MSE News: Pensions Minister: 'no straws to clutch to' for WASPI campaigners

17891113

Comments

  • jamesd
    jamesd Posts: 26,103
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    edited 14 June 2017 at 6:10AM
    There's certainly injustice here, with twins born on the same day having had one waiting five years longer than the other and on average dying two years younger. Fortunately the current changes are undoing the first part of that injustice.

    I suppose we could go back to the state pension calculations we had when the increase to 65 was introduced but it would be bad for most women if we did. You see, under those rules a woman with 35 years towards the state pension would be entitled to 35/43rd of the basic state pension. 35/43*122.30 = £99.54 a week. Or 35/48 for men.

    Then that was cut from 43 to 30 qualifying years in a move mainly intended to increase the state pensions of women. That increased the payment from £99.54 to the full £122.30 a week for the same 35 years counting.

    The single tier pension changes also largely help women, cutting the state pensions for those with lots of working years to help pay for it. The single tier pension is £159.55 a week with 35 years required to get it, so the same woman with the same record would now get £159.55 if she reached state pension age from April 2016. Wanting to go back to 60 is particularly nasty for the women who would lose this big increase from £122.30 to £159.55 if it took their state pension age to before 6 April 2016.

    The rules on credits have also changed over the years in ways that have largely benefited women.

    While some women are having difficulties due to age equalisation, the large increases to the state pensions that those with limited earnings records get as a result of these changes are greatly increasing the state pensions that women, particularly those with limited paid work record, get.
  • Pollycat
    Pollycat Posts: 34,578
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Savvy Shopper!
    Forumite
    Pennylane wrote: »
    That's because you get your pension now so you're not bothered about other people. Some of us are still waiting.
    I'm bothered about those women who are in financial hardship because of the changes to women's pension age.

    I'm not bothered about those (WASPI) women who aren't - and feel it appropriate to post selfies of themselves travelling first class to demonstrations and guzzling champagne.

    And I'm still waiting for my pension too.
    But I've also 'got over it'.

    Pennylane - where does equality sit with you?
    As jamesd has pointed out (many times) why do you think it fair that a women born on the same day as a man should receive her state pension before him?
  • Malthusian
    Malthusian Posts: 10,898
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper Photogenic
    Forumite
    Pollycat wrote: »
    As jamesd has pointed out (many times) why do you think it fair that a women born on the same day as a man should receive her state pension before him?

    Because she was going to get her pension five years earlier than that man so she wasn't bothered about other people...

    Incidentally, I was interested to discover that WASPI was banging the drum for at least two years before it all really kicked off in 2015 - before it was known under that name. At least some of its founders handed a petition into the DWP in March 2015, a month before WASPI was founded in April 2015. As far as I could tell, the proto-WASPI petition in March 2015 garnered no mainstream press coverage whatsoever. How things have changed.

    The proto-WASPI petition failed because it only demanded the reversal of the 2012 Pensions Act - the acceleration of some State Pension Age rises by up to 18 months. Today many of us would sympathise with that aim, but in 2015 the campaign hadn't gained any noticeable momentum. The number of people severely affected was too small, and the question had been settled only a few years ago and the time to protest had passed.

    WASPI, as we know, went the whole hog and demanded the reversal of the 1995 Pensions Act and the restoration of State Pension Age at 60 to women born in the 1950s - but they kept this detail vague (restricted to their Facebook page, then moved to the "Info" tab, then removed from public view altogether) so that people would sign the petition without knowing what they were really supporting. This allowed them to build the critical mass that proto-WASPI couldn't.

    The lesson is simple. If you are going to demand something, make it big. There is no place for reasonable requests in politics. You need to make your demands big enough that the size of the prize overcomes your supporters' natural aversion to asking for handouts, while couching them in vagueness to avoid alienating potential sympathisers.

    Of course you might say that WASPI failed just as much as proto-WASPI did, because while they garnered more support they still failed in all of their aims. But that ignores the fact that WASPI got to swan around the country, appear on TV and drink champagne in first-class carriages.

    I had never heard of the proto-WASPI so I found it very interesting.
  • Pollycat
    Pollycat Posts: 34,578
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Savvy Shopper!
    Forumite
    Malthusian wrote: »
    Because she was going to get her pension five years earlier than that man so she wasn't bothered about other people...

    Incidentally, I was interested to discover that WASPI was banging the drum for at least two years before it all really kicked off in 2015 - before it was known under that name. At least some of its founders handed a petition into the DWP in March 2015, a month before WASPI was founded in April 2015. As far as I could tell, the proto-WASPI petition in March 2015 garnered no mainstream press coverage whatsoever. How things have changed.

