Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU in thinking the government have made the correct decision not to blanket pay all WASPI women £3k? This goes against the Ombudsman recommendations to pay between £1k-3k to every WASPI women.

583 replies

caringcarer · 17/12/2024 13:35

At the time it was in every newspaper for weeks, in the radio and on the TV news a lot of coverage via the media. Most women of this age agree they knew about pension age changes. At the time it was huge. I fail to understand how any women could not have known unless they lived off grid. No individual letters were sent out to the women who would be affected. The Ombudsman's recommendation was that a blanket payment of between £1k-3k be paid to all WASPI women. Labour have just announced no money will be paid out at all. It would have cost the taxpayer up to £10.5 billion pounds on top of the huge amount of my ney it has cost to review it for several years. It is money that the government just don't have. Assuming lessons have been learned and any future changes will see DWP send out letters to any individuals who it will directly affect. The only worry is that it sets a precedent of ignoring what the Ombudsman's recommendations.

OP posts:
CurlyhairedAssassin · 17/12/2024 19:35

usernother · 17/12/2024 17:55

I think it's the right decision. I'd rather the money is spent on something else. I found the amount of lying from people (some of whom I'm friends with) saying they didn't know, sickening.

I think some people kid themselves that because they didn't receive a specific individualised letter then it's ok to claim they weren't informed. Which isn't the same as not knowing.

I feel similar about the whole PPI bandwagon to be honest. Plenty of people put claims in for thousands of that. Plenty of those people knew full well what they'd signed up to, but because it was relatively easy to claim that they didn't know what they were agreeing to they deserved some compensation.

Drfosters · 17/12/2024 19:33

Pat888 · 17/12/2024 18:13

Gawd I can’t believe we are on this again -it’s hilarious that people cannot believe we did not know -I’m a wasps and I did not know -I also got the Daily Telegrapg regularly and invested in shares which I read up on but I did not know the pension age had changed. Fortunately DH earned loads so I’m fine thanks -and to say we should regularly check -wtf call DWP monthly to ask if there’s changes, check community council hasn’t changes, any other allowances altered ?? So everyone of us contacts them on a ?monthly basis hahaha

i am really struggling to believe that the Daily Telegraph did absolutely zero reporting on this. Maybe they didn’t but genuinely I would be shocked that they didn’t cover this at all.

I just find it odd that some women like my mum said the adverts were everywhere and everyone was talking about it and some people say they had no idea. Seems such a strange divergence. Is it due to education or area of the country for instance?

SunnyDaySummer · 17/12/2024 19:31

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 19:23

What sort of plans apart from the fact they needed to work for longer?

No doubt millions of the women will have turned down very lucrative career-change opportunities in their 50s, as they knew they’d be getting their state pension cheque soon (without checking when). 🤣

Balletdreamer · 17/12/2024 19:28

Vaxtable · 17/12/2024 13:54

Funny how Labour found the money to pay off the rail drivers et al, and £50m for syria and everything else, but suddenly it’s to much to find to make payment for an error a government department made?

I thought the railways were privatised? Why is the government paying off drivers? Genuine question

DarkAndTwisties · 17/12/2024 19:28

Thepurplepig · 17/12/2024 15:58

Pulled 50 million out of his arse for Syria at the start of the week though didn’t he.

Tbf £50m is absolutely nothing compared to the £10.5b this compensation is quoted as costing. Less than 0.5% of it if I've got the 0s right.

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 19:27

bettingpencil · 17/12/2024 19:25

that was under jeremy corbyn's leadership and was in their 2019 manifesto

funnily enough a very large percentage of WASPI women decided to vote for Boris Johnson's government instead....

Yes. Shame they didn't vote for Labour then.

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 19:26

Billydavey · 17/12/2024 19:22

And I believe the ombudsman made the wrong decision but we’ll just have to agree to disagree

I think they did too.

bettingpencil · 17/12/2024 19:25

GallyGaff · 17/12/2024 19:19

This is what labour were saying a few years ago.

x.com/i/status/1869066848719016119

that was under jeremy corbyn's leadership and was in their 2019 manifesto

funnily enough a very large percentage of WASPI women decided to vote for Boris Johnson's government instead....

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 19:25

They didn't win the election though.

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 19:23

BIossomtoes · 17/12/2024 19:06

Even if “everyone knew” (they didn’t, hence the Ombudsman’s maladministration decision) the 2011 changes didn’t give many early 1950s women time to plan accordingly.

What sort of plans apart from the fact they needed to work for longer?

Billydavey · 17/12/2024 19:22

LatteLady · 17/12/2024 17:53

Well, if that were the case then the WASPI women cause would not have been set up, nor would the parliamentary and health service ombudsman’s have found that the DWP had failed to communicate the changes adequately. Those are the facts, agreed by all, but what annoys me, is if this were a Bank or Insurance Company, the government would be telling them to pay up...

And I believe the ombudsman made the wrong decision but we’ll just have to agree to disagree

Notsuchafattynow · 17/12/2024 19:21

MichaelandKirk · 17/12/2024 14:00

They didnt make an error. The WASPI women said they didnt know about the changes. Anyone could claim they didnt understand or didnt get the memo!

But they quite literally didn't get the memo.

