Mixed feelings about WASPI victory

[Fauxflowersnoflowers]

Early 40s here, so this doesn't as such directly affect me, but I've been intrigued by the story about the WASPI campaign and done a bit of reading around it and I'm still confused.

The changes apparently were in the public sphere since as early as 1995 and could have been known about. Many women were aware and did take financial steps to address the changes. The current case seems to centre around whether they should have been personally informed, not was the change fair.

WASPI just said on Women's Hour that they don't object to the equalisation of the pension age, but then callers were objecting to having to work longer and not getting a good retirement, so the two arguments seem to contradiction each other

Also, it seems misunderstood that a compensation payment would be a full reinbursement of the "lost" pension, from my reading it's more likely to be a fixed amount to recognise the fact they should have received a letter. Although again, it appears many did, just not everyone, so who gets the compensation? All of them or just some?

I suppose the other question is how do we pay this? Public services are already stretched badly, childcare costs are crippling and there is a bit of a worry for me that the funds to pay this are going to come out of other areas that will just make the loves of younger women harder and push their pension ages even further back, maybe into their 70s.

Feel really conflicted about it. On one hand kudos to the women for getting this far, but in the other it feels like a really clear example of the importance of properly understanding your own finances and educating yourself about your pension planning.

Yes well I did explain that earlier but anyway- if they'd waited till 65 they'd have been living on one pension if their husband was older. In many cases this wasn't sufficient and dropped them into poverty. So the age was lowered to 60 for women in1940.

Usually hadn't contributed as much? I think they might have disagreed with you there. There were plenty of working class women workers. Where do you think all the domestic workers came from, for instance? But their pay was minimal and didn't include a workplace pension funnily enough. Or employment rights.

Because she wasn't told. I don't get what people don't get about this?

-" if they'd waited till 65 they'd have been living on one pension if their husband was older."

Only if they didn't work themselves...

Apologies for the mis-quote.

I understand people being unhappy. Every tax paying adult is going to foot these bills not just men.

If the situation were reversed then I wouldn't be happy about the extra expenditure but it would be hard cheese as that's the price of unfairness.

Your point about men's longevity being shorter is irrelevant as a lot of women of that age group only worked past time or paid lower contributions.

Thank goodness. Women 'not in paid employment ' but bringing up children, caring for relatives, running the house..

@Gonnagetgoingreturnsagain

"But government are running scared because of a huge bill which they definitely don't want to pay out for."

The huge bill is estimated to be up to £30 billion. And it won't be the "Government " footing the bill, instead it will be those of us still in work through our taxes or through cuts in other services.

If the Government has £30 billion available to pay the compensation then I would rather it is spent on education rather than compensating WASPI women who choose not to follow the news about the increase in the pension age.

Not necessarily; having a learning difficulty doesn't preclude someone from working ie in a practical role. I see this in my family; some people are in work but find great difficulty managing admin work. So I can see how some women would have remained in the dark about this.

Are you aware of the average wage of a working woman compared with a man in 1940, when the age was lowered?
Not to mention the fact that many jobs were barred for married women eg teaching.

1995? You mean it was first discussed in open parliament then?
Imagine if they got rid of all disability benefits and said people had been given lots of notice because some MPs had been discussing this in parliament for years?
Women had very little notice.

@Letsgotitans

"Because she wasn't told. I don't get what people don't get about this?"

It was widely and readily reported both at the time the legislation and until it came into effect in 2018.

The WASPI women had 23 years in which to become aware of this and there is a degree of personal responsibility to keep yourself informed on pension, tax changes etc.

Legislation was passed to equalise pension age, But it did not apply for years. Then suddenly lots of women who had been told they would not be affected were told they would eb impacted. That legislation was not passed until 2011.

There were public information campaigns. It wasn’t just discussed in Parliament.

@1dayatatime 2011 actually.

The other very unfair thing about the 2011 Act was the timetable setting out each person's pension date. For one month difference in age, your pension date was delayed by four months.

This is what most of us who are affected are angry about. The process was bonkers. I missed out on four months pension because I was born eight hours too late.

You know what I've never been officially "told" that my pension probably won't be paid until I'm 70. I only know that because I've looked into it. That's despite me starting work in 1995 - aged 17 so I'll have paid 53 years NI by then. Should I get compensation too? How about all you special WASPI women share yours?

@DigitalDust I never saw one public information campaign about this.

@Itsrainingten Nothing has changed for you. Women had two or three years notice before they would have retired, that their retirement age was increasing.

I can honestly say, and I worked in finance for 40 years, Nope. It was not in the news. Information like pension forecasts that you can do yourself online now just were not available. I remember purchasing stamps to stick on my NI card. Future ( private) pension predictions were the for rich with financial advisors.

As far as I'm aware, it was a small article in a newspaper (I have a WASPI women in the family). They didn't get a letter directly telling them. If you have evidence otherwise please send me the link.

Then you can’t have been looking very hard. Admittedly the campaigns were a bit crap, but I remember them being pretty much everywhere in the early 2000s at least

That isn’t true. I swallowed the 1995 change without complaint. It was absolutely fair and there was a lot of notice. The 2011 acceleration was grossly unfair, both in the increase in pension age at very short notice and the crazy way in which pension ages for 300,000 women differed. Basically the younger you were the worse your outcome.

@Fauxflowersnoflowers There were no DWP letters sent out. I knew because I am a news junkie and read quality newspapers. Lots of people do not.

@blossomtoes I thought I had said exactly what you did. It was 2011 legislation that was the issue. It changed things very suddenly.

If we have to foot the bill then I suppose we have to do this and I actually don't begrudge them this, though am angry with whichever government/s let this happen in the first place. But surely it should come out of gov funding partly too?

@DigitalDust where were these campaigns?