    Duplicitous?

    The proto-WASPI petition failed because it only demanded the reversal of the 2012 Pensions Act - the acceleration of some State Pension Age rises by up to 18 months. Today many of us would sympathise with that aim, but in 2015 the campaign hadn't gained any noticeable momentum. The number of people severely affected was too small, and the question had been settled only a few years ago and the time to protest had passed.

    WASPI, as we know, went the whole hog and demanded the reversal of the 1995 Pensions Act and the restoration of State Pension Age at 60 to women born in the 1950s - but they kept this detail vague (restricted to their Facebook page, then moved to the "Info" tab, then removed from public view altogether) so that people would sign the petition without knowing what they were really supporting. This allowed them to build the critical mass that proto-WASPI couldn't.

    The lesson is simple. If you are going to demand something, make it big. There is no place for reasonable requests in politics. You need to make your demands big enough that the size of the prize overcomes your supporters' natural aversion to asking for handouts, while couching them in vagueness to avoid alienating potential sympathisers.

    Of course you might say that WASPI failed just as much as proto-WASPI did, because while they garnered more support they still failed in all of their aims. But that ignores the fact that WASPI got to swan around the country, appear on TV and drink champagne in first-class carriages.

    I had never heard of the proto-WASPI so I found it very interesting.
    I was one of the women who was hood-winked into signing the petition because what was in the petition didn't tally with what was on the WASPI Facebook page.
  • Pennylane
    Pennylane Posts: 2,707
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    A man born on the same day as me will get his pension just 3 months after me.

    A female friend of mine is just 2 months older but will get her pension 8 months before me.
  • Pollycat
    Pollycat Posts: 34,578
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Savvy Shopper!
    Forumite
    Pennylane wrote: »
    A man born on the same day as me will get his pension just 3 months after me.

    A female friend of mine is just 2 months older but will get her pension 8 months before me.
    <<sigh>>
    You're missing the point.

    It's about equality!
    That means bringing the state pension age of men and women in line so that people born on the same day get their pension on the same day.

    As the starting point was 5 years difference, of course it was necessary to phase the changes.

    You need to forget about when other women are getting their state pension and compare your pension date with a man born on the same day as you.
    Do you really not think it's unfair that a man born on the same day as you should have to wait 3 months to receive his pension?
  • System
    System Posts: 178,077
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Community Admin
    I think it's unfair that women on average will live longer than me, but I'm not letting it bother me. Life's a bit unfair, not nearly as much here as in some parts of the world.
  • Pennylane
    Pennylane Posts: 2,707
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    Pollycat wrote: »
    <<sigh>>
    You're missing the point.

    It's about equality!
    That means bringing the state pension age of men and women in line so that people born on the same day get their pension on the same day.

    As the starting point was 5 years difference, of course it was necessary to phase the changes.

    You need to forget about when other women are getting their state pension and compare your pension date with a man born on the same day as you.
    Do you really not think it's unfair that a man born on the same day as you should have to wait 3 months to receive his pension?

    Why should I forget about when other women get their pensions when it's grossly unfair? I've just given an example of a man having to wait 3 months longer than me which isn't too band TBH. It's not right but it's not too bad considering I have female friends born just 8 and 11 months before me and they've been getting their pensions for a couple of YEARS.
  • Pollycat
    Pollycat Posts: 34,578
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Savvy Shopper!
    Forumite
    Pennylane wrote: »
    Why should I forget about when other women get their pensions when it's grossly unfair? I've just given an example of a man having to wait 3 months longer than me which isn't too band TBH. It's not right but it's not too bad considering I have female friends born just 8 and 11 months before me and they've been getting their pensions for a couple of YEARS.
    You really don't get it at all, do you?
    Pennylane wrote: »
    That's because you get your pension now so you're not bothered about other people. Some of us are still waiting.
    Pot.
    Kettle.

    Typical GRASPI 'me me' woman.
  • Daniel54
    Daniel54 Posts: 831
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Pennylane wrote: »
    Why should I forget about when other women get their pensions when it's grossly unfair?

    So your key grouse is that you are envious of women who get to SPA before you,but not much bothered about about the very many more men and women who will have to wait longer than you.?

    Waspi Ltd actuslly don't have much interest in the 2011 act and it's distortions ,as they are all about bridging pension and backdated compo to insulate themselves from both 1995 and 2011.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards