Sign the Petition for Womens state pension age going up unfair

GibbsRule_No3

This programme had an item on the changes to pensions today. I was hoping it would have been longer. They kept saying about going to .Gov site to get a statement and more info. I think there might be an article in the Telegraph today, will try and check when I get to work. They certainly indicated that women did not know about the changes to the retirement age and that the £155 pension was a misnomer and that people did not understand they would not all get that amount. Like I said shame it wasn't a longer item as it probably just added to the myth/confusion.

MoneyWorry

Hmm, flat rate pension of £8 and then they state further along they've paid NI for over 40 years. They shouldn't have to claim benefits....heaven help me. I've been working since 1978, then mostly due to the financial crisis was made redundant in 2007 and 2014. It was the first appointment I made....not for the money, but for the NI preservation.

p00hsticks

GibbsRule_No3 wrote: »

They certainly indicated that women did not know about the changes to the retirement age and that the £155 pension was a misnomer and that people did not understand they would not all get that amount.

It's a bit contrary to say that you weren't aware of the changes to SPA but are aware of the introduction of the nSP and the fact that the new maximum is £155.

A good example of how you hear what you want to hear and ignore the bad news....

JezR

Somewhere in their examples is a case of a woman who was always intending to work to 65, but was going to defer her pension from 60 and pick it up then as a lump sum. Now she 'has' to work until 65 and won't be getting anything extra for doing so. Since the current rate on deferral that she was expecting from the figure she stated has only been in force since the 2005 Act it is hard for me to understand how she knew all the detail of this, yet at the same time was unaware of the pension age changes from 10 years before.

GibbsRule_No3

Talking about the pension.

jem16

GibbsRule_No3 wrote: »

Talking about the pension.

Yep and Anne Keen ( WASPI founder ) had no answer to what Plan B was when told that Plan A ( effective rollback to age 60 for all 1950s women ) was unlikely to happen.

This is their biggest failing - they are not interested in helping those most in need. They are purely interested in getting what they think is their right - pension at age 60.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06vfc6w

From about 12:20 in once it's available to catch up on.

GibbsRule_No3

I thought she meant she was not going to tell them what she wanted as Plan B.

Lets face it we all want the best for our own situation. I will admit the only thing that concerns me is the 1953 - 1955 shift and that jump between, a friend who was born in 1952 already receiving her pension and the amount of years I have to wait until I get mine. We had planned for years to do things when I retired and now we cannot do it until much later. I am happy to work a few more months in the great shift of things to equality but it should be shifted to a timescale.

jem16

GibbsRule_No3 wrote: »

I thought she meant she was not going to tell them what she wanted as Plan B.

She doesn't want a Plan B - that's very clear on Facebook. She thinks she's entitled to Plan A along with ALL 1950s women regardless of need or circumstances.

Lets face it we all want the best for our own situation.

Yes we do but we also have to face reality and accept personal responsibility over 1995 changes.

I will admit the only thing that concerns me is the 1953 - 1955 shift and that jump between, a friend who was born in 1952 already receiving her pension and the amount of years I have to wait until I get mine. We had planned for years to do things when I retired and now we cannot do it until much later. I am happy to work a few more months in the great shift of things to equality but it should be shifted to a timescale.

No-one here would disagree with the 2011 changes being unfair.

mgdavid

jem16 wrote: »

.......
No-one here would disagree with the 2011 changes being unfair.

<sticks head above parapet>

I will disagree, it should have been done sooner / quicker.
Nobody said life is fair. They've had a skewed advantage for many decades, they campaigned like blazes for equality, now they whinge and don't like it. Tough. The 2011 changes are AIUI a maximum of 18 months longer working, hardly earth-shattering.

Goldiegirl

This £8 a week pension thing - does anybody know where they got this idea from?