Women SPA this week

ffacoffipawb

Terron wrote: »

I was born in 1959. My sister was born 11 months later in 1960 but lets assume she was a twin.
We were teens when the equal pay act was implemented, so it has applied for all our working lives. Equalizing pension entitlement was an obvious consequence, though after a delay. Forty years after the implementation seemed fair, so that would have been 2015. It happened last year, a little late but close enough.
Given that the European court ruling against unequal retirement ages was in 1992 and the goverment acted in 1995, there was plenty of notice. The only excuse for not realizing it was changing is stupidity and being penalised for that is natural and fair.


I planned to retire at 60 from in my 20s, but that was using private pensions that were also available to women (though the terms may have been slightly worse due to their longer life expectancy). But the inequality of it being easier for men to get private pensions does not justify the separate inequality of state pension ages.



That is the answer to your question. It is not fair that men had longer to plan, but that in no way justifies inequalirty in the state pension ages.

It was well publicised at the time apart from GRASPIs with selective amnesia.

Ignorance of the law is no defence, the Government does not have to notify individuals.

What if they reduced the alcohol limit for driving? They would not write to people to tell them. Would drunk drivers caught out try the same argument?

Hope Mansfield and the GRASPIs get their just deserts.

Silvertabby

jamesd wrote: »

The groups seem to believe that it's acceptable and desirable for 50s twins with the same birth date to have that difference. Just because one is or becomes female and the other is or becomes male.

Hmmm - They won't win, of course - but just think what would happen if they did. What would be the cost of paying pensions from 60 to 'men who identify as women' ? And would 'women who identify as men' (sorry, really struggling for current pc terms here!) refuse payment until they reached male SPA ?

ffacoffipawb

Silvertabby wrote: »

Hmmm - They won't win, of course - but just think what would happen if they did. What would be the cost of paying pensions from 60 to 'men who identify as women' ? And would 'women who identify as men' (sorry, really struggling for current pc terms here!) refuse payment until they reached male SPA ?

Is Mansfield helping the GRASPIs for free or are they going to get a big bill which they will claim poverty to avoid paying?

Silvertabby

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

Is Mansfield helping the GRASPIs for free or are they going to get a big bill which they will claim poverty to avoid paying?

I believe the GRASPI funding is from member contributions, who have been conned into thinking that a few £s now will be repaid by £30K cheques when they 'win'..

jamesd

Pollycat wrote: »

a lot of women posters who have been impacted (including me) would have welcomed some sort of bridging benefit to help women in dire financial straits until their state pension became payable.

There already were and are provisions for that case. All adults prior to their state pension age are entitled to the range of working age benefits, whether for those who are seeking work - including if no job is available - or due to inability to work. Many women will also have made arrangements to pool their resources with another person, often via marriage, and the working age benefits system also respects that choice.

If a person is solely relying on the working age benefits, basic state pension or single tier state pension it follows that they can be described as living in [relative] poverty. This is because relative poverty is defined as an income less than 60% of the median. This includes people before pension credit age with untouched five million Pound pension pots or at any age owning five million Pound homes because those aren't income so the person can simultaneously be both poor and rich.

Of course there can also be definitions of dire that benefits can't help sufficiently with, like a person unable to make high enough mortgage payments.

Terron

jamesd wrote: »

If a person is solely relying on the working age benefits, basic state pension or single tier state pension it follows that they can be described as living in [relative] poverty. This is because relative poverty is defined as an income less than 60% of the median. This includes people before pension credit age with untouched five million Pound pension pots or at any age owning five million Pound homes because those aren't income so the person can simultaneously be both poor and rich.

That was me after I lost my job at 54, though my pension pot was only about £600k. I did have significant other savings, I was on benefits (contributory JSA then NEA) for about 9 months as I got into BTL to provide me with an income. For the tax year that started after I lost my job my income was less than £12k.

Mortgagefreeman

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

Is Mansfield helping the GRASPIs for free or are they going to get a big bill which they will claim poverty to avoid paying?

Backto60 have had numerous crowdfundings. Please note, they don’t use crowdjustice, which would ringfence monies just for Legal action. Backto60 appear to be able to use any monies raised for films and blogs and other ‘expenses’ ?:rotfl:

Malthusian

Mortgagefreeman wrote: »

Backto60 appear to be able to use any monies raised for films and blogs and other ‘expenses’ ?:rotfl:

jem16

Malthusian wrote: »

All the different factions manage to use members' money for their little trips etc.

That picture is of Waspi Ltd who collected £100k via Crowdjustice for their legal action which so far has been to go down the maladministration route. It's on hold whilst the JR was going ahead and the PHSO ( rightly) is waiting to hear the judgment.

Then there is Waspi Campaign 2018 ( with Anne Keen, one of the original co-founders) who have now changed the I from Inequality to Injustice and joined up with BT60. They haven't specifically done any crowdfunder/crowdjustice so far.

Then there's BT60 who achieved the JR. They have used crowdfunds to so far raise a total of around £120k - some presumably on legal fees but much on films, publicity and little jaunts to Geneva etc, etc. They pretend to want to join all the groups with them but it's basically do as Joanne Welch says or be removed, blocked. People who questioned their latest crowdfund were branded as traitors. The lead name in the case was blocked from twitter, Facebook etc last Summer and then removed from the case not long after the permission hearing.

Then there's a host of other groups, mainly on FB. They tag along with whoever promises them their £48k cheque. Just doesn't quite happen like that.

lisyloo

Does that say first class?
I don’t know whether they paid for the uplift themselves and took their own champagne, but it’s not good for the image.