Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Retirement age for ladies - why so upset? R2 debate

325 replies

AiryFairyUnicornRainbow · 06/12/2018 20:25

Listening to R2 today - a lot of ladies (who have picketed for equality all their lives, presumably) are now up in arms, that their retirement age has moved in line with mens

So before, women could retire at 60 and men 65 - but womens age was 60.

What exactly are pple upset about?

Have ladies been requesting equality since the dawn of time?

Why do you feel hard done by, when my Generation (your sons and daughters) will have to work long past your retirement age?

I have a relative, who is completely up in arms about this, but has only worked probably 15 years in her working life - as was the done thing stayed at home with kids way beyond school age. No private pension, nothing. Yet is a massive womens libber.

These days, women are felt rushed back into work the minute they give birth, and are literally worked to death. SAHM's are frowned upon by the working mothers

OP posts:
Original poster
AiryFairyUnicornRainbow · 06/12/2018 20:26

Now men and women are equal, both retire at 65

OP posts:
bluebellation · 06/12/2018 20:32

It isn't the fact that the retirement age is now the same (66), it's the way the change has been brought in. For women (like me) born in the 1950s, we were within a couple of years from retiring at 60 when the change to 65 came in, swiftly followed by another change to 66. Many people were not notified of the change and had planned their retirement based on getting their state pension at 60. With so little notice, they did not have time to make alternative financial plans. What we are campaigning for us some compensation for the speed st this change was implemented.

Original poster
AiryFairyUnicornRainbow · 06/12/2018 20:37

So six years difference literally means such an upheaval of your retirement plans?

I am shocked. Six years out of an entire working lifes financial planning makes such a huge difference?

OP posts:
OddBoots · 06/12/2018 20:39

6 years is a huge difference in such a short time. Most women have no problem with an equalising of retirement age but it was done too fast for that particular age group, the phasing in should have been much slower.

MysteryNameChange · 06/12/2018 20:40

Of course six years makes a fucking difference!
And I'm also of a generation that will never retire, but I still have sympathy for the women who've been shafted by these changes. It's shouldn't be a race to the bottom.

bridgetreilly · 06/12/2018 20:41

Six years difference might not be a lot if you have twenty years to plan for it. But when you are two years away from retirement, to be told you have to work another six years, then that really is a LOT.

bluebellation · 06/12/2018 20:44

Well it wouldn't if you'd known about it in advance! Personally I'm fortunate that it hasn't caused me any hardship but that's because I'm still working but if you were not working or only part time, assuming you were going to be getting a pension, then suddenly you weren't- well you can't just go and get a job. Ageism makes that unlikely. It amounts to over £40,000 that we would have had and suddenly we weren't. And that's hard for some people to manage.

StoneofDestiny · 06/12/2018 20:45

It's the way that the change was brought in leaving women with no time to prepare. One group of woman took a big hit on this. If it had been phased in it would have been fairer, but shifting the boundary by 6 years has had a huge impact.

TheMagician · 06/12/2018 20:47

I think women might be glad of the opportunity to accrue more reckonable service if they were out of work having kids.

Obviously it depends on how much you hate your job though.

HateIsNotGood · 06/12/2018 20:51

So you know a relative Airy and now know everyone's situations too? I'm a 1962-er myself so it's now 67 for me and I do agree that we needed to equalize the male/female retirement age and have been aware for many years that this will be the case.

I started working full-time at 15 after O-levels, never married but did live life (all its ups and downs) including caring for my dying Dad when he lived abroad. Didn't buy a house, didn't work in the public sector, didn't go to Uni until I turned 38, being an independent self-supporting female I never had any money left to consider a private pension.

And yes, it was people like me that continued to chip away at the male 'preserves' and another current thread reminded me of the daily shit we did put up with so the "ladies" of today have a chance,
but I didn't think it would be helpful to that OP to describe that and tell her to pull her big pants on and ignore it.

But during those decades, even though I didn't have children, the very fact that women did, did indeed affect my working environment and pay and even getting a solid well-paid job in an area of low-employment.

And I'm not complaining about any of it, I'm proud of the amount of blokes I told to go make their own fucking tea and who had to shut the fuck up as I did my/our job as good as and often better than them so we became "mates".

At 39 I had DS. He has ASD and I'm an LP so not a lot of pension-paying career going on - just work to pay the bills.

