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.

You at wrong Neaoll.

Age change
Under the 1995 Pensions Act, the government decided that the pension ages of both men and women would be equalised by 2020. Previously, women retired at 60, while men retired at 65.
In 2011, state pension ages were raised at an even faster rate.
Some of those born between April 1951 and 1960 will not qualify for a pension until the age of 66.
Campaigners belonging to Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) say some women had very little notice that they would not get a pension at 60.
They are calling for "transitional arrangements" for those affected.

Did you never use the government website to check your own pension prediction and when it would kick in? No? Your fault then

I am surprised anyone can not consider it unreasonable of the government to not notify affected individuals of a fundamental change in their entitlement (the second rise)

If your occupational pension scheme had increased your retirement age and not notified you I doubt you’d be so blase

Only that would never happen because it’s illegal to change previously earned pension benefits without explicit agreement

Other than state pensions of course

I'm in the affected group.

I've known about these changes for years and years. I've had plenty of time to sort myself out and several of my contemporaries who felt they couldn't carry on with a demanding job have, over the years, taken on jobs such as checkout work at local supermarkets which they say they enjoy.

Average life expectancy for women in the UK is nearly 81 now. Bearing in mind that a fair number will, sadly, die younger than that, it means that there will be a lot of women drawing pensions into their 90s. I think it's just not sustainable and really unfair to expect today's workers to pay for 30+ years of pension for a large number.

I'm not sure about 'grabby', but I don't think YABU with the principle, OP.

Where have you been since 1995? Saying you do not read papers and didn't use the internet- that was your choice. You must have lived in a bubble

None of these is a requirement last time I checked. It's the government's role to get in touch with the individuals.

Bearing in mind that a fair number will, sadly, die younger than that, it means that there will be a lot of women drawing pensions into their 90s

How do you work that out? Fair number...? A lot?....

Jesus.

@JinglingHellsBells I didn't live in a bubble. I still don't read newspapers but seem to know a lot more about what is going on in this country and the world than many people.

Not sure when the internet really took off but I certainly did not have it in 1995 or 2000 come to that. I think I started using the internet in about 2005. Plenty of people my age, and even some younger, don;t even use it today so quit the smugness please.

No, I didn't think to use the Government website to check my pension age and details. I think a letter should have been sent out. Pretty sure not everyone would think to do that.

A poster said letters are sent out if you don't have enough ni contributions in a year. Well I have never received a letter regarding that. When I did check the Government website I saw that I had a couple of years missing just a couple of weeks ni so where were my letters?

@EerieSilence , I still don't know what you mean by women at the lower limit of the law?
My mother who would be nearing 100 if she were still alive) had to work, so many kids! She worked evenings in a local factory, 5 - 9 then swapped to a day shift at the factory that offered 10 - 3 shifts for mothers with school age children. She then took herself off to evening classes that offered free evening courses and she did English and Maths 'o' levels so that she could get an admin job in the Civil Service with a pension. She worked there until she was 65 and then part time in a GPs surgery until 70 when she helped my younger brother with childcare.
I am really proud of her for having such a strong work ethic. I think that is what annoys me about so many posts. Women are not feeble, we do not have to rely on husbands for financial support. Nothing has changed about women (working class) having to work. Both my grandmothers had jobs outside the home. It is just one generation of post war baby boomers, many of whom chose to stay out of the work place all their lives, hoping that whether or not they chose to work the state would give them a pension and let them live off the state at 60. It was not the case for my grandmothers.
It is unfair and divisive to expect the young generation to pay for women who wanted to retire at sixty and who had not bothered with any other kind of pension provision.

A lot of posters seem to think that it's over 60s women who have never worked outside of the home, took no responsibility for money or who gave up work early of their own free will and have chosen not to continue working that are "grabby" for expecting their pensions early.
Most of them have worked all of their lives. Most have paid at least 35 years of national insurance. Most were not allowed to pay into the company pension schemes or didn't earn enough to have anything spare to put into a private pension. They lived through mortgage interest rates of 14%, childcare costing around the same as their wages ... AND most didn't know of the changes. Remember, the main source that should provide accurate information, ie the governments own website, was saying women would receive their pensions at 60 only four years ago.
Many of these "work shy" women are carers for elderly relatives and provide childcare for their grandchildren.

I'd love to know where there are places crying out for workers over 60 are. There's very little work around here for anyone of any age. Small businesses are going under, shops closing, no money so no demand for services. There is the occasional need for care staff, but they do tend to take on younger, stronger workers. Occasional professional work is available for those with relevant skills and qualifications, but the firms tend to recruit younger, more flexible (cheaper) workers that they can train - and I can't blame them for that.

I suppose it depends on your background and your work ethic. I'm younger but did have a break as I had my dc close together but always did some work. As soon as I could I started paying into the pension at my first formal job.

My mum was fortunate as she retired at 60 and has a good pension. She was encouraged to have a career by her own dm. Came from a working class background as did my dad but both did well in education. They were not privileged.

I think their generation had good opportunities as they were young in the 60s

@ Jinglehellsbells: Did you never use the government website to check your own pension prediction and when it would kick in? No? Your fault then. it's been available for years and years.

In 2015 the government website was still saying that women would get their pension at 60. Some of these women used the site to get their pension forecasts and those forecasts state that they would get their pension when they were 60. Forecasts given, from the government pension agency, in 2015, just four year ago, when the pension age was already 62.

