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:
Fifthtimelucky · 17/12/2024 16:45

I am almost a waspi woman (I miss the cut off date by a few months) and I think it's the right decision.

IMustDoMoreExercise · 17/12/2024 16:42

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!

Exactly. It is your responsibility to know things like this.

If you don't declare any capital gains made, you can't just say that you didn't know about it.

If you are an adult, you need to be responsible for your own welfare.

SharpOpalNewt · 17/12/2024 16:40

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:24

Oh right so because lots of women understood screw the ones that didn't and needed it explained better?

Loads of people don't claim all the benefits they could. Should we find them all and pay them retrospectively as the government failed to write to them and address their personal circumstances to say how much they could claim?

MoreDangerousThanAWomanScorned · 17/12/2024 16:39

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 honestly am not trying to be patronising here, but I know £50m for Syria and £137m for train drivers and £10.5 bn for WASPI women sound like they're broadly comparable in that they're all big money, but they really aren't. 10bn is about 15% of the NHS budget - it really is quite an unaffordable amount. Or, rather, it could be afforded by requiring current tax payers to fund it, and as this thread shows most people don't think that's reasonable or equitable.

EasternStandard · 17/12/2024 16:38

tfresh · 17/12/2024 15:41

WASPI women living up to the reputation of being the most entitled generation. They would literally see their grandchildren go to falling down schools if it means another cruise.

Complaining about getting better circumstances than their own children. It's insane.

Where are you getting these women are rolling in it?

Surely there's a spectrum of how much they have rather than all going on cruises etc

As for the op and Labour, they spent it up in first few months, they're probably strapped now

MrsMurphyIWish · 17/12/2024 16:38

I actually thought I could retire at 67 like DH, but as I was born the end of ‘78 then it’s 68 for me. No point in complaining though - the pension is a state benefit and benefits change.

I also teach so I see first hand how dire it is in schools. It’s worrying to think how social mobility has decreased over time - any money needs spending on our public services.

Cableknitdreams · 17/12/2024 16:38

MoreDangerousThanAWomanScorned · 17/12/2024 16:09

Women have always worked. Only middle class women didn't, and no, tbh, I don't think a few years caring for preschoolers is a lifetime of work.

Well actually they repeatedly lost their jobs due to lack of support or childcare, lost their tenancies as a result, and went without food,l to feed their children, in the case of my mother and others I know of her generation.

Cableknitdreams · 17/12/2024 16:36

EmmaMaria · 17/12/2024 14:30

It doesn't affect me directly, although I was (just) born within the range affected, because I do not depend on my state pension and because I have always worked, so have a full state pension. However, I do think that people today often fail to realise the degree of social change that has taken place over my lifetime, especially for women. Where I grew up - an urban environment so not in the sticks! - most women did not stay in education past 16, few had careers and those that did often had massive interuptions in their working lives due to parental responsibilities. They didn't get to worry about the cost of nursery or how many free hours they could get and when they got them, because there were few nurseries and no free hours at all. If I am brutally honest, educated, thinking working class women were pretty rare. The normal expectation was leave school, work for a few years, court, marry and have babies (preferably in that order, but often not). News was something that many men and women paid scant attention to - the big stories, yes, but being "well informed" wasn't often an agenda item. And thinking about pensions was like the far distant future anyway.

So many of these women really didn't know about or understand pensions, eligibility and all the rules that were associated with them. Remember that their parents were amongst the first to ever see a state pension. It wasn't until 1946 that the universal state pension was introduced.

I think it is wrong, although unsurprising, that the Labour government has decided to refuse any payments after the ombudsmans recommendation. But after taking fuel allowance from the elderly, what is leaving many women in poverty? Thank God the Labour Party are on the side of the working men and women of the country. Otherwise we might blink and think the Tories got back in.

Absolutely agree with this post.

SharpOpalNewt · 17/12/2024 16:35

Stretchanoctave · 17/12/2024 16:30

Quite.

A line has to be drawn somewhere.

mumda · 17/12/2024 16:33

MichaelandKirk · 17/12/2024 13:52

I have to say I agree with the decision. The government dont have the money to spend and I have to be honest and say unless women were living under a rock how did they not get the information.

A couple of weeks the news were interviewing an elderly person who had just lost her late husband's pension. He had brought a single annuity. She didnt seem to understand that it was lost when he passed. She even mentioned that he took the 'higher' amount as two options had been offered but she only now knew what they really meant when her partner passed away.

They have lots of money they spend, It is taxpayers money, not theirs!

Stretchanoctave · 17/12/2024 16:30

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?

Quite.

Waytooearlytogetup · 17/12/2024 16:29

Kingoftheroad · 17/12/2024 15:59

I couldn’t agree with you more. I am disgusted by the comments. If this had happened to men it would have been settled long ago. Given that the Scottish Government have failed to account for 8 billion guven during covid, this amount is a drop in the ocean.

This affects the poorest women in the country who have already suffered having their winter fuel allowance removed.

20 years ago Gordon Brown identified the oap’s as being the most deprived in our society thus the reason for introducing the winter fuel payment.

Don’t worry all of you 30+ jummy mummy’s what goes around comes around. By the time that you retire there will be no state pension and you’ll be working till you drop

The problem is that was 20 years ago. Those economics aren't relevant now.

