To think that a lot of people don't seem to understand that part-time work = much smaller pension?

[AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered]

I work with a lot of women in their 50s, several of whom have expressed their shock/disgust at how little occupational pension they'll be receiving when they retire, even proportionally compared to FT workers. They have all had DC then remained PT even after the DC became teenagers and eventually left for uni. I didn't want to say anything to them when they were complaining to me how hard done by they are, but surely it's basic maths to know that the more you invest (and the earlier) the more it grows and therefore the greater the pension? How can they now claim to be so surprised and hard done by?

Right, but how will you afford to eat @Bringmejavabringmejoy ?

I’m in my 30s & although I will ensure I will make the full NI contributions I don’t expect to receive a state pension so have other investments.
How the hell are today’s youth meant to save x for a house, pay xx for a degree & then save for a private pension? As another poster mentioned the tax paying population is shrinking & will continue to do so. There is a massive public sector pension deficit & already tax rises are looking likely to pay for NHS, social care etc. We are in for some rough times & they can’t even lower interest rates to soften the blow.

I think a lot of women are in for a big shock when it comes to pensions. Even the widows pension is only for a year or so now where before it was for a good number of years. And women on low wages who don't earn enough to pay NI contributions and who aren't getting the child benefit protection will be missing years of contributions as well. It's a minefield.

Magna I don’t think anyone is saying that raising children isn’t important work, but, beyond a certain level of pension, is it fair that those of us who have worked FT, without breaks, all our lives, and made contributions, get less? Or put it this way, would it be fair for there to be the same pension for folks who have paid in for 50 years, full time, as those who worked 40 years, half of it part time? Because that’s the real economics of it..... rightly or wrongly.

As a single, childless woman, I only have me to look after me, and am planning for that to still be the case in 30 years....

Yabu.
Part time doesn't have to equal smaller pension. If you have other savings, investments, property, enough equity to downsize. All can be part of a pension pot.
I'm 49, work part-time even with teen DC.

I will get 90% of DH's pension if I survive him £13.5 k pa.

YANBU

So often you see pp on MN thinking about going back to work p/t after mat leave or reducing their hours in order to balance all their demands, and it's very rare to see anyone advising them to think about the pension implications as well as the immediate drop in take home.

Plus in the future we will have the added complication of people (mostly women) who would have received NI credit for their pension contributions whilst receiving Child Benefit for young children who are now not part of the system because of the tax implications for higher earners of claiming CB. It's going to get worse, not better, for women in particular

YABU

I spent years part time, I complain about my pension (because it is a worry)
doesn't mean I can't do sums
FFS if I couldn't do my sums I wouldn't know that my pension was inadequate would I?
Of course I knew less pay would equal less pension, doesn't mean I have to be happy about it!

@HollaHolla yes, it would be fairer if those who (cough) "take a break" to do the often onerous work of raising children got equal pensions to those who go to the office every weekday.

Frankly, if we stop procreating, we're all stuffed. Let's stop pretending it's something women do all by themselves just for a jolly.

Not knocking those without children, but the greatest disparity is between those with children who get to bugger off to the office every weekday morning, and those with children who have to get them dressed, fed, to school, sort out arguments, do homework, do laundry, do cleaning, but the birthday presents, arrange the holidays, cover half terms and school holidays - and then get royally shafted for "not having been working" when they are elderly.

I don't understand how there can be a public sector pension deficit - I'm required to pay 9% of my salary into my pension which is more than any private scheme I know of, and that's not even the top possible level of contributions.

I don't know whether to also get a private pension, as my parents were part of the Equitable Life scandal which put me right off one. I don't expect a state pension to pay out for me but after Equitable I don't know if there are now protections in place to make sure a private one would definitely pay out either.

I thought there were the waspies campaign which highlighted an issue because they were caught out by a change in rules?

Yes, there was but the rules haven't changed.

I am wary of individuals paying into private schemes. I know somebody who only got a third of what they were promised. Fortunately they owned some property too.

Right, but how will you afford to eat

State pension
Savings
Downsize, if necessary, and release equity
Husband's trust funds

@Magna I’m genuinely interested in the varying perceptions of pensions/contribution made by those in and out of paid work. Absolutely I get that folks have to procreate or else we’re all screwed, but equally, who is keeping the economy going now.... and why should those of us who haven’t been lucky enough to have families also suffer financially? (Playing devil’s advocate!)