SunnyDaySummer · 17/12/2024 19:16

It’s like a couple having a third child, then finding out there is no child benefit for the 3rd child, and demanding compensation because they hadn’t heard about this. How is it different?

BIossomtoes · 17/12/2024 19:06

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 18:59

Everyone knew. It was talked about a lot in the news and certainly in workplaces.

Even if “everyone knew” (they didn’t, hence the Ombudsman’s maladministration decision) the 2011 changes didn’t give many early 1950s women time to plan accordingly.

wombat15 · 17/12/2024 18:59

StrikeForever · 17/12/2024 18:41

The Ombudsman has already established there was no ‘memo’

Everyone knew. It was talked about a lot in the news and certainly in workplaces.

SunnyDaySummer · 17/12/2024 18:56

What if some men decided to take the government to court for sex discrimination, having to work an extra 5 years?

Anyway I’d heard about it loads even though I was much younger and not that big into current affairs. I think the only people who didn’t know well in advance, would be very disorganised / head-in-clouds people who would have done nothing about it even if they had known.

OrwellianTimes · 17/12/2024 18:52

FuzzyPuffling · 17/12/2024 13:47

No. It's the wrong decision. It should have nothing to do with " can't afford it"- we don't say that to the victims of the PO or the blood scandals, or to gay service people.

The rise in state pension age to 66 was not communicated adequately. On top of a previous rise to 65, this made planning a financial future more than difficult.

And don't forget, these women are of an age when access to pensions was limited as were employment rights and supporting benefits.

The ombudsman recommended level 4 compensation. Older women are just an easy target to say "no".

I don’t think it’s comparable to those scenarios. The mental trauma and shame endured by blood victims, PO victims, and gay service people is huge.

WASPI are out of pocket, never been actively shamed by the community.

ForReasonsUnknown · 17/12/2024 18:51

1apenny2apenny · 17/12/2024 16:10

Young people need to sit up and take notice. I predict within the next 10 years the state pension will start to be removed/reduced altogether.

Those working in reasonably paid jobs especially need to take note, you'll have spent your whole life funding others and putting up with crap services/stuff being taken away only to find that your retirement will look similar to someone who never bothered to work. In fact there are quite a few pensioners now who are better off than others due to the uplift of pension credit.

Wrong decision imo, a process wasn't followed, the women weren't written to. I suspect some hapless civil servant thought it wasn't worth bothering as it only affected women.

You are aware it’s ministers who make the decision, not civil servants? The arrogance is insulting!

Young generations are well aware we’re fucked - because older generations have consistently failed us at every stage to protect the future and have only ever voted for their selfish interests!!! pathetic.

Smokesandeats · 17/12/2024 18:51

LikeWhoUsesTypewritersAnyway · 17/12/2024 15:49

Being a woman still in my 50s - just - I had my retirement age pushed up from 60 to 65 back in the 1990s, (because I was born after 1960.) It was pushed up to 66 a few years later..

So I am struggling to care about the WASPI women. Especially as, in the late 1990s - several women at work who were several years older than me, laughed at me, when I was told I had to work to 65. (They only had to work til 60 because they were born before 1960.)

They stopped laughing when it all changed, and they had to work to the same age as me. (I started laughed.)

As I said, I'm struggling to care about them.

Your SPA age will now be 67 not 66. I think the cut off point is for those born in 1960-1961.

TheHateIsNotGood · 17/12/2024 18:49

And since then, my non-discriminatory state pension age has been raised to 67, only 5 years to go now. When I first started working at 15 it was 60. Mind you, by keeping the already-knackered working at mill is a sure-fired way to decrease our longetivity and the associated 'costs'.

user243245346 · 17/12/2024 18:49

OnlyDespairRemains · 17/12/2024 18:05

Younger generations are already over-funding older ones and it is not sustainable.

Why should someone who won't retire until they are 70 (if they retire at all) pay for someone else to retire at 60?

Another case of the 'me' generation taking as much as they can with no thought for those to come.

I agree. By the time my dds are 60 it's likely that there will be no state pension. Its incredibly expensive.

indigovapour · 17/12/2024 18:48

Correct decision and I think it'll be a popular one. Labour finally getting something right.

TheHateIsNotGood · 17/12/2024 18:44

I'm not quite a Waspi and I thought fair enough when my state pension age was raised to 65 to be equal to men - we wanted equality and we generally lived longer than men so I thought fair enough.

However, I lived and worked through the times that basically said FU to the Sex Discrimination Act in terms of equality in pay, maternity rights, societal roles ad infinitum.

To state that Waspi women had time to plan for their retirement pays no attention to the 'working' lives of women of the Waspi generation. Many of whom were banging the drum of female equality to enable the rights that women 'enjoy' today. Yes a few broke the mould but the majority didn't.

ForReasonsUnknown · 17/12/2024 18:41

Umbridge34 · 17/12/2024 18:32

Everyone I know started working at 16/17 alongside college and uni. The only people who didnt work at uni were finded by rich parents

By the time I can claim my state and NHS pension (without significant penalties) I will have worked 52 years at the current estimates. I fully anticipate that this will rise before I get there.

I’m gen z and have been working since 16 - I did full time hours whilst at uni. I’m 25 so I doubt my pension will look like a they do now if it exists at all.