Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Naomi
    • By MSE Naomi 26th Nov 19, 5:07 PM
    • 332Posts
    • 75Thanks
    MSE Naomi
    MSE Poll: Should 1950s WASPI women be compensated?
    • #1
    • 26th Nov 19, 5:07 PM
    MSE Poll: Should 1950s WASPI women be compensated? 26th Nov 19 at 5:07 PM
    Poll started 26 November 2019
    Up to 3.8 million women born in the 1950s had been due to get the state pension at age 60. But legislation changes as recently as 2011 mean many will receive theirs up to six years later some didn't hear about this until too close to retirement and say they hadn't had time (or in some cases, the means) to prepare for this delay.

    Labour proposes to compensate the women affected, costing the state 58 billion over five years. Boris Johnson said in a leaders' debate that while he sympathised, he couldn't promise 1950s women the money.

    Did you vote? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below.

    If you haven't already, join the forum to reply.

    Thanks!
Page 1
    • fkcigclrc
    • By fkcigclrc 26th Nov 19, 6:55 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    fkcigclrc
    • #2
    • 26th Nov 19, 6:55 PM
    • #2
    • 26th Nov 19, 6:55 PM
    We have all had our state pension age moved since we started work. Mine is now age 67 and I was born in 1962, ( I am female). Where does the 'compensation' end? It was some of these women that wanted equality so why should men work longer, especially as they don't take time off to have children.
    • prowla
    • By prowla 26th Nov 19, 7:04 PM
    • 10,723 Posts
    • 9,729 Thanks
    prowla
    • #3
    • 26th Nov 19, 7:04 PM
    • #3
    • 26th Nov 19, 7:04 PM
    I have no idea when or if I will get a state pension; all I know is that I pay money in and don't get a lot in return.
    • Silvertabby
    • By Silvertabby 26th Nov 19, 7:20 PM
    • 4,877 Posts
    • 7,909 Thanks
    Silvertabby
    • #4
    • 26th Nov 19, 7:20 PM
    • #4
    • 26th Nov 19, 7:20 PM
    Well I have to say that I'm shocked and amazed at the number of people, of both genders and all ages, who have voted for 'full compension'


    Would some of these people like to post where they think this largess should come from? NHS? Education? Extra taxes for all?
    • POPPYOSCAR
    • By POPPYOSCAR 26th Nov 19, 8:28 PM
    • 13,045 Posts
    • 29,180 Thanks
    POPPYOSCAR
    • #5
    • 26th Nov 19, 8:28 PM
    • #5
    • 26th Nov 19, 8:28 PM
    I am pleased that so many that have voted in the poll can see the injustice here for those women.

    Good for you.
    • Maggie1954
    • By Maggie1954 26th Nov 19, 9:50 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    Maggie1954
    • #6
    • 26th Nov 19, 9:50 PM
    Waspi
    • #6
    • 26th Nov 19, 9:50 PM
    I have lost around 50,000 on my pension heist - no correspondence whatsoever. However, I would not vote for Jeremy Corbin -he is a liar and we will never be refunded. I have been totally dependent upon my husband's state pension for the last 5 years - he is 81!! Try getting a job at 60, despite having degrees from Oxford and being a called Barrister!!!
    • Molly Mulldoon
    • By Molly Mulldoon 26th Nov 19, 10:03 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    Molly Mulldoon
    • #7
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:03 PM
    • #7
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:03 PM
    No compensation. I am one of those affected but see this as a vote buying exercise. My vote is not for sale!
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 26th Nov 19, 10:27 PM
    • 14,419 Posts
    • 11,471 Thanks
    fatbelly
    • #8
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:27 PM
    • #8
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:27 PM
    Here's a history from Paul Lewis about how we got to where we are now:

    1995 - women's state pension age to be equalised
    Following pressure from Europe, the Conservative Government was forced to announce plans to equalise state pension age for men and women. The timetable was the most relaxed possible and would raise pension age for women to 65 slowly from April 2010 to April 2020.

    2007 - further rises in pension age to 66, 67, and then 68 introduced
    The Labour Government passed a new law to raise state pension age to 66 between April 2024 and April 2026, then to 67 between April 2034 and April 2036 and to 68 between April 2044 and April 2046.

    6 April 2010 - women's state pension age begins to rise
    The first women are affected by the equalisation changes. Women born 6 April 1950 to 5 May 1950 have to wait until 6 May 2010 to reach state pension age, a delay of up to one month.

    Entitlement to Pension Credit for men and women is now linked to women's state pension age rather than the age of 60. A similar change restricts entitlement in England only to free bus travel. Entitlement to Winter Fuel Payment is also linked to women's state pension age and the qualifying date for the payment in winter 2010/11 moves to 5 July 2010. It will rise by six months each year.

    May 2010 - further change promised
    In opposition the Conservative Party had announced it would raise pension age for men and women more quickly than existing plans. After it came to power with the Liberal Democrats in May 2010 this pledge was repeated in the programme for government set out in the Coalition Agreement.

    "We will...hold a review to set the date at which the state pension age starts to rise to 66, although it will not be sooner than 2016 for men and 2020 for women."

