Inform the debate on the effect of the equalisation of the state pension age on women

bowlhead99

OldBeanz wrote: »

If anyone knows a woman being paid less than a man for the same job then they should report the matter to the appropriate authorities as it is against the law.

I'm not sure that's the case. At our firm we have some women in the same role/ job title as male colleagues, with lower salaries, and some men getting paid less than some female colleagues in the same role job title. So there is definitely going to be cases of a woman getting £35k and a man getting £37k, but there is also a woman on £37.5k and a man on £34k. What an employer will pay for you and put in your employment contract is related to what you want and how much the employer wants what you offer.

What would be against the law would be if the £35k woman was paid that instead of £37 or £37.5 *because* she was a woman, or the £34k guy was paid that level instead of higher levels because of sexuality or ethnicity or disability or gender or all the things that are covered by equal opportunities rules.

buggy_boy

patanne wrote: »

I don't think that anyone on here (or not many anyway) has disputed the fact that retirement ages should go up. You do know that men's will too don't you? This is not just about women. I would hope that we get gender equality in retirement age as quickly as we will do in employment pay.

Women fought for the vote a darn sight longer than 10 years.

Originally the pensionable age was basically your life expectancy, with life expectancy growing that creates an issue where there will be almost as many people of 60+ than there are tax paying workers, obviously it does not take a genius to work out that is not sustainable.

Im well aware that the age of the pension is going up, im in my 30's and even though I pay my NI I fully expect the age of pensions to increase further and maybe even get means tested so by the time I get there I am planning on there being no OAP for me...

I am the generation you baby boomers have screwed over, I get paid substantially less than colleagues in their 50's even though im now more skilled, they have a final salary pension I get a pitiful contribution pension where I get no choice of the provider, my employer pays 6%, I pay 5%, over the pas year the pension provider has lost the employers 6%, my 5% and the pot has reduced 5%... If my pension increases by 5% a year and I continue to contribute, taking into account expected pay rises (Didnt have a pay rise for 7yrs) my pension will be worth the equivalent of around £3500... My generation has had to pay the high house prices that your generation has mostly gained from. And now you want us to pay more tax to give you more money, my generation is going to be screwed and for most that have little or no plans for retirement they will have to work well into their 70's.

I feel actually lucky I had cheaper uni fees (around £1200 per year) I managed to get onto the housing ladder and although the crash brought house prices down ive still gained a little... I would rather money spent to help the early 20 somethings just coming into the working world where getting a job is extremely difficult and most jobs are try to de-skill, getting on the property ladder is a pipe dream for most and with volatile pretty poor pensions. It is that generation that we should be looking at as we should learn from the lessons of the self entitled grab everything baby boomers and stop stealing our youngsters future.

saver861

buggy_boy wrote: »

I am the generation you baby boomers have screwed over, I get paid substantially less than colleagues in their 50's even though im now more skilled, they have a final salary pension I get a pitiful contribution pension where I get no choice of the provider, my employer pays 6%, I pay 5%, over the pas year the pension provider has lost the employers 6%, my 5% and the pot has reduced 5%...

If you were in my parents generation you would be considered somewhat well off!

You seem to spend a lot of time thinking about what you don't have, or what others might have that you don't / won't get.

Maybe you should try looking at things from the other perspective for a while ...... just to balance things up. I suspect you won't though.

Pollycat

buggy_boy wrote: »

Originally the pensionable age was basically your life expectancy, with life expectancy growing that creates an issue where there will be almost as many people of 60+ than there are tax paying workers, obviously it does not take a genius to work out that is not sustainable.

Im well aware that the age of the pension is going up, im in my 30's and even though I pay my NI I fully expect the age of pensions to increase further and maybe even get means tested so by the time I get there I am planning on there being no OAP for me...

I am the generation you baby boomers have screwed over, I get paid substantially less than colleagues in their 50's even though im now more skilled, they have a final salary pension I get a pitiful contribution pension where I get no choice of the provider, my employer pays 6%, I pay 5%, over the pas year the pension provider has lost the employers 6%, my 5% and the pot has reduced 5%... If my pension increases by 5% a year and I continue to contribute, taking into account expected pay rises (Didnt have a pay rise for 7yrs) my pension will be worth the equivalent of around £3500... My generation has had to pay the high house prices that your generation has mostly gained from. And now you want us to pay more tax to give you more money, my generation is going to be screwed and for most that have little or no plans for retirement they will have to work well into their 70's.

