To think the back to 60 campaign is grabby

[Neaoll]

It's been known about for a long time that state pension ages would be equalised.

State pension is just unsustainable, it was never supposed to be something people claim for 20-30 years. Was for people that had a hard time so they didn't starve to death in their last few years. Now it's a top-up to the richest part of society. It should have been linked with life expectancy a long time ago.

I'm in my 40s and dont expect to ever get a state pension. I've been contributing to my private pension ever since I worked to support myself.

@Zeldasmagicwand hurrah

The smugness and complete lack of awareness from some of these posters is unreal.

Literally come and talk to me about your fantastic career opportunities when you are 50+

@InfiniteSheldon but us women in our mid 50s have known since 1995 that we would need to work til 65 and then from 2010 that this would go to 67 so have years to prepare. It is the women born earlier than us who have been shafted as they had there pension age changed with sometimes less that two years' notice.

I'm worried about it going up again for our age group to 70, though.

The waspi generation women were told about the that their pension age was going up to 65 in circa 1995,they've had ~25 years to prepare for the fact that they are retiring 5 years later.

I'm sure at the beginning of their careers they faced more discrimination and took more time out to have children. But they also have enjoyed benefits like lower house prices so are likely to be more financially secure than the generations that will retire after them.

And yes some jobs are not suitable to continue when you're 60, but again your age doesn't creep up on you, it is wise to adapt your skills to a role that is more suitable as you age, eg if you're a nurse, I'm sure you can find a more clerical / admin based job in the NHS as you get too old to be on your feet. I notice there's often quite a few older chaps who work in shops like b&q who may have been tradesmen so are very knowledgeable when you ask them questions.

In Japan it is very common to see older people in retail roles, there is no age discrimination, and in terms of older age health and longevity they rank amongst the highest in the world.

So yes, Yanbu op, this campaign is very grabby and tone deaf in an era where working age people's retirement age is 68 and rising. I accept that if I want to retire earlier than that age I fund it myself.

People (like me) born before 1956 often left school at 15. Today, children have to stay in FT education or do an apprenticeship until they're 18. Very few people of the older generation (around 10%) went to uni, and gap years weren't a thing, so full-time working life started, on average, much earlier.

Women born in 1955, leaving school at 15 will have to work for 51 years before getting their SRP. Someone leaving school today will start work at 18 and their (current) retirement age is 68, so they will only work for 50 years. If, as is commonplace, they take a gap year and then go to uni, they won't start their career until they are 22 and at present will be able to get the SRP after only 46 years.

So raising the retirement age has had the biggest impact on women, and on the oldest women.

I think the changes have been far too quick. They should have been more gradual, and there should have been more effort put in to make sure that the dates for every woman were communicated to them individually much sooner.

I knew at 40 that the ages were going to be equalised, but I didn't know that full equalisation would be in place when I was 63. That came later, after poor health had forced me to switch to a much less lucrative job. Had I known that my working life was going to be a full 6 years longer, I'd have struggled on, had loads of sick leave, and probably got an ill-health retirement with extra years added to my public sector pension.

The extra year added in 2010 or whenever it was like a slap in the face.

"their" not "there"! (menopause brain...)

In terms of lack of self awareness, the post about studying into ones 20s is up there. These days you need a masters in snotty tissue studies before being allowed to sneeze, and even then you might have to do an unpaid internship first. If we want our young people to pay more into the pot and sooner, we do need to meet them in the middle and actually let them.

I remember seeing statistics somewhere showing that a fair amount of women of that generation did not work at all after having children. I know quite a few who didn't.

I’m 58 and I know women of my age who did not work after having children bar short stints in the local hospitality industry.

Also, let us not delude ourselves that the retirement age is staying at 68. Someone leaving school at 18 today isn't getting a pension in 2069. No chance.

The US is facing a similar situation, I think there should be the option to opt out of paying towards the state system. I would put my contribution towards my own private pension, in the end I would probably get more out of it and have more control over when I can retire.

How about your private pension writes to you over the next 20 years and three times changes the goal posts, they increase the number of years you have to pay in by 7

Hopefully you’ll not mind and if you do you’ll be labelled as grabby

Well, if you want women to be able to retire earlier all you have to do is ensure that your pension scheme will give them enough to do so

It will, after they've been paying into it for 30 years.

Of course, the same option will need to be available for men

No shit, genius

I'm 50 in a few weeks time.

I've been working since I was 16.

So, that's 34 years already.

Honestly, the thought that I have to work another 17 years, before I qualify for a Pension seems like a really fucking long time

Thankfully I do have a private pension, that I could access as early as 55. But I only have this because it was a non-contributory pension paid for by my employers.

There is categorically no way I would have had the where with all or the spare cash to start my own Pension at 16, when money was so tight and retirement was literally a lifetime away.

How about your private pension writes to you over the next 20 years and three times changes the goal posts, they increase the number of years you have to pay in by 7

I'm in my 40s and that has been my experience already. They have also increased the amount I have to pay in but my benefits have gone down. It's normal for most of us now.

@Greatnorthwoods, good luck with that. I speak as someone who took out a private pension with Equitable Life at the age of 26. I was supposed to pay X-amount per month and retire at 60 with £15,000 a year. I kept my side of the contract, they went bust. Be careful.

The claim they weren't informed in time is nonsense. I was 16 when the Government approved the policy in the mid-90s and I was well aware of it, thanks to epic levels of media coverage. How could their claim of 'unfairness' ever not be applied to any transitional group?

Where's the unfairness for those men (particularly those with hard physical jobs) with a higher retirement age AND a much lower life expectancy? Is that somehow 'fair'? Pay more in over the years, and take much less out (assuming you live that long)?

Good decision in court.

My DH said if the women had won he said men should bring a case on the basis that men had worked till 65 for years despite them having a shorter life expectancy.

I have never ever understood why women could retire at 60.

I agree op - they had decades of notice. I cannot see in a million years how this is discrimination. It might be hard to work till you’re 67 but that applies to all of us and I don’t see that these women should be entitled to special treatment.

My DH said if the women had won he said men should bring a case on the basis that men had worked till 65 for years despite them having a shorter life expectancy

What was he doing when you were working part time jingles?

Honestly, the thought that I have to work another 17 years, before I qualify for a Pension seems like a really fucking long time

You can stop work whenever you want to as long as you don't expect the state to support you!

Do you not enjoy your job? That's the issue really isn't it?

@Trewser when I was working p/t outside the home I was also the main childcare parent as DH was overseas a lot. But I don't quite see your point I have to say. It's none of your business how couples manage parenting and work, is it?

Why didn't he go part time?

I was born in 1956 so started work at 15 years old, then went on to have children so gaps in my work history, then with three children at school not easy to get chidcare, as nurserys were almost non existant and childminders were expensive, so part time work that fitted in with school hours, then periods of no work at times and low wage jobs, then a few years of seasonal work as i lived in a seaside town then having to care for a relative who was ill so carers allowance income , then at 54 finally managed to go back to work two art time jobs as its not easy to get a high paid full time job am that age then to be told i have to work another 6 years so 51 years to get my state pension, and my private pension the amount i have been able to put in means thats worth a whole £200 a year yes thats a year is going to go a long way our generation has been shafted and yes one of my jobs is a manual job

Was he in the army? Hopefully not working abroad to pay less tax!

@Tetherendreached A woman doing the same job as a man was paid a little over half the man's salary

Sorry but which jobs do you include in your comment here?

I for one was paid exactly the same as men all the time I worked and I'm coming up to 65.

@Trewser I don't see the point of your question.

Men had to work till 65. This was unfair. They could claim it was discrimination as the court ruling has decided today.