Demographically, currently where the money is needed most is for younger generations. The group now entering retirement is the richest generation to have ever lived. Obviously not true for everyone of them, but statistically proven for the demographic group).

By contrast, the younger generations coming behind them are increasingly falling further and further behind in prosperity as a result of public policies that were voted for by their parents to their advantage but their children's detriment.

In the current state of the country's finances it would be wholly immoral to have provided a blanket compensation to a group many of whom DID know and everyone of which SHOULD have known if they'd been properly planning their retirement. My mother was a working class factory worker and absolutely did know, as did all of her colleagues, it was widely discussed amongst them according to her. She took steps to plan around it and was well prepared, but under the Ombudsman's proposal would still have been entitled to compensation.

andHelenknowsimmiserablenow · 17/12/2024 16:29

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.

I am in my 50s and remember clearly when the increase in pension age from 60 to 65 was announced. I was 29 and also had the 'poor you!' comments from older colleagues. The WASPI women could only have been in their 40s when it was announced. How did some of them not know?

GallyGaff · 17/12/2024 16:27

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:22

Does she lack imagination to think others may live more chaotic lives than hers or may have had other things to focus on. Without a direct call to action they may not have realised they were being targeted with ads and announcements in papers.

What would've worked for them?
If their lives were thar chaotic many would've binned the letter.

Hairyesterdaygonetoday · 17/12/2024 16:26

minipie · 17/12/2024 14:35

So many of these women really didn't know about or understand pensions, eligibility and all the rules that were associated with them.

This works both ways though. If women were so ill informed, that also means they were not relying on a particular state pension age and can’t say they planned around it.

It really doesn’t work both ways. Everyone knew women would retire at 60 and men at 65, that’s just how it always was.

I thought that was weird, till I reached 60 and my postmenopausal body was really suffering from spending all day at a computer. Luckily I was able to go part-time.

Drfosters · 17/12/2024 16:25

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:24

Oh right so because lots of women understood screw the ones that didn't and needed it explained better?

But that isn’t the government’s responsibility. They need to inform which they did and There was a lot of press at the time. People do need to take responsibility to watch the news/ read the papers etc. plenty of people have busy lives but understood.

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:24

Drfosters · 17/12/2024 16:16

I agree with the decision. I asked my mum who is in the age group and she said she knew all about it. She said there was tonnes of publicity and they gave her 20 years to prepare. She honestly had no idea how anyone could have missed it. She prepared accordingly. I feel for these ladies but if plenty of women understood I am not sure what else the government of the time could have done.

Oh right so because lots of women understood screw the ones that didn't and needed it explained better?

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:23

Tryingtokeepgoing · 17/12/2024 16:19

Well I didn’t get a letter saying mine was now 67 not 65…. Am I also entitled to compensation? Or, like any adult, did I do the right thing by keeping myself informed. Or is the argument that, as we are only women and can’t be expected to trouble our selves with complicated things like pensions, we need to be spoon fed. If taking away WFA and reducing private sector pay rises and increasing utility bills and mortgages is acceptable, I don’t see why this is any different.

It's not because it's women. I'd expect any change in the pension age of Men to be communicated too

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:22

Ihavearedbag · 17/12/2024 16:16

I think it was the right decision. My mum is a waspi and is incredulous some others didn’t know what was going on. Giving them £10 billion while working families can’t afford to buy a tiny flat would be outrageous

Does she lack imagination to think others may live more chaotic lives than hers or may have had other things to focus on. Without a direct call to action they may not have realised they were being targeted with ads and announcements in papers.

Tryingtokeepgoing · 17/12/2024 16:19

Nanny0gg · 17/12/2024 16:07

What letters?

There wasn't proper notification of the pension age rising past 65

Well I didn’t get a letter saying mine was now 67 not 65…. Am I also entitled to compensation? Or, like any adult, did I do the right thing by keeping myself informed. Or is the argument that, as we are only women and can’t be expected to trouble our selves with complicated things like pensions, we need to be spoon fed. If taking away WFA and reducing private sector pay rises and increasing utility bills and mortgages is acceptable, I don’t see why this is any different.

JohnofWessex · 17/12/2024 16:16

What about all the men who got a pension at 65 instead of 60?

Drfosters · 17/12/2024 16:16

I agree with the decision. I asked my mum who is in the age group and she said she knew all about it. She said there was tonnes of publicity and they gave her 20 years to prepare. She honestly had no idea how anyone could have missed it. She prepared accordingly. I feel for these ladies but if plenty of women understood I am not sure what else the government of the time could have done.

1959waspi · 17/12/2024 16:16

For me, it's the age from 64/66 increase, if I recall, it was sneaked in. I am not bothered about the compensation but the fact that my state pension - which I have made over 40 years contributions - was delayed due to a 'lack of funds'. I should have done what my extended family are doing, live off state benefits and still get a pension at 66/67/68.

Ihavearedbag · 17/12/2024 16:16

I think it was the right decision. My mum is a waspi and is incredulous some others didn’t know what was going on. Giving them £10 billion while working families can’t afford to buy a tiny flat would be outrageous

goldencabbage · 17/12/2024 16:14

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!

No memo was sent