Should 1950s WASPI women be compensated?

colsten

sylvingoe wrote: »

The other issue is that at the same time as governments were making all the changes to State Pension Age, we were under austerity measures, so a lot of people will have found it hard/impossible to make financial plans for a later State Pension Age and this does not just apply to 1950s women, but to all women born afterwards and men have also had their State Pension Age increased.

By your logic, everybody born after April 5 1950 (women) and December 5 1953 (men) should get compensation, as everybody born since then had a SPA increase, and everyone alive since 2007 has lived through austerity. Yay! Let's kick the Compensation Fairy into action!

colsten

Holly100 wrote: »

I am one of the women who was told 18 months before my 60 birthday that I had to work a further 3 years to get my pension.

I wish people would stick to facts. Nobody gets told they have to work up to their SPA to get their SP. Countless people, many of them 1950s women, stop working many years before they reach SPA. If you mean you couldn't afford to stop working before you were entitled to your SP, that's an entirely different matter. Countless people are in that situation, too.

Holly100 wrote: »

My husband and I had planned to retire together, he being 5 years older than me. I was lucky enough to get my very small NHS pension at 60 and decided that I had paid enough into Government coffers over the years and they were not going to scupper my retirement plans. I left my job on my 60 birthday and went out cleaning making sure that I earned the same amount each week as I would have got in my state pension. It was hard going after sitting in an office all my working life but I did it.

Excellent! You were able to work, and you did. That's what people should do if they can.

Holly100 wrote: »

I feel angry that we were given such short notice and that it has affected a vast amount of women

we weren't given 'such short notice'. The equalisation was publicly announced in November 1993, and increases did not start until 2010. That is 17 years notice, at least. Those who still don't get their SP in 2019 now had 26 years notice. Not exactly so short.

Holly100 wrote: »

Also lets not forget the men in all this who have also had to wait longer for their pensions after believing all their working lives that they would get it at 65.

What's all this nonsense about "believing all our lives"? State pensions aren't a matter of belief but a matter of facts, all of which have always been freely available to anyone who wanted to know about it. A simple phone call to the DWP/DSS was all that was needed, or a visit to the local CAB.

Holly100 wrote: »

Compensation would be nice, however the country is in a bad way regarding NHS, Education and Policing. To sort this out and pay us women compensation the coffers would need to be overflowing which we all know they are not. The only way that Jeremy Corbyn could afford to compensate us women would be through borrowing and we all know where that left the country last time the Labour government was in power and that is why we have been in austerity over the last 8 years.

I totally agree with on that.

Seabee42

Firstly if I had £56 Billion to run up as extra debt I am sorry this would not be the group I would spend it on, I mean there are some very wealthy people in this group and their case "that state benefits should never change" is completely daft. It should be illegal to bribe people like this the same way at the last election it was pay off all student debt that bribe similarly £30k to mostly middle class families.


Unless we continually increase the debt running up debt today means less to spend tomorrow just on the interest alone. What should be cut to pay for this very generous give away that is also discriminatory.

Pollycat

Seabee42 wrote: »

Firstly if I had £56 Billion to run up as extra debt I am sorry this would not be the group I would spend it on, I mean there are some very wealthy people in this group and their case "that state benefits should never change" is completely daft. It should be illegal to bribe people like this the same way at the last election it was pay off all student debt that bribe similarly £30k to mostly middle class families.


Unless we continually increase the debt running up debt today means less to spend tomorrow just on the interest alone. What should be cut to pay for this very generous give away that is also discriminatory.

And there are some very poor women who would benefit from financial help until their state pension becomes payable.

I'm not advocating that this ridiculous amount of 'compensation' be paid to them but they should be able to claim benefits if their financial situation is such that they are eligible.
I think the change in Pension Credit age has caused problems with eligibility.

Please note:
I am a late 1953 woman so affected by both changes in state pension date but am not a 'WASPI' woman and am incredibly irritated by the fact that the media are constantly referring to '3.8 million WASPI women'.
WASPI do not and never have represented me!

in_my_wellies

colsten wrote: »

You fail to mention that the 35 years came into effect on 6 April 2016 - alongside the New State Pension - and that transitional arrangements mean that you get the better of the old and the new rules. You also fail to mention that people can continue to add NI years up to their SPA, either by working, by getting NI credits or by making voluntary NI contributions.

In the light of this, what is it you are complaining about?

I really don't need to explain my circumstances but was making the point that the change from 30 to 35 years was made AFTER I had followed the advice to get a pension forecast and after I had left work thinking I had enough years. I had no notice at all.
I'm aware of the rest of your post but didn't want to explain all that and take the thread off topic

Ceme3000

I just don't understand how people can just drift towards retirement without wondering how they are going to support themselves and have some sort of quality of life. Surely you owe it to yourself to ask questions. How much state pension am I going to get? Have I paid enough in? When do I want to retire? How much do I need for the life I want.

I'm 53 now (male) but asked myself these questions back in my 30's, I made sacrifices and did something about it. Surely its what every responsible person, male or female should do! It would never occur to me to assume that the pre 2016 state pension (£118pw or whatever) would be enough, and neither would I assume that my partner would support me.

It also makes my blood boil that when the equalisation to state pensions was widely discussed in the media from the early 90's that women can now say that they didn't know. I just don't believe it! I'm afraid it smacks of picking and choosing which gender equality laws you want and now jumping on the compensation bandwagon.

Given that one of the gender equality discussion points back in the 90's was equalizing the age at 60 for men and women, I don't see how they could now pay 50's women without paying 50's men.

JoeCrystal

I am also totally against the idea of compensation for 1950s women. Why should their pure ignorance and lack of planning get rewarded? After all, there are benefits in place to help out the poorest in society.

GunJack

What I REALLY don't understand is how, as a mid-20's working male at the time of the stated increase (1993-1995) I was aware of the changes to SPA, how it would affect me (my SPA is now 67), but more importantly, how it would affect Mrs.G-J who is only a year different to me. We actively discussed it after hearing it in the budget, on the news, on many current affairs programmes, in printed media, etc., etc....

...yet all these women (who were supposedly older and wiser than us) did not???

Seabee42

Pollycat wrote: »

And there are some very poor women who would benefit from financial help until their state pension becomes payable.

I'm not advocating that this ridiculous amount of 'compensation' be paid to them but they should be able to claim benefits if their financial situation is such that they are eligible.
I think the change in Pension Credit age has caused problems with eligibility.

Please note:
I am a late 1953 woman so affected by both changes in state pension date but am not a 'WASPI' woman and am incredibly irritated by the fact that the media are constantly referring to '3.8 million WASPI women'.
WASPI do not and never have represented me!

This is kind of the point, if it was we will spend say even 5billion helping the poorest women affected it would have been much better received.

Pollycat

GunJack wrote: »

What I REALLY don't understand is how, as a mid-20's working male at the time of the stated increase (1993-1995) I was aware of the changes to SPA, how it would affect me (my SPA is now 67), but more importantly, how it would affect Mrs.G-J who is only a year different to me. We actively discussed it after hearing it in the budget, on the news, on many current affairs programmes, in printed media, etc., etc....

...yet all these women (who were supposedly older and wiser than us) did not???

Some say they didn't know.

Maybe they did know but didn't take it in as their state pension date was years in the future.

One woman claimant who represented the Backto60 court case said she didn't know about the 1995 changes but then 'with engaging honesty' produced two letters she received from her occupational pension provider, dated 4 August 2006 and 28 April 2011. In each case the letters advise her: “The DWP has assumed that your State Retirement pension will be payable when you reach the age of 65 Years."

Not taking in important information about your financial future does not mean you didn't know.