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.

But if you're asking me to provide the funding to make your pension much better - when chances are I won't get one at all - then you shouldn't expect me to be overjoyed about it

Where in this thread have I asked for that? I’ve not given my opinion on whether the changes are justified, I have been on this thread to point out that historically women’s pension rights have been generally poorer than men’s and also that that the gender pay gap still exists which also impacts women’s pensions.

Those about to retire now have paid in same as you on a pay as you go basis btw.

And no, of course nobody can predict the future, but if I asked you to bet on SP age going up or down, I think I know how you'd bet

So you're getting no pension at all? Or a rising pension age? Which one do you want to go for? According to the government's latest review: "Those affected by this proposed timetable will on average continue to spend longer in receipt of the State Pension than anyone reaching State Pension age in the last 25 years"

I’ve not given my predictions, but these would be that the SPA will probably end up at around 70, with a CPI/lower fixed cap rather than the triple lock. Rates of mortality improvement have been slowing down over the last few years and some company schemes are starting to weaken mortality assumptions for the first time in years.

There are all sorts of reasons why a 63 year old woman today might be poorer than she was at, say, 43 but being told eight years ago that you will retire three years later than you hoped is not one of them

But they weren't told were they?

This concept does seem to be causing some comprehension issues.

The information was in the public domain.

@Plasebeafleabite You described younger women as angry about anyone else having a better pension than them. I'm providing an alternate view - that to right the wrong for waspi women requires additional funding (i.e. over and above that which we're all paying in for our SP) from younger people. Younger people who are likely to see SP continue to rise (and who therefore won't have the same benefit when they get to this age).

Rising SP age and the possibility of no SP at all are linked. The reason it's rising is because the UKGovt feels that there isn't enough money in the pot to sustain it at 60/65. Regardless of whether that's true (magic money tree etc.), the reason many of us suspect there won't be an SP at all is that it's forecast to go to 75 as it is. If it goes much beyond there, I wonder how many of us will live long enough to claim it.

I could be wrong. But I hope that I'm not the only one being so pessimistic - this entire thread is about whether or not people were as informed as they should be about their futures! Imagining that things are going to get better - despite all the evidence to the contrary - isn't sensible financial planning. If I get an SP, I suppose I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Im the angry one? Interesting Because im in my 40s and im not the one with the "ive been mugged so my neighbour should be mugged too" attitude.

Those about to retire now have paid in same as you on a pay as you go basis btw.

No, they've not. NIC rates have increased in recent years, so those retiring now will have paid less NIC over the working life than someone who is 10/20/30 years away from retirement.

WhoTellsYourStory I agree.

I’m almost a WASPI, and even at my great age (!) I never, ever assumed that the state pension would be something I should wholly rely on. Until I was well into my 30s my qualifying age for state pension was 60, but actually even as a young child it felt odd to me that women’s pension age was so much lower than men’s, despite women living longer! It’s never been any surprise to me that the qualifying age has gone up and up. One of the reasons I’ve always worked, even when childcare ate up all my income, was to ensure I was making other provision as well. Tbh I think anyone who relies wholly on either their partner or the state to provide for them, unless they are in very specific circumstances of being unable to look after themselves, is being extremely naive.

And of course alongside the less favourable terms of the state pension we’ve all seen our occupational or private pensions getting worse... my contributions have hiked up hugely over the last few years- I pay literally hundreds every month into it - but I won’t see any increase in what I get out. This is the situation we’re all in, men as well as women.

I do think the ruling about waspis was right..., it was only a perceived disadvantage these women were experiencing by virtue of the fact women had been advantaged over men for decades with the state pension

But they weren't told were they?

It was all over the media. The recent court case Judge threw out the objection of lack of information and cited hundreds of media reports. It was also all over govt websites, included in state pension forecasts, etc.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink!!

www.ageing-better.org.uk/news/health-warning-employers

New report finds that 1 in 4 working people aged 55 and over with a health condition are considering leaving work.
Employers are not properly supporting older workers with health conditions, and poor culture and bureaucratic procedures often put many people off speaking to their employers until a crisis point.

