admitted that they didn't write to everyone? I was born in 1953 and they didn't write to me, I knew all about it, I was a Senior Manager running a large Payroll and HR department so it was my job to know and I would have registered a letter because of that. I know people don't always engage but I promise I would have noticed.

mumps

molerat wrote: »

MrsM received the letter March 2012. I don't remember receiving one and it is not in my SP file - I would have put it there if I had received one but we were aware of the changes anyway

I wasn't the only one who was missed then.

Goldiegirl

I received my letter in November 2013. as I'm one of the last people in the selected age group, I must have been amongst the last to be written to


Now, considering I'm quite on the ball about these changes, I had to have a good rummage round to find the letter.


There will be people who've mislaid the letter or threw it away, and will now say they never received it - I'm not saying this is the case with the posters on this thread!!

greenglide

As part of all this the DWP also introduced the Combined Pensions Forecast whereby they supply details of the State Pension entitlement to Pension Schemes for printing on their annual statements if the scheme wants to.

There was also the Automatic Pension Forecast exercise around 2004 or so which was aimed at huge numbers of people, was it all the population over a certain age (the memory is failing!).

jem16

molerat wrote: »

MrsM received the letter March 2012. I don't remember receiving one and it is not in my SP file - I would have put it there if I had received one but we were aware of the changes anyway

Perhaps you chose not to keep it as you already had one in your wife's name?

molerat

jem16 wrote: »

Perhaps you chose not to keep it as you already had one in your wife's name?

I doubt it as the letter gives actual SP date and we have loads of duplicated info in the folders.

saver861

Goldiegirl wrote: »

I think you are mistaking 1995 and 1985 with 1895 and 1885.

On the contrary - not at all. I got my centuries in the right order.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

I find it incredible that you think women were so downtrodden, with no power over their lives or able to make any decisions 20 to 30 years ago. I don't know where you were living in the 80's and 90's, but it bears no similarity with my life whatsoever. In my entire life, I can't remember feeling unequal compared to a man, whether at work or at home.

But, if you re-read my post I said that the further you go back historically the less advantages women had. It was not the same 20 years ago as it is today. It was even less so, 30 years ago, 40 years ago etc. It's not the case that all women were downtrodden - some were - but the advantages to them were lesser and has been historically the case.

But, let me copy some words from a woman, i.e. Martha Lane Fox from the Dimbley Lecture.

I’m going to start with a moment from my early life in technology.

It's 1998. I am 25. I am sitting in a huge central London office, with long sash windows, and a grey haired man in a three piece suit is at the far end, behind a big mahogany desk.

“What happens if you get pregnant?”

I’d just finished the most important pitch of my life - presenting the vision for Lastminute.com with co-founder Brent Hoberman. We were trying to raise money to create something truly new powered by the internet. This was the first and only question from the first and only investor who had agreed to meet us.



Note the year: 1998 - not 1888. Look up the speech - you might be surprised at some of the revelations in relation to women.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

In my entire life, I can't remember feeling unequal compared to a man, whether at work or at home.

Excellent. Unfortunately, that is not how it is or has been for many.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

You didn't need a University education, a full time job or to be a decision maker to have taken note of the 1995 changes and to work out whether you'd be affected None of it was rocket science - just joining up the dots really.

Nope its not rocket science. Why are so many people baffled by the new pension regulations. Not rocket science either.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

But, after 40 years working in banks and building societies, I know that, sadly, there are people out there who, for whatever reason are either uninterested or unable to cope with anything to do with finances.

Of course there are ... and there are probably an equal amount who are unable to cope with plumbing problems, etc etc.

If there is new changes on anything, regardless of what it is, then, if the majority does not understand it or are unaware, the message has failed.

Advertisers go to great lengths to ensure that the campaigns they pay big money to promote are reaching their audiences.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

You say this matter didn't affect you directly, but if you were married at the time, I assume you wife is of an age to be affected by these changes, so you may be indirectly affected - I'd have thought you'd have been looking for information in the same way that I did, if that's the case

Yes that's true. They changed it in 1995 and we were aware of the increased spa for women. That was 20 + years notice to do something about it.

They changed it again in 2011. Less time to do something about it and 18 months increase. You I recall, and all in your age group, had a 12 month increase and 12-15 years to make alternative arrangements.

You and I seem to have a different interpretation of fairness. However, I prefer my interpretation ....

Goldiegirl

saver861 wrote: »

They changed it again in 2011. Less time to do something about it and 18 months increase. You I recall, and all in your age group, had a 12 month increase and 12-15 years to make alternative arrangements.

You and I seem to have a different interpretation of fairness. However, I prefer my interpretation ....

I did say that I'd consider signing the petition if it was solely about 2011. Some people have been much more adversely affected than others, and they are extremely unfortunate. They have my sympathy.

But as for fairness. It'd be unfair if a woman born on exactly the same day as another woman had a different retirement date. But if every woman born on the same day has the same retirement date, that is fair - they are being treated the same.

But a woman having a birthdate a year later than another woman having a vastly different retirement date - that is unfortunate.

I see a subtle difference between unfair and unfortunate.

saver861

jem16 wrote: »

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/283806/response/693705/attach/2/FoI%203231.pdf

An extract from the above link;

Well, looking further:

A 2004 DWP report, Public Awareness of State Pension Age Equalisation, reported its survey findings that 73% of those aged 45 to 54 at that time—in 2004—were aware of the changes to women’s state pension age.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2015-12-03a.1247.0

Now I don't know if that is the same DWP survey referred to earlier but there is considerable difference is the findings. This suggests that 73% were aware. That would be more inline with what I would expect. Thus, instead of 59% being unaware, it would seem only 27% were unaware.

Those figures would seem more sensible in the absence of clarification of the 59% figure.

It would seem my faith in my fellow citizens is a little stronger than many on this thread. Instead of 59% being liars or unscrupulous it might be that only 27% are!

Heavens forbid should I ever be on trial, I do hope to avoid some on here on my jury!!!