MPs debate transitional state pension arrangements for women

Paul_Herring

cannyshopper wrote: »

He was contracted out for many years so it is doubtful if he would get as much as £155 under the new rules

He'd likely get more, in total, if you include the income from the contracted out money. Which I bet you aren't.

jamesd

cannyshopper wrote: »

Regarding the pension changes from 2016: .... you are not comparing like-for-like.

Some of us do their research before posting:

"The new State Pension will be more generous for many women who have historically done poorly under the current, two-tier system - largely as a result of lower average earnings and part-time working. Around 650,000 women reaching State Pension age in the first ten years will receive an average of £8 per week (in 2014/15 earnings terms) more due to the new State Pension valuation of their National Insurance record"

So yes, I compared like for like because I used the official figures for the effect of the change to the single tier pension.

cannyshopper wrote: »

The only PEOPLE I am asking to have their pension age reduced are those for whom the 2011 Act gave them less than 10 years notice of the change. This affects men as well as women.

So, for the women who will receive less if they are switched from the single tier system by having their state pension age reduced, are you planning to personally compensate them for the amount you've had them lose? If not, what should happen to them and who should pay the bill for it?

Do you agree with the Collection of Women Against Real Injustice and Inequality of the State Pension (CARIISP) that it is unjust to deny women the flat rate state pension?

For the men, who will pay the bill?

p00hsticks

cannyshopper wrote: »

eg my ex-husband retired last month: his basic state pension is about £162 pw because of the additions for GPS etc. He was contracted out for many years so it is doubtful if he would get as much as £155 under the new rules which the general public seems to think is the basic entitlement.

You're unecessarily scaremongering. Any one who has already built up a State Pension Entitlement of £162 under the current rules will get that amount even if they dont reach state retirement age until after the new State pension comes into effect.

Whether they would or wouldn't get less under the new regime is purely academic as the transitional rules ensure that people will get whichever amount is the higher.

zagfles

cannyshopper wrote: »

Pension credit should be exactly that: a top-up for those whose pension is inadequate. (The way it is currently implemented smells of a neat way the government can fudge the unemployment figures for older workers - but that's irrelevant to the argument)

I raised this because pension credit is indeed means-tested, and when it is paid to men in their 60's who aren't working, it absolves them from having to sign on and prove they are actively seeking work. Unemployed women approaching their pension age have no such concession.

You're being disingenuous now - either that or you really have an problem with equality legislation. A man and a woman born on the same day will be entitled to pension credit on the same day. Do you really have a problem with this?

State pension ages are sexist because they were set at a time when sex discrimination was deemed OK. Pension credit was introduced at a time when it was not deemed OK, and the govt had already got into trouble with the winter fuel allowance for a similar reason.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/567208.stm

The only PEOPLE I am asking to have their pension age reduced are those for whom the 2011 Act gave them less than 10 years notice of the change. This affects men as well as women.

And this is a excellent campagning point. So don't bury it in pretend arguments about pension credit being sexist because it DOESN'T discriminate!!

Pennylane

A glimmer of hope?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/could-women-be-about-to-land-a-fairer-pension-deal-now-iain-dunc/

bigadaj

Pennylane wrote: »

A glimmer of hope?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/could-women-be-about-to-land-a-fairer-pension-deal-now-iain-dunc/

Well you can keep clutching at straws to maintain gender inequality if you want, but I wouldn't rely on it too much.

Pennylane

http://www.maturetimes.co.uk/pensions-grab-means-poverty-1950s-women/

ffacoffipawb

Pennylane wrote: »

http://www.maturetimes.co.uk/pensions-grab-means-poverty-1950s-women/

They can carry on working like men have to. Equality for women, but only when it suits them?

Pollycat

Pennylane wrote: »

http://www.maturetimes.co.uk/pensions-grab-means-poverty-1950s-women/

If I had a penny for every article I've read that spouts the same regurgitated stuff as the one in your link, I'd not need my State Pension. :rotfl:

FTR, I am a woman born late 1953 so very much affected by both the 1995 & 2011 acts.

Re this link:

Pennylane wrote: »

A glimmer of hope?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/could-women-be-about-to-land-a-fairer-pension-deal-now-iain-dunc/

I'd be interested to hear if anyone posting on this thread (and all the other threads) really does think there's a 'glimmer of hope' now that IDS has resigned?

Given the situation of Britsh Steel and their pension issues, is there even a tiny 'glimmer of hope' that the Goverment will spend £billions to undo an act that has been in place for 5 years?

seven-day-weekend

But what sort of 'glimmer of hope' do you want?

Your pension age has gone up. It is not, imho, going to be reversed.