Women SPA this week

POPPYOSCAR

Gers wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/04/gender-equality-world-system-parity-2030

You are wasting your time.

They will not acknowledge it on here.

Pollycat

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

You are wasting your time.

They will not acknowledge it on here.

Is the article about the state pension age for women and the fact that a group of women have achieved a judicial review regarding the increase in state pension age?

Does it mention women's state pension age at all?

I'm not wasting my time on an article that isn't relevant to this thread.
And gender inequality against women is not the subject of this thread.

POPPYOSCAR

Pollycat wrote: »

Is the article about the state pension age for women and the fact that a group of women have achieved a judicial review regarding the increase in state pension age?

Does it mention women's state pension age at all?

I'm not wasting my time on an article that isn't relevant to this thread.
And gender inequality against women is not the subject of this thread.

You just proved my point.

Pollycat

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

You just proved my point.

No.
I just proved that I'm not interested in deviating from the thread subject.

I'm not disputing that there is gender inequality (although as I've previously stated I've never experienced it (or been a 'victim' of it to quote another poster) throughout my life
But this thread is about women's state pension age moving from 60 to 66 (and further out for younger people).
I always felt that it was unfair for women to get their pension at age 60 when a man born on the same day had to wait until age 65.

I really can't see what gender inequality (specifically directed at women as the article under discussion is) has to do with this topic.

Why not start another thread about gender inequality?

POPPYOSCAR

Pollycat wrote: »

No.
I just proved that I'm not interested in deviating from the thread subject.

I'm not disputing that there is gender inequality (although as I've previously stated I've never experienced it (or been a 'victim' of it to quote another poster) throughout my life
But this thread is about women's state pension age moving from 60 to 66 (and further out for younger people).
I always felt that it was unfair for women to get their pension at age 60 when a man born on the same day had to wait until age 65.

I really can't see what gender inequality (specifically directed at women as the article under discussion is) has to do with this topic.

Why not start another thread about gender inequality?

Well I disagree with you.

These women have not had the opportunity to build a buffer for these years.

Maybe you were encouraged to go to uni but many were not. They were destined for the typing pool if they were lucky.

A fact I personally find very relevant to the discussion at hand.

And I ,and others are quite at liberty to post whatever we want and feel is relevant on any thread as you very well know.

Pollycat

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Well I disagree with you.

These women have not had the opportunity to build a buffer for these years.

Maybe you were encouraged to go to uni but many were not. They were destined for the typing pool if they were lucky.

A fact I personally find very relevant to the discussion at hand.

And I ,and others are quite at liberty to post whatever we want and feel is relevant on any thread as you very well know.

And it's perfectly fine to disagree with me.
As you very well know.

I think you mean 'some of these women have not had the opportunity to build a buffer for these years.'

I can't speak for anyone else's opportunities for further education. Only my own.

I'm pleased you find that fact personally very relevant to the discussion at hand.
Again, we disagree.

Of course you and anyone else are quite at liberty to post whatever you want and feel is relevant on any thread.

My point was that the article was irrelevant.
My opinion.
We are entitled to have opinions that are not shared by other posters.
As you very well know.

I posted:

Pollycat wrote: »

I'm not wasting my time on an article that isn't relevant to this thread.

That's I.
Me.
On my own.
Not speaking for anyone else.

I would have been very interested in reading an article about women's state pension age - regardless from which direction it was written.

I would not even have commented about Gers' post if you hadn't posted this.

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

You are wasting your time.

They will not acknowledge it on here.

Dasa

Good luck to 'em I say. Don't think they'll get anywhere with this but it sure will p off a few peeps on this thread by the look of things if they do.

Pollycat

Dasa wrote: »

Good luck to 'em I say. Don't think they'll get anywhere with this but it sure will p off a few peeps on this thread by the look of things if they do.

You couldn't be more wrong. :rotfl:
There's a lot of women posting on this thread and previous ones on the same subject who would pocket £30k if women's SPA for those born before 1/1/1960 was reversed to age 60.
Including me. :dance:

A question:
do you really think it fair that a woman born on 31/12/1959 should get her pension at age 60 and someone born the day after has to wait until age 66?

Terron

bugslett wrote: »

Born 64, left school at 82. I became a forklift driver, one of a handful of women driving a forklift at the time. But that job that I did wasnt just driving a forklift, it was mostly loading (stuffing to give it the technical term!), containers. It was dirty, dangerous, heavy work. Drivers and warehousing staff are not very sexist on the whole. I've never heard of another woman do that job. That may suggest more intelligence than I possess!

I started my first job in 81. I was based at the head office but was working on computer systems for the warehouses. Most of the workers there including the forklift drivers were women, though the engineering jobs were mainly done by men.



Most of the worker across the company were women and working part time. In 81 one office had 600 women and 1 man, who had just started in a junior role. Most of the part time workers weren't allowed to joined the company pension scheme, but nor were most full time workers. It was only open to managers.

Gers

Pollycat wrote: »

I'm not wasting my time on an article that isn't relevant to this thread.
And gender inequality against women is not the subject of this thread.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/nov/06/rise-in-womens-state-pension-age-prompts-poverty-concerns

Will that do you?

And for the deluded soul who talked of 'my pity party' should get some facts right. I have never posted in pity or even made comment about any plight in relation to pensions. In fact I was able to take my occupational pension at 60 years and continued to work. If I had any complaint it's about the 2011 accelarated changes although I have not voiced it here apart from stating that I did not get notification.

Of course equality works both ways - can't even be a topic for debate surely?

However pension equality is just the one aspect which has been highlighted and addressed. When will the other areas of equality being given a focus?

I am not part of any group, just an interested woman.