I feel actually lucky I had cheaper uni fees (around £1200 per year) I managed to get onto the housing ladder and although the crash brought house prices down ive still gained a little... I would rather money spent to help the early 20 somethings just coming into the working world where getting a job is extremely difficult and most jobs are try to de-skill, getting on the property ladder is a pipe dream for most and with volatile pretty poor pensions. It is that generation that we should be looking at as we should learn from the lessons of the self entitled grab everything baby boomers and stop stealing our youngsters future.

Where did patanne (the poster you quoted) say she wanted you to pay more taxes?

UKParliament

The House of Commons Library has produced a research briefing for the debate, 'Increases in the State Pension age for women born in the 1950s'.

The House of Commons Library produces research briefings which provide in-depth and impartial analysis of all major pieces of legislation, as well as many areas of policy, or cover frequently asked questions and topical issues.

Watch the debate from 4.30pm on Monday 1 February on Parliament TV.

xylophone

Men and women should have the same pension age and the sooner this happens the better your unfortunate to fall on the wrong side of the line but whenever you draw a line in these sorts of things there will always be people that fall just to one side or the other... Thats life, you cant keep re-drawing the line for a few like you that are just one side of it or nothing will ever change.

I get paid substantially less than colleagues in their 50's even though im now more skilled, they have a final salary pension I get a pitiful contribution pension where I get no choice of the provider,

You've fallen the wrong side of a line?

And how on earth has the baby boomer generation "screwed you over"?

These are people who took jobs and found themselves with the pension scheme the employer provided - often they paid substantial contributions from their wages or salaries,sacrificing having more disposable income in youth.

With regard to the state pension, they just paid their NICs as required - they had no choice in the matter!

Those who could bought houses - getting a mortgage was no easy matter and required years of saving then as now.

And as for longevity, I don't think today's pensioners had crystal balls....

xylophone

The House of Commons Library has produced a research briefing for the debate,

Indeed....https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/70003915#Comment_70003915

post 82.

POPPYOSCAR

buggy_boy wrote: »

Originally the pensionable age was basically your life expectancy, with life expectancy growing that creates an issue where there will be almost as many people of 60+ than there are tax paying workers, obviously it does not take a genius to work out that is not sustainable.

Im well aware that the age of the pension is going up, im in my 30's and even though I pay my NI I fully expect the age of pensions to increase further and maybe even get means tested so by the time I get there I am planning on there being no OAP for me...

I am the generation you baby boomers have screwed over, I get paid substantially less than colleagues in their 50's even though im now more skilled, they have a final salary pension I get a pitiful contribution pension where I get no choice of the provider, my employer pays 6%, I pay 5%, over the pas year the pension provider has lost the employers 6%, my 5% and the pot has reduced 5%... If my pension increases by 5% a year and I continue to contribute, taking into account expected pay rises (Didnt have a pay rise for 7yrs) my pension will be worth the equivalent of around £3500... My generation has had to pay the high house prices that your generation has mostly gained from. And now you want us to pay more tax to give you more money, my generation is going to be screwed and for most that have little or no plans for retirement they will have to work well into their 70's.

I feel actually lucky I had cheaper uni fees (around £1200 per year) I managed to get onto the housing ladder and although the crash brought house prices down ive still gained a little... I would rather money spent to help the early 20 somethings just coming into the working world where getting a job is extremely difficult and most jobs are try to de-skill, getting on the property ladder is a pipe dream for most and with volatile pretty poor pensions. It is that generation that we should be looking at as we should learn from the lessons of the self entitled grab everything baby boomers and stop stealing our youngsters future.

If anyone has "screwed you over" it has not been the so called "baby boomers".


And how is making people work longer before they get their pension helping the younger generation into employment?

jem16

xylophone wrote: »

Indeed....https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/70003915#Comment_70003915

post 82.

Yes but the point is that this is the updated document published yesterday, hopefully with our comments taken on board.

Pollycat

jem16 wrote: »

Yes but the point is that this is the updated document published yesterday, hopefully with our comments taken on board.

Hopefully not with all the comments from this thread taken on board.