To be fed up with the WASPIs' renewed campaign?

That's not quite accurate. I was born in 53, the 95 announcement meant I'd get my pension at 63,in 2011 that changed to 65. So some women were due to get their pension at 65 but some at 61, 62 and so on.

I think the bit I hated was if I'd been born 8 hours earlier if have got my pension three months earlier. Cliff edges are annoying.

I think a campaign for the short notice some had with the 2011 change would have made more sense but it's history now.

Mo one is suggesting you shouldn't get a person though are they? You've just made that up. People are talking about how you shouldn't be getting compensation for yhe change in pension age paid for by current workers. Which you absolutely shouldnt.
And FWIW I have 32 years contributions so far and 19 years till I can retire (unless it gets raised again) 9 months total maternity leave in that time. 2 kids.

Well, I think doing what we do now, trying to keep the ratios of working time to retirement the same over generations is pretty fair, @MrThorpeHazell - just pointing out that it isn't true to say that the assumption is 15 years, it's that you spend around a third of your adult life in retirement.

I disagree yes it might have been harsh for early 50s born women but I was born in the first few months of 61 and have worked since the age of 16 was under the belief for a large part of my working career that I would be retiring at 60 . Women born in the early 50s were pushed to 65 and later born to 67 . My friend born less than 2 years before retired at 66 as it was cumulative but that has now caught up and I will receive my pension ( and bus pass ) at 67 .

OK, but can you come up with a better way?

Same here. I don’t think I got a letter, but I knew. In fact I’m certain that raising the retirement age for women had been talked and talked about for years.

I agree that the change in wealth inequality is devastating but recording that your mind is blown is only the beginning. People are actively working on how to deal with this and it’s worth reading people who think about what to do, such as Richard Murphy, Thomas Picketty, Gary Stevenson and the New Economics Foundation.

You’re misreading it. They weren’t affected by the 2011 Act so they had over a decade of notice. The people worst affected were those hit again by the 2011 changes.

I’m really just a tiny bit younger than WASPI women and I always worked. Ok so there were no funded hours of childcare, far fewer childcare providers and no wraparound school care so it was tough! I literally had to phone the council and enquire about a list of people who did childminding before I returned to work with my 12 week old baby. But it was still a possibility. We weren’t all staying home, doing little part time jobs for pin money and having no clue what our husbands earned.

sure, go back a generation or more and things were different. My grandmother had to stop work when she had my mum. But with the WASPI women, we’re not talking the dark ages….many of them were working and didn’t spend decades out of the workplace. I think some people are conveniently forgetting the choices which were available in this era

But the people in 1950/51 had the least notice of the change surely even if they got the retire younger? Or am I misreading that?

I’m also sick of hearing about “I paid my stamp for 35 years where is my pension?” At 47 I have “qualified” according to HMRC but I won’t get my pension til 68. If it’s there! My MIL - and I do love her! - has never worked. She came to this country as an immigrant, met her husband and had her children. She raised great children btw but she has never contributed to the state.

If you look at this chart women born in 1953/54 were the worst affected.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f02e640f0b62305b84929/spa-timetable.pdf

1951 so was one the worst affected. I said ten years earlier as didn’t realise I had to give exact to the month years. Was just trying to give an idea of the difference- wasn’t trying to be explicit on a thread to reveal exact details.

Yes I sort of feel like someone like that, who does something so unbelievably dim as to retire without double checking the age, probably wouldn’t have noticed or paid attention to 50 letters and a personal visit from the chancellor at the time explaining the change.

To anyone who is fed up with WASPIS.
Don't start threads about them
Change the subject when its mentioned
Don't comment on threads about them
Avoid TV and media items about them

no don't thank me.

We’ve already established that your mum, if she was born in 1948 as you said earlier, got her state pension at 60. She got exactly what she spent her working life expecting. Maybe she wouldn’t be saying “That’s life” if the pension changes had affected her.

They are still banging on about this?! I’m totally sick of them going on. If only they had put as much effort in at the time to pension provisions!

Agree with you OP. A 70 year old friend won't quit moaning about it.

She lives in a multi million pound house, has an occupational final salary pension of her own, several inheritances and the benefit of her husband's even better final salary pension. She's been drawing the state pension for a number of years.

I won't get mine for another 2 years at age 67 and I knew about the changes a long time ago. (Slightly younger than the Waspi women who only have themselves to blame if they took no interest in their own financial affairs).

It's not just about equal pay for the same job. That ignores the inferior education many women got.

I took O Levels, but some subjects were just not available to me. That means that when I did start work it was at a lower grade than a male who started at the same time.

That gap could last for life.

Working part time or staying home with children was not an easy choice, some have said how hard it was to return to work with a baby, what they have not said us that many employers had a policy of not employing mothers.

Yes technically that was illegal, but it still went on.

The average age of a first time buyer now is 34. So even with a standard 25 year mortgage, you wouldn't be done until you were 59, at which point you might have kids who want to go to university (given many are also delaying having children until they're no longer living with the precarity of renting), or older family you need to care for.

I'm of that age (still working but late 60s).I knew from the beginning, my colleagues knew, during the following decades of working life people's retirement would be looked forward to, the subject would come up but I never heard of any woman looking forward to collecting a state pension at 60. I imagine any who did would have been immediately informed of their mistake.
I just can't see how any one of normal intelligence and with any sort of access to information from tv. radio. even if they couldn't read and had no colleagues or friends or family couldn't know.
I've heard there was a 'letter' sent, and some people didn't receive it. I am one of those people. I have no memory of any letter. But of course I knew.

Same here. My son is nearly 29 and will be much older than I am before his mortgage free ( 40 year mortgage)

Yes so only a few were affected. I don’t find th annoying at all. They have my sympathies but my mum and everyone I know of her generation made plans and sorted themselves out. My mum had about 3 jobs on the go when I was little and worked until retirement age. Her view was that’s life. I have been affected by government policies changes in terms of the tax and Ni I pay and so have paid out thousands more than someone 10 years older than me would have. My children have to pay massive tuition fees for uni rather than getting it for free. Everyone gets affected by changes in government policy. It’s annoying but the consequence of having a ridiculously large population for the size of country we have.