MSE Poll: Should 1950s WASPI women be compensated?

Silvertabby

“ These discussions are largely academic. It is extremely likely that JC will be PM so we won’t be getting any money anyway.
Originally posted by Murphybear

Paul_Herring wrote: »

I think you some letters there...

Even without the typo, it's still highly unlikely that this bribe will be paid out. Diane Abbott just needs to put fresh batteries into her abacus .....

jamesd

primley47 wrote: »

same pay

The single tier state pension calculation introduced for those who reach their state pension age from 6 April 2016 is 1/35th of the single tier amount for each year of work or credits. Pay makes no difference to the calculation.

A woman who never worked also gets the same payment, so long as they did something to get credits, including getting child benefit, seeking work or being unable to work.

The calculation under the old rules is 1/30th of the basic state pension per year plus an earnings-related part.

Mrs_Arcanum

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Unfortunately that may not be a possibility, since after 2028, access to personal pensions may be tied to the SRA, specifically 10 years prior. They're restricted to 55 at the moment.

One such article - from 2014, but there are others, along with various discussions on this board.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10982177/Age-40-No-access-to-pension-until-58.html



Basically, it was proposed to link the two, a consultation was had, and... nothing. But that's not to say it won't happen, nor should anyone proceed on the basis that it won't happen. They are still able to enact that change at any time they wish.

Such as pension credit is already being affected. Any woman with a younger husband and insufficient contributions will not be able to claim PC until their partner reaches 67 (or later).

jem16

tgroom57 wrote: »

I am of the age affected by this. I haven't voted because the choices are too stark. I was fully aware when the age rose from 60 to 63, and had planned for that. But the extra rise from 63 to 66 came suddenly and distinctly unexpected- since the age had already changed once, I didn't expect it to change again (so soon!)

If your SPA is now 66, then it was never 63 for you. What makes you think it was?

The 1995 Act raised women's SPA from 60 to 65 with anyone born 6th April 55 onwards going to 65. Those born 6th April 50 to 5th April 55 had a SPA of between 60 and 65 depending on their date of birth.

The 2011 Act added on a maximum of 18 months so anyone now with a SPA of 66 had a SPA of at least 64.5 after the 1995 Act. Most had only 12 months added so 65 to 66.

What month/year were you born? You can check what your SPA did rise to in this chart.

http://www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/statepensionage/SPA_changes.pdf

I am in favour of the original 63 years being honored, which is why I couldn't vote for any choices listed.

I do believe the 2011 Act was wrong and the 1995 Act timetable should be allowed to stand but it won't happen now. However those with a SPA of 63 or less were not affected by this Act.

Pollycat

jem16 wrote: »

If your SPA is now 66, then it was never 63 for you. What makes you think it was?

The 1995 Act raised women's SPA from 60 to 65 with anyone born 6th April 55 onwards going to 65. Those born 6th April 50 to 5th April 55 had a SPA of between 60 and 65 depending on their date of birth.

The 2011 Act added on a maximum of 18 months so anyone now with a SPA of 66 had a SPA of at least 64.5 after the 1995 Act. Most had only 12 months added so 65 to 66.

What month/year were you born? You can check what your SPA did rise to in this chart.

http://www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/statepensionage/SPA_changes.pdf



I do believe the 2011 Act was wrong and the 1995 Act timetable should be allowed to stand but it won't happen now. However those with a SPA of 63 or less were not affected by this Act.

This is what I mean by some women giving incorrect information about their circumstances.
I heard lots of this from MPs quoting their constituents' circumstances when I was listening to the debates back in 2016(?)


I have been very sure of my original (post 1995) state pension age and my revised (post 2011) state pension age and my own date of birth so when I hear women who say 'it's had this effect on me' and that statement is not true - either from misunderstanding or downright intention to mislead - it makes me cross.

Murphybear

Murphybear wrote: »

This subject has been discussed at length elsewhere on MSE.

One asked

“I'm sure these Waspi's will be happy to give up their bribe so that the money can be used to save the NHS, cure homelessness, etc.”

My response was a resounding yes. I would want it to go to the NHS to provide better services for the age group we are talking about. In particular knee/hip replacements and cataracts.

These discussions are largely academic. It is extremely likely that JC will notl be PM so we won’t be getting any money anyway.

Now corrected. Apologies for typo, I normally check carefully.

jem16

Pollycat wrote: »

This is what I mean by some women giving incorrect information about their circumstances.
I heard lots of this from MPs quoting their constituents' circumstances when I was listening to the debates back in 2016(?)

There is a lot of misinformation coming out of the various campaign groups in general but a lot of it is centred round having the wrong SPA information for the 1995 Act increases.

Many think their SPA increased by 6 months for each birth year - ie 1956 was 63, 1954 was 62 etc. This seems to be where the mythical age 62 that many quote comes from.

Then there are those that think the 1995 Act increase was just to 63 as the 2011 Act changes started when women's SPA had already reached 63.

When you try to give them the correct information, they call you a troll and block you so they continue to spout the wrong information. It's like Chinese Whispers.

I have been very sure of my original (post 1995) state pension age and my revised (post 2011) state pension age and my own date of birth so when I hear women who say 'it's had this effect on me' and that statement is not true - either from misunderstanding or downright intention to mislead - it makes me cross.

It makes me more cross when the MPs don't bother to check the information from their constituents. Most of the ones "supporting" the Waspi/BT60 don't seem to know the correct facts either.

Pollycat

=jem16;76552987

It makes me more cross when the MPs don't bother to check the information from their constituents. Most of the ones "supporting" the Waspi/BT60 don't seem to know the correct facts either.

Me too.
I think this whole 'issue' has been a political bandwagon that various parties and MPs have jumped on and continue to jump on.

Murphybear

Pollycat wrote: »

The bus passes have already followed suit - at least where we live.


It is now linked to the state pension age.
The above showed my husband's details so I've replaced that with xx - but it showed his 66th Birthday which is when he reaches state pension age.

We have bus passes

We don’t have many busses. There was one from where we live to the centre of the market town. The bus company withdrew it, not because it didn’t get used but because the council only refunded the bus company a part of what they should have received for the journeys undertaken by the bus pass holders.

Pollycat

Murphybear wrote: »

We have bus passes

We don’t have many busses. There was one from where we live to the centre of the market town. The bus company withdrew it, not because it didn’t get used but because the council only refunded the bus company a part of what they should have received for the journeys undertaken by the bus pass holders.

Yes.
Well.
You do have bus passes.
I made no comment about the level of service you receive in your area.
I was simply pointing out to another poster that bus passes in some areas are linked to the state pension age.