Ageing Better's new report, ‘Health warning for employers: supporting older workers with health conditions’, shows that employers are not properly supporting older workers experiencing long-term physical and mental health conditions.

Health is the most important factor affecting older workers’ decisions to stop working before reaching state pension age. Ageing Better’s research finds that early access to support, small adjustments to the workplace and working patterns and empathetic management are crucial to enabling people to manage their health at work and remain in employment.

A survey of over 1,000 people shows one quarter of people aged 55 and over with a health condition who are still in work are considering leaving because of their health. The research also found that workers are often put off speaking to employers until the last moment due to poor workplace culture and overly bureaucratic procedures.

According to Public Health England, 40% of the working age population will have a long-term health condition by 2030. Older workers are more likely to have long-term health conditions such as musculoskeletal disorders, heart problems or chronic breathing difficulties. While 25% of 25-49 year olds have a long-term health condition, this figure rises dramatically to 44% of those aged 50-64. They are also more likely to have multiple conditions: 23% of 50-64 year olds report that they are managing two or more long-term health conditions.

The early exit of older workers from the workplace has significant implications for employers struggling to recruit and retain skilled workers. Other research also suggests that halving the employment gap between people aged 50-65 and those in their 40s could boost GDP by 1% (around £20 billion pa)

I am 63 and am therefore one of these WASPIs. I have worked since I was 16, full time until I had my daughter 25 years ago, then part time. I have paid NI and into work pension schemes throughout my working life. I am lucky that I took early retirement from my CivilService job seven years ago and receive a monthly pension which I can just about manage on. If I didn’t have that, I don’t know what I would live on, I would either have to carry on working or live off my husband’s pension.
It is disgusting what the government has done to women of my age. We will not give up fighting for the pension we have paid in for all our working lives.

@Acciocats Cheers. I'm absolutely fine with paying money towards things I don't directly use (no kids, so no schools) because of the fact that I indirectly benefit from an educated society etc. I don't agree with paying the additional money for women to retire at 60, when absolutely nobody else is going to get that same benefit. By all means let's have a big conversation about how we fund retirement, and perhaps I'll change my mind in light of a bigger picture, but not in this silo case. I feel for the women affected, I do, but I don't understand why all of the issues being raised to support their cause are suddenly all OK when they apply to all the women 5+ years behind them.

HelenaDove maybe angry is the wrong word, but your default is to quite aggressively cast women in the role of victim rather than acknowledging that women are capable beings with agency over their lives.

Interestingly in an earlier post, as soon as I mentioned that I used a childminder, your response was quite aggressively ‘did I realise that woman was facilitating me going to work, and what would happen if no woman ever did child minding?!’ As if she was somehow a victim.

Does it not occur to you that many women make choices which suit them? My childminder wouldn’t have wanted to trade places with me. She wanted to be at home with her toddler. You could actually turn things around and say I facilitated her getting what she wanted because the wages I paid her gave her an income while enabling her to be at home, earn and not pay for childcare. The point is, neither of us were victims, we made different choices which suited us both.

And of course any woman born in the 1950s onwards is overall hugely advantaged over previous generations of women in terms of access to work, contraception and yes, pensions!

@Ilovemypantry You're making my point for me. You chose to retire at 57 as you could afford to, but you want to pursue your right to have had an SP at 60. Which will be funded by those like me, whose retirement age is currently 67, and who because of generation rent/childcare/student loans etc will be looking at working until we drop.

Ilovemypantry So you’ve worked part time for the last 25 years (presumably because it suited you... no child needs their parent working part time for that long ) and you then took early retirement at age 56, you have a civil service pension and you’re complaining that you have to wait a bit longer for your state pension?

My heart bleeds....

i just think childminders should get paid more than they do. And its not very nice for a poster (not you but another on this very thread) to tell a childminder who hasnt been paid that they arent being reasonable Low paid women are not respected by society in general Particularly service providers like child minders and care workers.