@lynsey91
You claim maybe you know lots of "young mothers who work and care for children" but I certainly don't. Most of the mothers where I live don't work and quite a few barely have since leaving school. I am talking women late 20's to late 30's.
There has been a HUGE increase in the number of women working, look at the evidence from this document from the Institute of Fiscal Studies called The Rise and Rise of Women in Employment,
It states 1. Over the past 40 years, the UK has seen an almost continual rise in the proportion of women in employment. The employment rate among women of ‘prime working age’
(aged 25-54) is up from 57% in 1975 to a record high of 78% in 2017, with far more women in employment over the course of their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s.
Women today expect to work and to work until at least 65 or longer so why are some of you wanting them to pay to let some of you retire on a state pension at 60?

Just to reiterate again and put it out there in bold, in case some of you think the younger generation are not pulling their weight,
Over the past 40 years, the UK has seen an almost continual rise in the proportion of women in employment. The employment rate among women of ‘prime working age’(aged 25-54) is up from 57% in 1975 to a record high of 78% in 2017, with far more women in employment over the course of their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s

@Riv
In 2015 the government website was still saying that women would get their pension at 60

I don't think it was. I was 60 that year so it would have applied to me and was under no illusion that my SP was waiting for me! Sorry but you are wrong. I knew long before I was 60 that my pension would arrive a lot later. But it was not an issue as I didn't intend to stop working at 60 anyway.

How do you know this, please?

Im 60 and unfortunately too ill to work and have been for quite a few years. When I was working, many moons ago it seems, the pension age was 60. I paid very high tax and NI but can look forward to a very reduced pension -I'll be lucky to get £60 a week. I don't know how I can live on that. So it looks like my life will end when I'm 67, but I have made provision for my cats.

Most of them have worked all of their lives. Most have paid at least 35 years of national insurance. Most were not allowed to pay into the company pension schemes or didn't earn enough to have anything spare to put into a private pension.

@Riv with respect, you don't know any of this really, it's only your opinion.

I am one of those women. Yes I am a professional but you cannot go around stating that this group of waspi women had dead end jobs, no money for private pensions or were allowed to join a company scheme unless you have the hard facts and stats to show that. You are assuming and quoting hearsay.

I keep coming back to the same point. We all have different skills. Some women never had jobs or had low paid non professional jobs. It's not the responsibility of the tax payer (mainly the younger generation) to provide pensions for a few extra years for women who think they should be given a pension at 60. Men can't get it then so where it the fairness in that?

If the court had decided to give women this back-pension it would have opened the door for men to say t was sexist and discrimination and they would want their pensions backdated to 60.

The bottom line is that unless someone is ill, there is no valid reason why they should not work till 65.

Just because the RA was changed is not a reason to say you are owed back payment for those years.

@littlewhitething If you paid NI for 35 years you should get your full pension - it's got nothing to do with how much tax you paid or the amount of NI, but it's based on years of contributions. At some point you should have checked this as you can/ could buy into the missing years for a few hundred pounds to bring your pension up to the full amount.

Gawd, people are so bitter and hard done to these days. And I don't mean the women in their 60s!!!

@MyDcAreMarvel She's not entitled to Pension Credit! Never has been and never will be! Nor Council Tax Support! She has a car so no buses used and free tv licence ends in May don't forget. Out of her £600 she has to pay £185 council tax every month! Could you live on £415 a month BEFORE utilities & other bills?

Name change fail!

Most of the whinging here is from women who took no responsibility for their own finances OR didn't work, or did work that they feel at 65 they are too unfit to do. Unless you are in ill health there is no reason why you cannot work at 65 just as you would have at 60. You might not WANT to but that's a different matter. In most cases you will be far better off financially working anyway as the full SP is around £160 a week.
Exactly this. They come across as entitled to special treatment over men and women younger than them.

Gawd, people are so bitter and hard done to these days. And I don't mean the women in their 60s!!!

People should just shut up and fund others lifestyles that they won't receive themselves

OP, you seem to be taken in by what you are told by government.
There's plenty of money, so yes people who feel hard done to should complain.
This government and Conservative Gov in general don't look after the poor and needy, nor the middlers, though they like to think they do. It's only the rich who benefit from the cons. Please don't kid yourself that austerity was needed.
No, people shouldn't be made to work at 60/65, that's ridiculous.

People should just shut up and fund others lifestyles that they won't receive themselves

Did you not get any assistance with your children's school, were you made to go private? Because some people don't have kids, should there be no state schools, then? There will be a lot funding your lifestyle choices.

What about the NHS, some people are never ill, should we all have to go private.

Do you work? Ever had TC/CB, Maternity allowance, subsidised childcare.
A lot of people never had this, does that mean you shouldn't?

You aren't coming across as very intelligent.

Why is it ridiculous for healthy adults to not get paid state money at 60 to not work?

If the government has all this money why has the UK public debt doubled since 2008 as a percentage of GDP?

Maybe you're just taken in by a guardian article 😂

Women at the lower limit of the law were encouraged to be SAHMs, were discouraged from advancing their careers, those from working class grew up in an environment which still adhered to the old-fashioned values of the man as main contributor to the family budget. What second career would you imagine for them?

Encouraged by whom? Most were SAHMs at least for a few years because that is what you did. Though women in more professional roles would have worked when they had young children. As is still the case today, people on low wages would still pay out all their income on childcare so don't tend to work when they have preschool children. The exceptions would have been where childcare could be provided by the extended family.