    October 2010 - revised changes
    The commitment in the Coalition Agreement fell foul of EU equality laws which allowed the government to equalise state pension ages as late as April 2020 but would not allow further discrimination between men and women during that process. So in the Spending Review of October 2010 the plans were revised. Women's state pension age would now be raised more quickly to reach 65 in 2018 and then both men and women's pension age would rise to 66 by 2020. Critics pointed out that plan breached the Coalition Agreement promise of 'no sooner than...2020 for women'.

    2011 - Pensions Bill sets out the planned changes
    In February 2011 the detailed timetable for change was announced in the Pensions Bill 2011. Women's state pension age would rise to 65 by November 2018 and then men and women's pension age would rise together to reach 66 by 5 April 2020. Five million men and women would face a later state pension date. But while men would have to wait at most another year, 500,000 women would have to wait longer than a year. The wait for 300,000 would be 18 months or more and 33,000 would have to wait for two years.

    Widespread protests and rebellions in Parliament - which the Government defeated - led to promises by the Secretary of State Iain Duncan-Smith to introduce some 'transitional' changes to help the most severely affected women. But the Pensions Bill went through almost all its stages in Parliament with no details of what the Government would actually do.

    On Thursday 13 October 2011, the last possible date, the Government announced its plans. It would cap the delay for women at 18 months. It kept the rise to 65 by November 2018. But would then stretch out the transition from age 65 to 66 for both men and women by an extra six months. It will now be completed in October 2020. The concession will cost 1.1 billion (at 2010/11 prices), half of which will be spent on stretching the timetable for men, none of whom had complained.

    On Tuesday 18 October 2011 the House of Commons accepted these changes and despite a further attempt in the Lords to amend them the Pensions Act 2011 became law on 3 November 2011.

    April 2011
    In April 2011 the Government began a consultation on how it should bring forward the change in state pension age to 67 and then 68. That consultation closed on 24 June 2011.

    29 November 2011
    On 29 November 2011 in the Autumn Statement the Chancellor George Osborne announced that the rise in the State Pension Age to 67 would be brought forward to April 2026 to April 2028 instead of April 2034 to April 2036.

    Further changes
    Under the Pensions Act 2007 the state pension age will rise to 68 between April 2044 and April 2046. That date will be brought forward.
    • colsten
    • By colsten 26th Nov 19, 10:42 PM
    • 11,301 Posts
    • 10,673 Thanks
    colsten
    • #9
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:42 PM
    • #9
    • 26th Nov 19, 10:42 PM
    Well I have to say that I'm shocked and amazed at the number of people, of both genders and all ages, who have voted for 'full compension'


    Would some of these people like to post where they think this largess should come from? NHS? Education? Extra taxes for all?
    Originally posted by Silvertabby
    I share your shock. Corbyn, when pressed repeated by Andrew Neil tonight on the source of the 58bn, eventually muttered "Government reserves". Which is a terrible term for "younger people"!!! I am also shocked that so few people seem to even care where the money would come from, as long as they can cash in.

    I am also shocked that so many people seem to be perfectly happy with well-off women born in 1955 (SPA 66) would get the top amounts (30k-ish), whilst any poor women born later, same SPA, would get as little as 313. I absolutely understand the need for a taper but I totally do NOT understand why people in need do not get prioritised. I don't accept the "means testing is too costly" argument.

    I am further shocked that nobody seems to care about 1950s men, at all. The Pension Credit (PC) age of men went up exactly the same way as women's SPA. So the very poorest of men, who previously qualified for PC from age 60 now get nothing, apart from perhaps ESA/JSA. As if that was not enough, they are now being humiliated by seeing affluent women their age walk away with up to 30K whilst they are getting not a bean.

    Shocking, shocking, shocking that Labour, of all Parties, could come up with such a badly thought through proposal. Even more shocking that mature women are cheering it. Our society is going to ratshits.

