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.

Where are all the women who didn’t work?

Certainly all the women in my family did. Some because they had to; some because they chose to.

@MaybeRevisitYourWipingT3chnique there used to be no disability benefits. You maybe got a home help visiting to get you out of bed and dressed, and meals on wheels, but no money for extra heating or anything else.

I never said they did. And no it isn’t.

Of course it is. They want compensation for not getting special treatment. How is that equality? No consideration for the fact that they still retire earlier than anyone younger, or any consideration for how (or who) will pay for it.

raising the pension age has saved the government £181bn

Maybe they could just give us a bit of that back? We want compensation for treating us unfairly.

A quick Google gives this (from 2013) suggesting that your family isn’t very representative (though undoubtably hard working).

Over the past 40 years there has been a rise in the percentage of women aged 16 to 64 in employment and a fall in the percentage of men. In April to June 2013 around 67% of women aged 16 to 64 were in work, an increase from 53% in 1971.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/womeninthelabourmarket/2013-09-25

So how much is a retirement age of 68 saving? Can we also expect some compensation? Since it's all about equality and fairness?

Lots of people can't work beyond 60. It's not something unique to women in the Waspi group.

I think what a lot of the younger posters are trying to articulate though (and I think this case draws it into sharp focus) is the sense that we might have been raised up by previous generations, but there is also a growing sense we are being used as cash cows.

While then at the same time losing many of the benefits those slightly older than us have had, like the realistic opportunity to afford to buy a family home or have a baby, free university education, access to free dental care, child benefit, free bus passes, decent chance of state pension at an age you could actually enjoy it etc etc.

The social contract has already failed for us.

This is why I'm uneasy about it, we're being expected to celebrate this as a victory for women, while there seems to be limited recognition from the WASPI group that those women coming behind them are also the people who are despairing about how we can afford to pay for it.

I was born 6th April 1960. Missed out by one day to be eligible for waspi.

I started work full time at 15 years old, no higher education for many of us in the good old days. So by the time I hit 60, I'd already done 45 years which doesn't seem too different to someone who didn't start until after uni and will work until 68

I understand the circumstance you describe and the difficulties that would have been faced but that doesnt apply to everyone - surely that must be a mjnority? My husbands mum was born in 1953, she is wholly dependent on the state pension. She still worked up until last year and she classes herself as a WASPI women who has been very hard done by but I dont understand how. Of course she has missed out on these years of state pension but she was still working so what needs to be compensated? Of course it would have been nice for her to retire earlier or build up a pot if she chose not to, but state funding isnt a right and as it happened she worked beyond retirement age anyway.

My mum was born in August 1960 so falls outside the WASPI period. Her goalposts changed too. Im sorry if i sound unsympathetic but im in scotland, im already paying ridiculous levels of income tax, where is the money for the gov compensation scheme coming from?!

It’s up to you to fight unfairness if you perceive you’ve been a victim of it. What do you think you should be compensated for? You can plan for your retirement knowing when you’re going to get your state pension. Won’t you be pissed off if it’s suddenly raised to 70 a couple of years before you’re eligible?

Utterly dispiriting that this issue is setting women against women and young against old. Too much anecdotal comment on here. The Ombudsman has seen ALL the evidence - and ruled the WASPI women should be compensated for the injustice done to them. The sooner it's done the better - for to be sure, there will be more opportunities for government to screw over more people in more ways unless those appointed to scrutinise their behaviour are respected.

I’m genuinely surprised at that. Perhaps there was a dip in the late 60s / early 70s, as I didn’t know anyone whose mothers didn’t work in the 1980s or whose grandmothers hadn’t worked in the 40s/50s/ early 60s

Whether the grandmothers would have been included in formal labour market statistics or whether it was cash in hand I don’t know.

Lots of people have jobs through the latter years of school and all through university. I certainly did. 80's kid.

But the government has said that to current 40 year olds. Their pension ages have been moved as have men’s. Why is that ok but not for the boomer generation? And to get the new state pension you only need 35 years NI contributions. You don’t need to contribute any more ni because the pension age has been moved.

state pensions are incredibly expensive and there will likely be gone by the time my dcs generation reaches pension age. Why is it fair that they pay more so the older generation can retire earlier than they will ever be able to? We need some inter generational fairness imo.

@Fauxflowersnoflowers you get access to many more welfare benefits than older people had. Free dental care access affects everyone of all ages. Free university education mainly benefited the middle class. Most people left school at 15 or 16 and went into work.

So true, I am a WASPI woman, when I first went out to work at age 15 men were paid more than women, my first job was in the school summer holidays in a local factory and I was shocked to find out that us females were paid less than the men and I guess that was the start of my becoming a feminist. When I became pregnant I lost my job as back in the early 80's you had to have been in your job for at least 2 years to be able to return to it. If you did go back to work you had to either rely on family or find a child minder. My husband left me and then did not pay any child support so for me to work it only made sense for me to do part time stuff that fitted in with school hours, no work place pension in those sorts of jobs and even if there had been I could not have afforded to pay into it. Women have always had to fight for equality, I do not think that young women have it easy today, we still have a long way to go. I knew about the change in state pension age but as others have said it was they way the changes were speeded up which have caused the issue. I retired when I was 67 and believe you me, I was totally knackered by then, I really feel for future generations as it is only going to get worse. I would also like to point out that I still pay income tax, there seems to be a misapprehension that once you retire you are exempt from tax, when in fact, the only thing you don't pay is NI.

Be pissed off all you like. But don't ask us to pay for it. They've done it once, I'm assuming they will do it over and over again. At least your start point was 60...

"I bet if it was men this happened to they'd be furious and demanding compensation and a lot of it straight away" and she agreed with me.

why did men ever put up with the fact woman could draw state pension 5 years earlier?

or was it as many men were nearing or over 5 years older and they retired together?

@Annettekurtin state pensions will not be gone. State pensions have increased and people retiring this year get more than older people.
Very few people can get enough of a private pension to replace the state pension.

@MikeRafone The idea was that women would retire at the same time as men and the woman would be cooking and cleaning for the man. Men put up with it because it benefitted them. In married couples the average age difference was 5 years.

You don’t need to contribute any more ni because the pension age has been moved.

It was 30 years before 2011. In practice most people will pay for over 40 years. Lots of WASPI women have around 50 years contributions. You don’t just stop paying because you’ve got enough eligible years.

@Ahugga life expectancy is decreasing.