Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Economic Exile

Will The Waspi Women Force A Rethinking Of Pension Age Escalation?

Recommended Posts

I'm enjoying how this core group of 5 women have gathered momentum and are making a big impact in the media and government.

https://www.facebook.com/WASPI-Women-Against-State-Pension-Inequality-Campaign-877054125688402/

Nobody in the campaign is questioning that pension ages for males and females should be the same but more should the aim be e.g.70 years old for both and if this is deemed reasonable how quickly should it be implemented? Surely we would have to have a society where suitable work is available for all?

I was born in 1958 and expected to retire at 60 until I realised around the year 2000 that I would be 65. I just thought f*ck f*ck f*ck f*ck...another 5 years to go before I can get that. No letter from DWP to inform me of this until after 2011 when I got one more year added. Double f*ck f*ck f*ck f*ck. So I believe that unless you were the type of women that looked into politics, news etc you genuinely wouldn't know you would be affected.

Yes I hear a lot of men saying oh you women don't like it now when you have to be equal!

Personally I don't think women and men are equal and they never will be because we are different.

Women born in the 1950's lived in a world that is very different to now and not all boomers are rich! If you had children you didn't have a career unless you had a family member to take on your childcare duties or enough money to pay for it. 1950's women have asked for state pension forecasts and been given conflicting info e.g. you need 30 years contributions and based on this they've retired then been told they need 35 years. Some have divorced and settlements have been based on them getting SP at 60 so they have been left with a shortfall because of the escalation in reaching state pension age. Others have taken ill health retirement from government departments based on their belief and the belief of the government dept that they would retire at aged 60.

Take from the whole shambles what you will but I'll state I'm against this fast escalation in reaching State Pension Age at say age 70 simply because we don't live in a world with suitable jobs for all ages and circumstances where everyone is fit and able to work till age 70.

The WASPI'S are currently getting a choir together (can't wait to see what they come up with), emailing MP's en mass, campaigning, leaflet dropping and making appointments to see their MP. There have already been 2 debates with cross party support and next up is a house of commons full debate. That's the focus just now but they have crowd funded and are consulting a barrister re a legal challenge.

Oh, and apparently they're bullying poor Ros Altmann ex head of SAGA who was against the way pension age increases were being implemented. Now she has been appointed Baroness Altmann and sitting in the House of Lords she has totally changed her mind and thinks pension age increases in general is just what we all need! I can't see her coming out well in all this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There just isn't enough money to pay for 10-15 years of pension each. That's why it keeps creeping up.

Pretty harsh, in that many won't be financially independent without work, and it's going to be hard for people in their sixties to get work, or even be capable of it. But there it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There just isn't enough money to pay for 10-15 years of pension each. That's why it keeps creeping up.

Pretty harsh, in that many won't be financially independent without work, and it's going to be hard for people in their sixties to get work, or even be capable of it. But there it is.

Well yes that's what we are being told to accept.

I suppose it's an acceptable way to see things for the clever? intelligent? adaptable? rich? i take care of my health? hard working? lucky? cunning? people that currently don't think they will ever end up in financial hardship or even destitution in their later years of life.

In an age of global surplus labour with increasing automation should we be looking to creating a society where old, ill and jobless people have to work till they drop or face the ordeal of trying to claim paltry working age benefits because, for whatever reason, they haven't managed to accrue independent financial resources to survive old age?

One of the current government's responses is that the WASPI women who are jobless or ill or caring for others have a raft of benefits in place to help them. Claiming job seekers or sickness benefit is not an easy option and carers allowance won't keep you. Have you ever had to claim a benefit? People with debilitating and terminal illnesses are being declared fit to work and being put through terrible stress taking it to appeal with a very high percentage winning...if they haven't died while they were waiting. Others are trying to get jobs but can't get one because they just aren't readily available to all. I'm referring to people who have worked all their life but fall ill or those who lose their job not people who have never worked. Not all jobs have handsome redundancy payments!

I'd be fine about pension age increases as long as those who hit hard times through redundancy or illness were looked after. The reality is that they are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other issue is that as you live in Scotland you're life expectancy is significantly shorter than, say for example, a woman in the south of England but you've still paid in the same.

It would be an interesting question how much the north of the border and indeed the north of England send down south in this subsidy.

Just for the record my wife lost out too with even less notice she got 2 years, 11 month and nearly 3 weeks added to her pension date so 1 week short of being 63 she gets her pension.

To be fair though "equality" means treating everyone the same, you can't have "equality" then treat part of society differently, whether it be because of: gender, religion, colour or ethnic origin, the word by it's very nature means treating everyone the same not just when it suits you.

As I say if pensions reflected life expectancy Scotland would have a much lower retirement age than the south of England but it's a one size fits all situation and given the vast amounts of money involved I doubt anything is going to change in the near future, other than getting worse.

The new 2014 care act *came into force this year) has in it bits that seem specifically designed to take money from the elderly in need of care that the previous CRAC regulations didn't allow.

Seems to be the new policy "Harvest the Old".

K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes that's what we are being told to accept.

I suppose it's an acceptable way to see things for the clever? intelligent? adaptable? rich? i take care of my health? hard working? lucky? cunning? people that currently don't think they will ever end up in financial hardship or even destitution in their later years of life.

In an age of global surplus labour with increasing automation should we be looking to creating a society where old, ill and jobless people have to work till they drop or face the ordeal of trying to claim paltry working age benefits because, for whatever reason, they haven't managed to accrue independent financial resources to survive old age?

