Back to 60's Judicial Review Outcome

SonOf

The pension age for women today 30th September 2019 is 65 years 7 months. The pension age for women in 2010 was 60 years.

Not it was not. The 1995 act changed the SPA for women that were born between certain dates. So, in effect, there was no one SPA for women after 1995 but a whole range of ages based on your date of birth.

You are giving the date that it was last 60. But that doesn't mean all women had 60 as their SPA up to that point. It ceased to be 60 for all women after the act was passed in 1995.

hence why those changes happened 24 years ago.

I was surprised that he seemed unaware but on reflection I suspect that as he keeps banging on about how unreasonable are the complaints of women who lost out by the pension changes that he deliberately phrased it thus in an attempt to bolster his argument.

It is clear from my posts that I am very aware and it's only you that seems to have an issue. Seems to be an attempt to create an argument where no argument exists.

And yes, I do think that women complaining about the changes made 24 years are being unreasonable. However, I am much more sympathetic with those that suffered from the 2011 changes (not that you would refer to them as 2011 changes I suspect) as they had far too short a timescale for implementation.

LHW99

nigelbb wrote: »

The resentment over the change in SPA for women especially the 2011 change arises from the fact that women see older sisters, friends, cousins etc who were able to retire at 60 less than ten years ago. In due course when we really are decades on from the change in 2010 there will not be the same disgruntlement.

I think there is more resentment over the fact that a certain subset of women were subject to two successive increases in SPA. It felt mean-minded (I won't say 'unfair') and IMO it would have been better to have made a single (larger?) increase the first time round - but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Gers

lisyloo wrote: »

You had a better chance of going to university.
My mum born in 1945 did not have a chance but her brothers did (sexism at the time).
Interestingly I asked women about this and it appeared 1953 was about the turning point, so arguably you had better (career) opportunities.
You have better healthcare, drugs, operations and longevity.

The lady born 1950 might have died of cancer or heart attack that the lady in 1956 survives.

Fair?

Once again you are offering vast generalisations and muddled ideas.

My mother born in 1928 - went to university after the war years and had a very successful career as a university lecturer once she graduated. Stayed in that job her whole working life.

Better healthcare etc came about because of societal changes from which men benefited equally.

I'm not going to argue for or against the pension changes. At least not here where things are turning difficult again!

Silvertabby

“ SonOf is right. In 1995, my State pension age was 65.
nigel, are you getting confused with the date the increases actually began - in 2010?
Originally posted by Silvertabby

nigelbb wrote: »

I'm not confused as in 2010 the SPA for women was still 60 which is what I stated.

But not for ALL women - only those born by 1950. In my case, my State pension age in 1995 was indeed 65.

This conversation reminds me of the lady who is adamant that the Government LIED when it said that the re-equalisation of State pension ages would be carried out in stages (ie, 60 years 3 months, 60 years 6 months etc etc) because her pension age went straight from 60 to 66. Still trying to work how how she thought her payments should be incremental!

Just a thought, but when women's State pension age was reduced from 65 to 60 in the 1940s, did the Government write to every woman on the Land to tell them? Thought not.

nigelbb

Silvertabby wrote: »

But not for ALL women - only those born by 1950. In my case, my State pension age in 1995 was indeed 65.

All women who retired in 2010 were 60 years of age.

xylophone

The pension age for women today 30th September 2019 is 65 years 7 months. The pension age for women in 2010 was 60 years.

All women who retired in 2010 were 60 years of age.

You give the months for 2019 but not for 2010.....which seems somewhat inconsistent.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/state-pension-age-timetable/state-pension-age-timetable

lisyloo

Gers wrote: »

Once again you are offering vast generalisations and muddled ideas.

I disagree with muddled.

Yes it’s a generalisation that there wasn’t gender equality in the past and there are individual exceptions going back in history but in general there was gender inequality and in general the situation has improved.
I don’t think anyone would dispute this in general.
When women could go to university (in general) is a significant turning point. Not the only one and there will be exceptions, but it’s significant in terms of career opportunities.
Pension entitlement is generalised (apart from NI) it’s not individually customised.

My mother born in 1928 - went to university after the war years and had a very successful career as a university lecturer once she graduated. Stayed in that job her whole working life.

I don’t think you are claiming that women had equal opportunities in 1928 are you?

Better healthcare etc came about because of societal changes from which men benefited equally.

I don’t agree.
The existence of family planning has transformed women lives from being baby machines and knackered at the end of their lives to having longer life expectancy,
The pension changes are actually overdue compared to increases in longevity.

nigelbb

xylophone wrote: »

You give the months for 2019 but not for 2010.....which seems somewhat inconsistent.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/state-pension-age-timetable/state-pension-age-timetable

That was just for brevity. In my earlier reply I stated it in exact detail:-

In 2010 the state pension age for a woman was still 60. Any woman retiring earlier than the 6th April 2010 would have done so aged 60 years. Even a woman retiring on 31st December 2010 would have been 60 years of age (& 8 months 6 days).

hugheskevi

Why is State Pension age used interchangeably with retire? They are completely separate things and the majority of people do not retire at State Pension age, but somewhat before or after that age.

The change to female State Pension age simply changed the age at which women receive a taxable, non means-tested payment from the State based on their age, contribution and salary history.

But I suppose statements such as

The resentment over the change in SPA for women especially the 2011 change arises from the fact that women see older sisters, friends, cousins etc who were able to retire at 60 less than ten years ago. In due course when we really are decades on from the change in 2010 there will not be the same disgruntlement.

sound a lot less convincing when written as

The resentment over the change in SPA for women especially the 2011 change arises from the fact that women see older sisters, friends, cousins etc who received an additional £50,000 less than ten years ago. In due course when we really are decades on from the change in 2010 there will not be the same disgruntlement.

(£50,000 based on the pre-tax value of 6 years of full new State Pension)

Intoodeep

barnstar2077 wrote: »

Do we need another thread of arguing about this?

As far as I can see there is no argument


EQUALITY = EQUALITY


Or shall we backdate all men's Pensions back to 60 years of age?