To be fed up with the WASPIs' renewed campaign?

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

the last paragraph is interesting

I can understand the frustration.

But the problem is that pensioners are the biggest recipients of benefits in the form of the state pension. Most are taking out way more than they ever put in. It’s a very uncomfortable truth.

This is unsustainable long term and a ticking time bomb that my generation will have to deal with. It’s a disaster for advanced economies. See France for example.

There are no easy solutions here and there is going to be much pain coming.

But in the 80’s, 90’s and early noughties the culture had changed considerably as had pensions etc . The ability to set up pensions , pay additional contributions was there and autonomy over financial decisions had been present for some time.

People like myself were not sent letters (slightly too young) but the massive amount of publicity , discussion etc made us aware that our retirement age was changing and even a few years makes a difference in making changes to saving for retirement. Due to raising family it was only after the children had finished education I could contribute to building pension up to “bridge the gap”.

My mother was from an earlier than WASPI generation but retired at 55 with a very generous workplace pension and a very generous payout from her mortgage endowment, even after starting with nothing after a divorce. She had left school at 14 and certainly would recognise much of what was written but for my generation and those born a few years before this , this chimes as the experience of a previous generation, not ours . We benefitted from the equal rights movement . It took years before men benefitted from that pension wise and even now , because of the disparity in life expectancy , men will still get less retirement than women . In some deprived areas men’s life expectancy is less than the retirement age .

I agree. I barely watch the news and I knew about it.

Yes, it did. A woman who was sidelined into a 'female' job on low pay with little or no pension wasn't going to be able to make it to the top (or anywhere near it) in time to make a difference. Even when the law changed, culture often didn't, and infrastructure (such as childcare and the idea of 'real men' and 'good husbands' supporting stay at home wives) was slow too. Many women worked for 'pin money' and didn't pay NI, sometimes because employers preferred to keep everyone under the limit so they didn't have to contribute either, and sometimes because the pay was low and there was little or no childcare available for those without family help.

Also laws that forced employers to allow part-time workers and those on recurring contracts (eg term-time in schools, or renewable academic contracts) to join pension schemes came in much later, and most PT workers have always been female. Some entry level jobs were renamed to make them sound unisex, but in fact were reserved for one sex or the other, with the higher paid ones with prospects for boys, and the support ones for girls.

Many women paid a lower stamp (NI contribution) when they married, as it was assumed their husbands would provide when they retired, and he could make higher contributions to his own SERPs (the earnings related bit of the old state pension), which could have tax advantages for the couple. Fine if that happened as planned, but if the couple split, it was the woman left with a low pension, and when the SPA changed these women had far more to pay back than if they had paid the full amount in their own right. I'm not advocating that those who paid in less should get a full pension, but it's not as clear cut as it sounds.

And woman were discriminated against legally by being barred from workplace pensions, which was the point I was making originally. As others are suggesting that woman were feckless in not sorting out additional pension

It is possible for an employer to pay into a SIPP - my husband’s employer did for several years.

It was you that brought up Private pensions, not me

I think you are getting very pedantic in this. It is completely irrelevant to the debate which is about the State pension. Everything else is privately organised ie not by the state. Google it, it will tell you the same. It is a turn of phrase to indicate the distinction that is all. Not sure why you are obsessing over a distinction everyone else understands.

I’ve tried explaining, if you can’t understand then unfortunately it isn’t something I can help with

the employer doesn’t pay a percentage towards private school fees

From the report:

Communication between 1995 and 2004
Between 1995 and 2004, DWP’s communication of changes to State Pension age reflected the standards we would expect it to meet. Accurate information was publicly available through DWP’s agencies, pension education campaigns, leaflets and website.

Nine whole years of communicating the information accurately and effectively. But the WASPIs missed it all! 🙄🙄🙄 When people far younger managed to get the message.

Say it isn't about greed and the chance to get a nice lump sum for nothing.

The WASPIs like to conflated the two to try and garner more sympathy.

Here you go. Summary report, there's a link to the full document.

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/complaints-womens-state-pension-age

These women really grind my gears. Apart from the ones whose pension age changed from 65 with little notice, I have zero sympathy.

No one believes you never knew, it was publicised everywhere. Do you take us for idiots?

Please campaign about something useful and relevant if you're going to campaign about anything. Your greed is obvious.

i feel a bit unsympathetic too. I’m 58 and when I started working I was told state pension was at 60. I have that on my ancient (pretty worthless) pension paperwork. It’s 67, fair dos.

Still private pensions regardless of organised by an individual or a workplace

But like state vs private schools.

Im sure this isn’t correct. It wasn’t 18 months notice of a 6 year increase. It was from 63-65/66 if I understand it correctly.

Letters to individuals yes. But the changes were very widely publicised before for years before then. TV and radio campaigns, leaflets in libraries, doctors etc. it’s ridiculous for anyone to claim that they got to their late fifties still thinking they could claim state pension at age 60.

Letters to women born between April 6, 1950, and April 5, 1953 were not sent until between April 2009 and March 2011.

The government's 2009-2011 letter campaign (delayed from original plans to send them much earlier) missed a significant number of affected women, mainly those born 1953 - 1959.

Many affected women received only 18 months' notice of a six-year increase in their state pension age, unlike men who received six years' notice.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) found that maladministration and injustice had occurred and, as a result, they recommended compensation.

They said:
"For most sample complainants we consider the primary injustice is that they were denied opportunities to make informed decisions about some things, and to do some things differently, because of maladministration in DWP’s communication about State Pension age. That is a material injustice."

I didn't get a letter. I phoned the DWP in 2012 to find out if the change had been implemented and whether my NI contributions were OK. I was 57.

Workplace pensions are arranged by employers with mandatory employer contributions (usually 3%) and tax relief, while private (personal) pensions are set up by individuals for greater control over investments. Workplace schemes offer free money via employer matching, while private pensions, such as Self-Invested Personal Pensions (SIPPs), provide more investment choices

hopefully this is a more comprehensive explanation

if your work place is paying into your pension, I doubt it’s a private pension- but a workplace pension. This is different from a private pension and although both have tax advantages they operate differently.

These two different types of pension are differ from a state pension

well mine is a private pension. My work pays into it and so do I. It isn’t the state pension

Agreed. Equal rights is what we demanded and what we got.

No, work place are different from private pensions and again separate from state Old age pensions