One of the current government's responses is that the WASPI women who are jobless or ill or caring for others have a raft of benefits in place to help them. Claiming job seekers or sickness benefit is not an easy option and carers allowance won't keep you. Have you ever had to claim a benefit? People with debilitating and terminal illnesses are being declared fit to work and being put through terrible stress taking it to appeal with a very high percentage winning...if they haven't died while they were waiting. Others are trying to get jobs but can't get one because they just aren't readily available to all. I'm referring to people who have worked all their life but fall ill or those who lose their job not people who have never worked. Not all jobs have handsome redundancy payments!

I'd be fine about pension age increases as long as those who hit hard times through redundancy or illness were looked after. The reality is that they are not.

I'm pretty sure that when I reach that age it'll be total destitution for me.

Just not sure there's anything that can be done about it.

Edited by EUBanana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair though "equality" means treating everyone the same, you can't have "equality" then treat part of society differently, whether it be because of: gender, religion, colour or ethnic origin, the word by it's very nature means treating everyone the same not just when it suits you.
Hence why equality is a crock. The car insurance thing pretty much summed that up.
Reminds me of Monty Python. "It's a symbol of his struggle against reality".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that when I reach that age it'll be total destitution for me.

Just not sure there's anything that can be done about it.

I'm hoping not to be destitute but I know I'm going to be skint. No change there as I've been skint for 17 years since ex husband ran off with someone else when kids were aged 4 & 5.

The pension age increases issue IMO is not going to go away among the population. As the years pass there will be plenty of hardship stories. Also, soon when the new flat rate pension comes in lots more people are going to find they are not going to get what they expected.

Interesting article about former pensions campaigner now pensions minister Baroness Altmann.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/how-could-this-one-time-fearless-campaigner-let-down-thousands-o/

Edited by Economic Exile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new pensions minister, Guy Opperman, has shot himself in the foot at a Westminster Hall debate yesterday by suggesting that 1950's born women should take up apprenticeships. WASPI campaign are reporting an unprecedented increase in their membership and massive publicity today :lol:

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/waspi-campaigners-could-defeat-government-13292647

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, John51 said:

http://www.waspi.co.uk/

Headline:

Women Against State Pension Inequality

3rd line:

We are a campaign group that fights the injustice done to all women born in the 1950s

 

 

 

So you think it's ok for governments to increase the pension age of a certain cohort of people from 60 to 60 something then again  to 60 something else. See 1995, 2007? and 2011 acts.

Equality you may say. I started work formally in 1974 at age 16 although I'd worked at weekends since age 12. I lived in a rural area in a traditional family with a breadwinner dad and stay at home mum. No particular encouragement from parents or school to aim for a "career" because the expectation was you'd get married, have a family and do part time stuff.

As it happened I was lucky back then to get employment in a national utility provider age 16 then aged 20 at a bank. I got promoted at the bank but it was very tough. Really had to put myself out to get it compared to promoted males who appeared from the city areas. I'm lucky, many women in my age group had no occupational pension. It really was a different world until about 20 years ago IMO.

Governments want to increase it to 70 for all. What then? Further increases to SPA? No state pension for anyone? Back to the Victorian era? Unless you're fortunate to have been well paid and able to finance a rest.

F**k that, I say.

Regardless of what you think about the waspi campaign I admire them. Five ordinary women started it and after two or three years they are highly organised and have 140 groups countrywide to date. They've choked the DWP with maladministration letters. Current news on that is a new dept will be set up by October to deal with the backlog.

People can laugh, deride or criticise as much as they want but at least the waspi campaign, women in their 50's or early 60's are taking on the government. Young people should take a look at the history and unfolding of their campaign!

I love this picture

 

 

IMG_0026.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No mention of injustice wrt all the men that had to work an extra 5 years to get their pension. 5 years of pension stolen from every middle aged male from 1940 to 1995 because they weren't born female.

Selective equality is not equality, it's a power play. The downside of a power play is that you can lose far more than what you had before getting into the power play. With true equality, those previously getting special perks because of their gender no longer get those perks. There being no special treatment 'just because' is what makes it equality.

If you want a system that recognises that women and men are actually different and should therefore be treated differently, I am in total agreement with you.

If you want an system where it's equality if it suits you but special treatment if it doesn't, well f^ck that. The oscillation between 'Strong and independent' and 'help me, I'm a victim' is getting old. One or the other. Not both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, John51 said:

No mention of injustice wrt all the men that had to work an extra 5 years to get their pension. 5 years of pension stolen from every middle aged male from 1940 to 1995 because they weren't born female.

Selective equality is not equality, it's a power play. The downside of a power play is that you can lose far more than what you had before getting into the power play. With true equality, those previously getting special perks because of their gender no longer get those perks. There being no special treatment 'just because' is what makes it equality.

If you want a system that recognises that women and men are actually different and should therefore be treated differently, I am in total agreement with you.

If you want an system where it's equality if it suits you but special treatment if it doesn't, well f^ck that. The oscillation between 'Strong and independent' and 'help me, I'm a victim' is getting old. One or the other. Not both.

I agree that it's been unfair to men that they have had to toil on until aged 65. However women's pension age was reduced to 60 in 1940 because in general men were older than their wives and they didn't want to wait for wives retiring at 65!

I'm against pension ages rising above 65 for anyone. Many people may live longer but by that age many people are worn out, slower and have illnesses. Also I can't imagine where all the jobs are going to come from to keep the population working from twenties to seventy or beyond.

Personally I don't regard males and females as being equal. We're very different IMO. I do agree that regardless of sex if you do a job you get paid the same but apart from that there's not much more required.

I found the article below interesting about women's pensions. Very long though!

http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/the-scandal-of-womens-pensions-in-britain-how-did-it-come-about

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.