If there were something like a basic state pension for everyone (imagine!!) I know any of us under 55 are screwed on this, but we continue to pay for older people, who got the luxury of retiring at 60, on a good pension - whether they had worked in paid employment or not.

I am absolutely in support of everyone having a living wage style pension, but that shouldn’t preclude top ups where people are in a situation to do so....

Oh, I understand all right.

I worked full-time for 20 years, then had dc. After 10 years being a SAHM I went back to work part-time. My health isn't great, and I wouldn't be able to cope with full-time hours. My current employer has a pension scheme but I don't earn a lot, so the contributions aren't much..

Yes, I know my pension won't be much, but there isn't anything I can do about it. Our combined salaries cover the bills and not a lot else, certainly not enough to put the £££ a month into a pension pot. Our hands are tied.

So I'm in a public sector pension and pay 14% which is a fortune out my monthly salary but its still a good scheme.
I'm not planning on having children but still need to work to 60 on a physically demanding role.
I thought about my pension since I was 21, it really is a big consideration and people should look ahead.

I think there is an age group between the baby boomers (who expected a lot and got it) and the younger people (like under 40 now) who know they aren't going to get anything in terms of state pension. The in-betweens who were promised a lot and now aren't getting it. So while I think its a bit of lack of financial understanding in some ways I think they have been a bit hard done by.

Well said. ^

However, I still have consciously decided that quality of life now is worth more to me than possibly struggling a bit financially as a pensioner (if I live that long).
DDon't get me wrong, I've paid into pensions since my fist job after leaving school at 16. I am in what has always been considered a good pension scheme, but I do know I'll get more than my FT colleagues. That said, I'll also get more than all those who never paid anything in to a pension. Its like everything in life isn't it - there will be some with more, and some with less.

I remember a pension salesperson talking to us several years ago when the majority of our salaries every month were going on a combination of mortgage and childcare - neither of which I'll be paying when I retire. I'm also expecting lots of other bills to come down too.
Yes,, there is something of a pensions nightmare coming in the decades ahead, but I don't think it is the folk who are working part time who are the biggest worry.

southboundagain

The deficit is because the schemes are unsustainable largely due to how long people are living for.

www.pensionsage.com/pa/UK-public-sector-pension-liability-equivalent-to-81pc-of-GDP.php

I have also had family burnt by Equitable Life & more recently we have had the BHS & Carillon fiascos so agree that even private schemes are risky.

Those saying they'll make up their contributions later on - it doesn't work like that, earlier contributions sit there gaining interest for 40+ years, later contributions only have 10-15 years to gain interest so are worth MUCH less.

where I worked pension was discussed often and it was always a learning experience.
I was made redundant very late in my career and worried about the hit to my pension but having my hours cut to pt towards the end of my career meant hardly a thing to my pension (so the timing of when you work pt plays a role).
my workplace pension is enough that I will not be able to keep my government pension (any I claim...which I won't even bother) will have to be paid back penny for penny.

Southbound, I pay 12% of my wages into my company pension scheme if that helps show it's not just public sector raising pension contribution amounts.
But I am worried about the coming demographic shift so once back at work (maternity leave) will also be paying into a LISA so I'm not only dependant on a company pension.

there were something like a basic state pension for everyone (imagine!!) I know any of us under 55 are screwed on this,

There is if you are already retirement age. MIL has no private pensions, no savings and has never worked. If you don’t have enough NI and is getting the state pension now, you get pension credits. She also has a council flat in a sheltered accommodation scheme. Rent paid by housing benefit and council tax paid too. So the state does currently paid for women with nothing. We are talking about those who are younger.

Basically yes those under 55 are screwed.

I work part time but still earn a good salary. Employer contributions are 8%. I have bits of pensions all over the place and don't expect any kind of meaningful state pension by the time I get to state pension age. Surely the age goalposts will have moved by then also. But by working 21 hours a week at least I'll be able to carry on working for longer if I need to as I'll be less likely to get burned out and knackered and will be more likely to be able to maintain good health before then.

I wor part-time and have for years. My pension is not good but I would be dead on my feet if I worked full-time in my job. I can't get my pension until I'm 70 so I figure I won't need it for travelling the world by then...