I would love childminders to be paid more, but the bottom line is, the people using them also need to be able to survive. If you push childcare prices too high people will vote with their feet and not use them. Which doesn’t help anyone as it perpetuates the situation of keeping people out of the workplace.

As I’ve said, for the years that we had 2 and then 3 children in childcare, my child minder was considerably better off than I was. We were struggling to pay sky high mortgage rates and our childcare bill was our second highest outgoing after that.

@acciocats
Who are you to decide whether a child needs their parent to work part time? Do you know everyone’s personal circumstances? I have a civil service pension because I paid into it for many years, they don’t just give it to you for nothing. Also paid NI all my working life so expect to get a state pension. I presume the Government are hoping a lot of the women concerned will die before receiving their pension, thus saving them money.

I presume the Government are hoping a lot of the women concerned will die before receiving their pension, thus saving them money.

They are not hoping anything of the kind. They know what the increase in life expectancy is and have made adjustments to the pension age accordingly.

Of course I don’t know everyone’s personal circumstances but quite frankly someone who works part time from age 31 and then retires at 56 to claim their occupational pension is hardly going to gain sympathy because their state pension age has gone up.

There are all sorts of reasons why a 63 year old woman today might be poorer than she was at, say, 43 but being told eight years ago that you will retire three years later than you hoped is not one of them

And would you be able to save enough in eight years to cover not working/no pension for three years?

No, you keep working like hundreds of thousands of the rest of us women (and men.) If you’re suddenly disabled or become too sick to work then you’re entitled to other benefits, as you would be if this occurred when you were younger.

I'm going to give some of my perspective here.

I'm 34. I was encouraged to save from 14, so that I'd be able to own a house one day. I went to uni and worked in menial jobs for around 8 years, saving everything I could whilst paying 50%-60% of my salary on rent.

I went back to uni and requalified into a vocational role whilst working (so self-funded). After 5 years, I thought I was set. I'd worked for 14 years, saving as much as I could, and I had my 10% deposit! I had a good respectable job! For the first time in my life, I earned more than the national average wage!

Excited, I went along to see a mortgage adviser. They said: as a single woman, your salary isn't enough. Nobody will lend to you.

I was stunned. I have a deposit! I said. I have a good wage, a secure respectable job in a profession! Doesn't matter, they said. You either need a big payrise, a second job, or a partner.

In the meantime, my parents (retired at 55 on their decent occupational pensions and the £820,000 profit they made on selling their house) had decided to start campaigning because my mum was upset that she wouldn't get her state pension at 60. They were living on interest. On interest.

When I told them what the adviser said, they said it had been hard for them too and that I just needed to work harder.

There are many, many, many people my age who cannot get a mortgage - because of being single, or the cost of childcare, or both. Who are paying half of more of a salary on rent, or an entire salary on childcare. How do they get on the property ladder? Because it's one thing to be trying to make an occ pen stretch until you're 65 when you have a roof over your head. How are these women going to pay their rent?

This is why I get angry when someone tells me they're fighting to take more money from people my age, because of the promise made that they'd get the pension at 60 that they've paid for. We go on paying for our pensions, but we won't get them at 60, and if we can't pay off a mortgage, we might never be able to afford to retire at all.

End soapbox!

"was stunned. I have a deposit! I said. I have a good wage, a secure respectable job in a profession! Doesn't matter, they said. You either need a big payrise, a second job, or a partner"

i bet they wernt telling the men that they needed partners.

@HelenaDove If he were single and earning what I was, why wouldn't they? Are you saying that there's some mortgage lender conspiracy by which single men can have mortgages but single women can't?

What an odd response to my post.

@Ilovemypantry i don’t know wether to laugh or cry. you’ve had an easy life for 25 years (parttime with one child - if your daughter doesn’t have SENS, that is a life of luxury!), then didn’t work at all for 7 years, and now you complain you don’t get your state pension?? wow