Government Pension increases

Paulash

Percentage increases in the state pension should be replaced by the same financial sum for those on the new or old pension.
Percentage increases leads to the financial gap between the pensions becoming greater year by year.
Pensioners expenses remain the same which ever scheme they are on, older pensioners get relatively poorer year by year incomparison to new pensioners, this is grossly wrong.
Even some employers recognise percentage wage increase are wrong and vary increases according position often the poorer paid getting larger % than the seniors/managers.

Marcon

Paulash said:

Percentage increases in the state pension should be replaced by the same financial sum for those on the new or old pension.
Percentage increases leads to the financial gap between the pensions becoming greater year by year.
Pensioners expenses remain the same which ever scheme they are on, older pensioners get relatively poorer year by year incomparison to new pensioners, this is grossly wrong.
Even some employers recognise percentage wage increase are wrong and vary increases according position often the poorer paid getting larger % than the seniors/managers.

How about those 'older pensioners' on the 'old' pension who have a much higher income than those on the 'new' pension as a result of building up substantial state additional pension (SERPS/S2P) by paying higher NI on higher earnings? How is it fair to them?

Like so many others, your indignation is based on a failure of understanding. See https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81758757#Comment_81758757?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=old+and+new+state+pension and you might recognise why your argument will never run.

marymck

I couldn't agree more! I'd happily sign a petition to that effect. Is there one already  or should we start one? This would also be a good question for Martin to put to the chancellor.

Though you'd be surprised at the amount of envy and vitriol this sort of question raises. I posted a similar comment on my local village forum yesterday, only to have someone attack me for getting my pension at 60 while she had to wait till she was 67. She reckoned that earned me 60k.
She went on to say that she made provision [via her platinum plated tax payer subsidised NHS pension] and she had zero sympathy for those who had not.

For the record, I got my state pension at 66 and it is the new state pension.

QrizB

Paulash said:

... older pensioners get relatively poorer year by year incomparison to new pensioners ...

This seems to be the crux of your argument. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?

Remember that pre-2016 pensioners can get additional state pension (from SERPS / S2P) and/or could contract out of these schemes and get a boost to their private pensions. Post-2016 pensioners don't get any of this, and also need 35 years of NI rather than 30.

Exodi

Paulash said:

older pensioners everyone gets relatively poorer year by year in comparison to new pensioners

Fixed that for you.

Paulash said:

Even some employers recognise percentage wage increase are wrong and vary increases according position often the poorer paid getting larger % than the seniors/managers.

Is that really your interpretation of it? That employers 'recognise percentage wage increases are wrong'?

Or could it be that for the past few years the government has kept forcing through higher-than-inflation minimum wage increases, forcing pay at the bottom up where employers are then faced with the decision of increasing wages of middle and senior management by the same significant percentages, inevitably requiring them to increase prices more than they already have to or taking a hit on profits, or forcing the impact onto middle and upper management by increasing their wages by less.

I would remind that last year minimum wage increased by 6.7%, the year before by 9.8%, the year before 9.7%, the year before 6.6%... you get the idea.

At least that's what we've decided to do in my company, but it isn't sustainable in the long term as it causes the gap between the staff and their managers to get increasingly smaller. Do it long enough and the managers will question why they should take on additional responsibilities for a negligible difference in pay. It's not because we've taken some philosophical standpoint on percentage increases, it's because the government has forced our hand by forcing the bottom up while the market can not stomach more price increases.

hugheskevi

Spare a thought for the poor 76 year olds - they have the lowest mean State Pension due to being under the old State Pension, women generally having lower pension, but mortality not yet really kicked in to increase the pension of the surviving partner through inheritance.

Interesting to note that 84 year olds on average have a higher State Pension than 72 year olds.

Average amount of State Pension in payment by age, May 2025, DWP administrative data

Age	Mean State Pension
66	£219.90
67	£218.15
68	£216.40
69	£215.46
70	£214.46
71	£213.35
72	£207.87
73	£206.28
74	£205.43
75	£200.75
76	£200.63
77	£201.51
78	£203.74
79	£203.71
80	£202.87
81	£204.56
82	£207.31
83	£209.11
84	£210.55
Total	£208.91

dunstonh

I couldn't agree more! I'd happily sign a petition to that effect. Is there one already  or should we start one? This would also be a good question for Martin to put to the chancellor.

People who don't understand things trying to waste time and money is not a good thing.

Far too often we see people moaning that the basic state pension is lower than the new state pension but they fail to take into account that the old state pension system was made up of basic state pension, graduated, SERPS and S2P.  It is the total of all of those things that matters.     The NSP is just a single amount.

Lots of people got paid more than the NSP on the old state pension.    Those that do not tend to be because they were either self employed or contracted out (and contracted out benefits were paid via the occupational pension or appropriate personal pension).

p00hsticks

QrizB said:

Paulash said:

... older pensioners get relatively poorer year by year incomparison to new pensioners ...

Post-2016 pensioners don't get any of this, and also need 35 years of NI rather than 30.

Only those reaching State Pension age between 6/4/2010 and 5/4/2016 needed 30 years - prior to that it was 44 years for men and 39 for women. 

p00hsticks

The OP could do with reading this recent thread on the topic 
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6642442/old-state-pension-v-new-state-pension/p1

In particular the contributions from @hugheskevi which points out that

Using DWP administrative data, in May 2025, the mean weekly payment for those in receipt of pre-2016 State Pension was £207.01 - For recipients of new State Pension the figure was £216.43.

The existence of contracted-out benefits, different pension ages, etc, complicate comparisons, but even setting them aside, the difference in amount received is under £10 per week so not a very large difference.

Qyburn

The OP is suggesting that State Pensions should be increased by a flat rate, calculated as the triple lock increment for the New State Pension. In other words £11.15/week in April 2026. That would work and would mean the BSP would get closer (in percentage terms) to NSP. It also means the uplift anyone might have over NSP would be eroded over time.

That's a valid and not inconsistent idea. Whether it's fair or not is completely subjective.

Question for the OP. For those who deferred and therefore receive a high SP, do you think they should receive the 4.8% increase, or just £11.15/week increment? 

p00hsticks

Qyburn said:

Question for the OP. For those who deferred and therefore receive a high SP, do you think they should receive the 4.8% increase, or just £11.15/week increment? 

That question doesn't just relate to those that deferred though - it's all those on the old-style pension who are receiving much more than the basic amount.