    No compensation. I am one of those affected but see this as a vote buying exercise. My vote is not for sale!
    Originally posted by Molly Mulldoon
    Same here. Whilst I would obviously love to get an extra 28,000 myself, this blatant bribe will not influence my vote.
    • Lambm
    • By Lambm 26th Nov 19, 10:53 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    Lambm
    Wasps women
    I am a Waspi woman. When I started work I did not get equal pay. Men working next to me in same job earned more as they were men. When I had children there was no maternity leave you lost your job. When you were able to work again you started at the bottom and worked your way up again. Despite this I managed to pay in 46 years of full pension contributions only to be told my pension would not be paid as promised.I not only had to wait an additional 3 years I get a lower pension for life than a man my age. As men born in 1951 get the new higher pension but only women born after1953 will get the the new pension worth approx 30 a week more. Prior to the govt breaking the pension contract men and women did receive the same amount but this group of women born between 1951 and 1953 never will ,this new inequality was never publicised. So yes I think the govt stole the money from the pension fund and should morally replace it.
    • Alistair31
    • By Alistair31 26th Nov 19, 11:15 PM
    • 211 Posts
    • 215 Thanks
    Alistair31
    So yes I think the govt stole the money from the pension fund and should morally replace it.
    Originally posted by Lambm
    All very good, but unless you are Diane Abbott you will realise that there is no magic money tree. Where should the money be taken from to repay you and people like you ?
    • Annworked42years
    • By Annworked42years 26th Nov 19, 11:19 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    Annworked42years
    YES after working for 42 years contributing national insurance payments every week I do feel I was entitled to my pension at the age of 60. Being advised less than 12 months before retirement age did not give me sufficient time to replan for my retirement.
    Where will they get the money? Try using the monies paid in by all the working women to this end. If a private pension company made a decision to extend the date you could draw a private pension by 6 years, after paying in for 40+ Years there would be uproar and probably court cases brought to force them to pay.
    • hyubh
    • By hyubh 26th Nov 19, 11:31 PM
    • 2,618 Posts
    • 2,087 Thanks
    hyubh
    I not only had to wait an additional 3 years I get a lower pension for life than a man my age.
    As men born in 1951 get the new higher pension but only women born after1953 will get the the new pension worth approx 30 a week more.
    Originally posted by Lambm
    It's more complicated than that. The post-16 state pension isn't higher, it's actually lower (although anyone who had already accrued higher than the post-16 amount keeps that). The key difference is that the pre-16 state pension was in two parts, basic and additional, whereas the post-16 state pension is 'single tier' (basically: younger workers who would have earned additional state pension anyway will mostly end up with a lower state pension than under the old system).

    That said, it is true that a man could accue a higher additional state pension than a woman, however this was directly due to men's higher SPA (the rate at which a woman accrued SERPS - or a GMP if a member of a contracted-out DB scheme - was quicker, but capped out earlier and lower). So, to be affected on the point I quoted above, you would need to be older, but if older, then the less the impact of the 2016 changes in the first place.

    Perhaps post on the Pensions board if you'd like to understand more about your particular situation...?
    • hyubh
    • By hyubh 26th Nov 19, 11:44 PM
    • 2,618 Posts
    • 2,087 Thanks
    hyubh
    Being advised less than 12 months before retirement age did not give me sufficient time to replan for my retirement.
    Originally posted by Annworked42years
    Decision to raise from 60 was made and publicised in 1993, and on the statute books in 1995...

    Where will they get the money? Try using the monies paid in by all the working women to this end.
    Used to pay state pensioners of the time. It's all gone!

    If a private pension company made a decision to extend the date you could draw a private pension by 6 years, after paying in for 40+ Years there would be uproar and probably court cases brought to force them to pay.
    An occupational DB scheme (like MPs', or a bank's, or teachers', or nurses', or school cleaners') can't retrospectively change its NRA indeed. The state pension is technically a contributory benefit however, so so different rules apply.
    • Marcon
    • By Marcon 27th Nov 19, 12:03 AM
    • 1,429 Posts
    • 1,137 Thanks
    Marcon
    Why Women Against State Pension Inequality, when they do nothing but try to promote inequality?
    • Paul_Herring
    • By Paul_Herring 27th Nov 19, 7:33 AM
    • 7,013 Posts
    • 3,717 Thanks
    Paul_Herring
    I note that the poll is broken for some users of Firefox; the vote button isn't rendered because FF is blocking 3rd party scripts that haven't been included in the page correctly.

    :golf_clap:
    Conjugating the verb 'to be":
    -o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries
    • Millbrooky
    • By Millbrooky 27th Nov 19, 8:20 AM
    • 1 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    Millbrooky
    This is a nonsense
    Everyone conveniently forgets that men were discriminated against for ~70 years - they were made to work 5 years longer for their pension despite life expectancy of 7 years less than women.
    Will we compensate these men who did lose out - they had on average 12 years less pension than women!
    To compensate women who haven't actually lost anything is nonsense - all women were notified that the age was changing, moving the age threshold didn't put them into poverty unless they resigned from their job at 60 without a pension - which would be madness.
    • Paul_Herring
    • By Paul_Herring 27th Nov 19, 8:57 AM
    • 7,013 Posts
    • 3,717 Thanks
    Paul_Herring
    Will we compensate these men who did lose out - they had on average 12 years less pension than women!
    You don't get how this general sexism/patriarchy thing works, do you?
    Conjugating the verb 'to be":
    -o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries
    • Xenophon
    • By Xenophon 27th Nov 19, 9:09 AM
    • 9 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Xenophon
    We have all had our state pension age moved since we started work. Mine is now age 67 and I was born in 1962, ( I am female). Where does the 'compensation' end? It was some of these women that wanted equality so why should men work longer, especially as they don't take time off to have children.
    Originally posted by fkcigclrc
    Absolutely, totally agree. Glad to see that some don't only believe in equality when it benefits them.

    I'm the same, thought I was going to retire and get the state pension at 64, now it is 67. Will I get 'compensation' as a man? As you say, where will it end!
    • greefy
    • By greefy 27th Nov 19, 9:55 AM
    • 1 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    greefy
    Mr.
    Hi,I'm a 61 year old male, am I going to be compensated a year, as I now have to wait until age 66 to retire,
    Cheers,
    Tony.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,521Posts Today

6,813Users online

Martin's Twitter