I'm 56 and have 11 years to go instead of less than 4 or even 9.
I'va already qualified for my Full State Pension, I just have to keep on working until then as there is no other choice. I bought a cheap house when I was 54 using an inheritance from my Mum but still have a mortgage to pay. It won't be my pension as I'll need somewhere to live until I die.

I'm knackered now.

Birdsgottafly · 06/12/2018 20:51

"Have ladies been requesting equality since the dawn of time?"

Thays always bandied about when we get fucked over.

Pity the focus wasn't removing the gender pay gap, or maintenance from the NR (usually male) Parent etc.

But as said, it was the time frame.

lidoshuffle · 06/12/2018 20:59

It's the unfairness of the cliff edge, illustrated in this graphic (and yeah, women of 60 wear flowery hats and have tight grey perms Hmm:

Retirement age for ladies - why so upset? R2 debate
DaffydownClock · 06/12/2018 21:16

Of course six years makes a bloody difference!
My retirement age moved from 60 to 62yrs 4months then 63yrs 5 months and now it's 66yrs 2 months! I'm in poor health and I've been told I won't get a full pension despite working full time since I was 18 because I've had to leave my work through ill health six months ago (I'm 65 next month), it's looking highly unlikely I'll actually live long enough to see it.
Angry? Bitter? You bloody bet I am!
I had no time to prepare; I was informed three months before my 60th birthday.

BigChocFrenzy · 06/12/2018 21:19

It could happen to you too, airy Now that govts have got away with it this time

Imagine yourself decades from now, the retirement you've planned for so long is in just a couple of years
ahhhhh, free at last ...

... then suddenly you've got 7 years to wait instead

Your finances suddenly have to stretch years

You are already knackered and you won't be able to cope with your current job for 7 years,
but who will employed a knackered old person if you quit / are sacked ?

You'll just have to keep dragging yourself to work and ignore those aches & pains for 7 years
.... while all your friends just a year or two older will be retiring as planned in 1-2 years time

Meanwhile, some bright young spark is asking what you are grumbling at

Nanny0gg · 06/12/2018 21:22

Six years difference might not be a lot if you have twenty years to plan for it. But when you are two years away from retirement, to be told you have to work another six years, then that really is a LOT.

^^This.

And I'm the last woman in the picture Confused

Boredboredboredboredbored · 06/12/2018 21:25

I would be fucking fuming too. It's happened to my mum who is 64 and still working a 50 hour week on minimum wage in a care home. She's knackered, can't afford part time work but has to keep going. It's a disgrace that this group of women were treated like this.

RetiredNotExpired · 06/12/2018 21:26

*So six years difference literally means such an upheaval of your retirement plans?

I am shocked. Six years out of an entire working lifes financial planning makes such a huge difference?*

MRA forums are thataway --->>>

BettyBooJustDoinTheDoo · 06/12/2018 21:30

I hope the OP has educated herself from this thread why women of that age are so upset, what a dreadful situation.

CraftyGin · 06/12/2018 21:30

The change has been advertised for many years.

The state pension is a safety net, not a way to maintain your lifestyle.

Iknowthatguy · 06/12/2018 21:34

I hope the OP has educated herself from this thread why women of that age are so upset, what a dreadful situation

From the way op writes, I assume he's a man.

Of course 6 years makes a big difference to financial planning op, don't be dim.

Surfskatefamily · 06/12/2018 21:34

My generation its 68. Ill probably be dead by then going off my familys average lifespan

Frouby · 06/12/2018 21:35

My mum was born in September in 54. She will now work until she is 66 I think. She thought she would retire at 60.

She is in a manual, min wage job. Sge is physically fucked. She doesn't have a private pension because she didn't have a career because women didn't. Her first husband was abusive and she got nothing when they divorced. Her second husband died before he drew his pension.

It wouldn't happen to men. Definitely not rich men.

Iknowthatguy · 06/12/2018 21:36

Women in their 60s are also far more likely to have caring responsibilities for elderly parents than men are IME

icannotremember · 06/12/2018 21:37

Oh for goodness sake Crafty Confused

Doilooklikeatourist · 06/12/2018 21:38

I thought o could retire at 60
I’m 58 now , I think I can retire when I’m 66 and 7 months
Of course it’s not fair
Luckily I have a plan b ( win the lottery )

Swipe left for the next trending thread