We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

MSE News: Retirement age hike has left women hundreds of pounds worse off

Options
12357

Comments

  • Mortgagefreeman
    Options
    I've never used Twitter before (or any Social media sites) but signed up so I could view the WASPI Parody account. It does make for some amusing and interesting reading, if you like that type of thing. Apparently WASPI have been doing their damnedest to get it shut down to little avail.
  • System
    System Posts: 178,117 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Isn't it strange that when sex equality costs men something it is called rectifying an historic wrong, but when the equalisation costs women it becomes a new grievance to exploit?
  • colsten
    colsten Posts: 17,597 Forumite
    First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    TrustyOven wrote: »

    I think what "triggered me" was the attack on wealthy people that are appearing to help the less privileged.

    They clearly have managed to pull the wool over your eyes. It is part of their strategy to use case studies of needy people - - - - entirely for the purpose of making the case that they themselves need to be given massive amounts of back payments and compensation.

    If you followed the WASPI campaign, you will have noticed that they demanded non-means tested payments right from the start. They have also reacted furiously to any suggestions that would involve a means test of any sort, and made it very clear that such proposals are unacceptable.

    WASPI don't care a jot about needy people. When 3 of the 5 co-founders saw the light and said they need to change their "ask", they were blocked from using the campaign's Facebook and Twitter accounts, and were eventually thrown out.
  • DairyQueen
    DairyQueen Posts: 1,829 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    edited 5 August 2017 at 9:35AM
    Options
    Pollycat wrote: »
    I disagree with this.

    I'm a late 1953 woman.
    I was well aware back in 1995 that I wouldn't get my state pension at age 60. Instead, I would get it aged 63-and-a-half.
    It was actually due in April 2017.
    That was included in my retirement plans (I retired early aged 50).

    Then in 2011, I (and thousands of other women around the same age were affected) was told that because of the move to pay state pension at age 66 instead of 65, my state pension would be pushed back to age 64-and-three-quarters. That's 15 months later than I had planned on and known about since 1995.

    By then, I'd already done my 'proper retirement planning' and they left me with a 15 month delay in my state pension date with 6 years notice.

    I did check what I was entitled to.

    You may have no problem with getting your state pension at age 68 but how would you feel if at age 62, you were told you'd be nearly 70 when you get it?

    I agree that some people haven't done 'proper retirement planning' - some because they haven't been able to afford to pay into a pension - but some people have done 'proper retirement planning'.

    It's generally acknowledged that this change in 2011 was unfair to those women in my age bracket.
    In fact I believe that the Government have said they'll give 10 years notice of a change in state pension age in future.

    My view is that it's only fair - and equal - that women and men get their state pension at the same age, so I don't support WASPI.

    On the subject of the MSE article, I'm downright sick of presenters/newspeople presenting the change in women's state pension age from age 60 as a complete surprise when it has been in the public domain for over 20 years.

    Pollycat highlights an issue of unfairness belatedly introduced into the SPA equalisation programme. The women in Pollycat's narrow age group are the victims of genuine injustice, and for the reasons that she states. However, their valid grounds for complaint have been marginalised thanks to the wider spurious and unreasonable claims made by the WASPI campaign.

    I am a 1959 woman and, since 1995, there has been universal knowledge and acceptance of the SPA equalisation legislation. In the intervening 22 years no family member, friend or colleague has ever claimed ignorance. This includes both women and men from all walks of life, social backgrounds and employment statuses. Only those in a religious retreat could have been unaware of the widespread publicity and discussion surrounding this issue in the 1990s.

    In my experience this clarity only became royally muddied when government started the programme of pension reform which began in the noughties. This has affected both genders but especially women, and the rapidity of the changes left us never knowing from one year to the next when we would retire. Everyone has been impacted to some extent but the acceleration of gender equalisation has targeted women of Pollycat's sepecific age group disproportionately.

    In the last decade or so SPA has changed twice for most people, The number of years of NI credits we require for a full SP has also changed twice. The nSP has been introduced. Most of us will have been given at least a decade's notice of the changes which negatively impact us personally. The same does not apply to women born in Pollycat's specific 1950s age group (late 1953 thru early 1955). This particular cohort had their SP age increased by up to 18 months with less than a decade's notice. I think I would also be feeling a tad resentful if I had been born in March 1954 as my retirement age would be a full 3.5 years after women born only a year earlier. If the latter had affected both men and women, if it had not been enacted under the umbrella of gender inequality, such random and extreme inequality would have provoked a national outcry.

    I believe that Pollycat's 1953-55 demographic can thank the WASPI campaign for the government's failure to rectify this injustice. Had WASPI campaigned only on behalf of this group then society may have been inclined to address the one issue which I believe has merit within the whole WASPI spectrum.
  • Silvertabby
    Silvertabby Posts: 9,202 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    edited 5 August 2017 at 1:13PM
    Options
    I believe that Pollycat's 1953-55 demographic can thank the WASPI campaign for the government's failure to rectify this injustice. Had WASPI campaigned only on behalf of this group then society may have been inclined to address the one issue which I believe has merit within the whole WASPI spectrum. Posted by DairyQueen
    I agree. I was born in 1956 (and, like you, was well aware of the changes in 1995) but would have supported a campaign to ease the 2011 changes for the 1953 - 1954 ladies.
  • jamesd
    jamesd Posts: 26,103 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    edited 5 August 2017 at 12:39PM
    Options
    There already was a campaign, between the time of the planned legislation and the final version. That increased government spending by a billion Pounds over the initial plan, to limit the maximum increase to eighteen months. That also extended state pension age inequality between men and women by the delay compared to the first version of the plan.

    More notice would still have been good but given the timings there wasn't much scope for it. Perhaps better to make the change faster for some to reduce it to less than eighteen months at the longer end. Maybe divert some of that money also to keeping Pension Credit age younger so that those in actual financial need would be protected from the working age means tested benefits system, which isn't as generous as the one for those above state pension age. Even just removing the fortnightly signing on requirement for working age benefits would have helped and that could have been done even selectively for areas with relatively high unemployment levels. That's something which could still be done at probably very low cost.

    A bigger time pressure here is Britain's baby boom years in the sixties, at the end of the baby boom generation, with it financially desirable to get the increases in place before lots of those people get to their state pension age. There was a mini-boom in the years just after the end of the second world war but that had mostly ended by the start of the fifties.
  • Nual
    Nual Posts: 179 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Options
    The disparity in age was because men tended to marry women younger than themselves and women tended not to work or paid a married women's stamp, relying on their husband's pension in retirement. So both had state pension income at the same time.
  • Nual
    Nual Posts: 179 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Options
    lets sort out the women first and then there is a chance to make things better for the worn out men too
  • bigadaj
    bigadaj Posts: 11,531 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Nual wrote: »
    The disparity in age was because men tended to marry women younger than themselves and women tended not to work or paid a married women's stamp, relying on their husband's pension in retirement. So both had state pension income at the same time.

    Which might well have been the case forty or fifty years ago, but things change as should the legislation.
  • bigadaj
    bigadaj Posts: 11,531 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Nual wrote: »
    lets sort out the women first and then there is a chance to make things better for the worn out men too

    So you are supporting current inequality, and maintaining spending money on well off people when cuts continue in many other areas with more need?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 344.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 236.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 610.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.9K Life & Family
  • 249.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards