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.

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

This surely means they think (quite rightly so) that the state pension age should be lower for both men and women

If, as an astute woman she had checked with DWP to get the facts on her pension (rather than relying on random claims in the news) she would likely have been given the wrong information. If she had phoned them to check her situation there is a good chance she would have been given the wrong information.

No amount of planning enables you to easily fill a gap in pensions which is announced with so little warning as the changes implemented by the Cameron/Clegg coalition. Its one thing to know at age 25 that your pension age is a few years later - its very different to be told its jumped again when in your mid/late 50s.

Bear in mind also that this generation were widely discriminated against in pensions even when they were working, despite the equalities act. Many providers persisted in banning part timers from pensions schemes until forced to by the European court as it was discriminatory against women. Even then they dragged their heels.

The idea that this generation are living in clover is for the birds. One of the groups most likely to be living in poverty in old age is single women and that is partly due to the level of job and pension discrimination they experienced compounded by late pensions age changes and incorrect information being given out by government departments.

They don't send out letter though do they or if they do it must be just before people retire. I'm in my late 50s and have never received anything. Why would you phone the pensions service rather than just reading a newspaper or look on the internet where it would be clearly set out? I can appreciate that people were unhappy about the fact that they have to read/watch the news to find out what is going on in the world but why should younger people who have an even later retirement age compensate them for that choice?

It seems mad to pay such a massive compensation sum that only equates to around £1k each, many of whom that won't make much difference to- nothing can compensate now for the most extreme cases.

Ah - my apologies

I had time to do something about it, but it doesn’t make it ok that someone 2/3 years older than myself got a full state pension at aged 60 whereas I’ve still got to wait another 3 years to get mine.

The state pension is a benefit not a pension. The terms can be changed whenever a government wants, just as with all benefits.

I started paying NI in 1994. My projected retirement age is now 68 🤷‍♀️

I just don't factor the state pension in to my retirement plans, if there is anything it will be a bonus.

@Notthatcatagain surely to mitigate the changes you just worked longer it's not that complicated. Wages would be higher than pension so you wouldn't be financially worse off. Women now are expected to be healthy enough to work until age 68.

You can check it here: https://www.gov.uk/state-pension-age

The upper threshold is 68 and the expert recommendation is that it needs to move to 71 fairly soon.

You also chose to have a child instead of waiting and saving.

There’s kind of a natural limit to how long you can wait to have a child, though.

In earlier generations families with that poster’s relative household income would absolutely have been able to buy an appropriately-sized house.

The people that made the decision won't face the consequences though. It will and always is younger generations.

Excellent post. I scooted under the radar by a matter of months so wasn’t affected, but am so pleased today for the women who were treated so badly.

It is yet another in a long line of government scandals which have had huge social and financial implications for the people involved. Think of thalidomide payments, compensation for contaminated blood, the post office scandal and many more. If it wasn’t for the people who put the time and effort into campaigning for fair treatment successive governments would have got away without meeting their financial obligations.

I have been very disappointed to read some of the comments on this thread, we are a rich nation, we can afford to make financial reparations without it encroaching on other peoples finances. It is in every one’s interests to maintain a sharp lookout for situations where vulnerable people are deliberately targeted and disadvantaged by bad Government decisions taken on the sly. If they think they can get away with it they will do it again and again as history shows us.

For the WASPIs

@MaybeRevisitYourWipingT3chnique is a phenomenal username and doubles as advice for all those husbands leaving skid marks on sheets that I read about on MN (and my ex)

Oh that’s all right then. Just work another couple of years.
Right. Thanks for that.

And why was that a problem?

I think the only safe answer is that nobody knows - assuming that by 'retirement age', you mean when you can start claiming your state pension.

Hopefully, it will be below the average age of death - although the original state pension was deliberately set above that age, presumably as a reward for already enjoying a longer life - but there's no guarantee.

For all we know, it could also be declared summarily unsustainable and thus completely scrapped for new claimants from any time in the future. The government of the day could cite the push to auto-enrolment in private pensions that has now been in place for a number of years as a 'reason' why they can no longer justify it and why you 'should have made full provision for yourself'.

Have you read the thread? Women are literally sharing that they were given the wrong information by the DWP. The idea that these women should shut up and give some thought to younger women is ridiculous. Why are we squabbling amongst ourselves when the state should be treating us ALL fairly. The compensation doesn't have to be paid for by young women. There are many ways government can raise funds so stop making this about young women versus older women! (Again, I am mid thirties and will probably be working until I am 100 but I don't blame WASPI's for this!)

Another one completely baffled about how women claim they did not know.🤔

Back when it was announced I remember reading about it in newspapers, hearing it on the news etc and think you would have to be a hermit with your head buried in the sand to have heard NOTHING.
Even the merest hint should have been enough for the average person to think "what have I just read/heard, this might affect me, I must look into this"
From the day I started work I knew I was going to retire at 60 (if not before) so when I heard about the increase in SPA I made arrangements for this to still be possible.

So why does the ombudsman recommend compensation.

Don’t bother arguing with me, you’re talking bollocks, with respect.

@viques you expressed it a lot more eloquently than me 👏

For all we know, it could also be declared summarily unsustainable and thus completely scrapped for new claimants from any time in the future. The government of the day could cite the push to auto-enrolment in private pensions that has now been in place for a number of years as a 'reason' why they can no longer justify it and why you 'should have made full provision for yourself'.

This is the reason I believe the government will axe the SP altogether. I think there’ll be benefits for anyone whose income is below whatever threshold, but there won’t be enough money by the time we get to the middle of the century for paying everyone a SP. It’ll all be about relying on oneself by that point.

What the hell should DP do about his job if we move out of London? Tell me. Do you seriously think we haven’t thought about that? How stupid do you think we are?

I was already 35 when DD was born. Officially, I was already what is termed a “geriatric” mother. How much older should I have been? And then I would’ve been told by MN that I shouldn’t have had a child so old, poor them.

keep going with your useless advice.

I am one of the women affected ( born in the 1950s ) . In the late 1990s I found out I wouldn’t receive my SP at 60 - it would be 64. I accepted that and planned accordingly. When the Coalition Government came in , the goalposts were changed again and my SP age changed to 66. That was not a lot of notice for a big change ! It meant that my original plans to retire in my late 50s which I then changed to 60/61 then became 64.
I am not against equalisation of the SP age but it is a fact that some of us were adversely affected hence the campaign.

The state pension is a benefit not a pension. The terms can be changed whenever a government wants, just as with all benefits.

Yes, this absolutely. It has never been widely called a benefit - largely because the word 'benefit' is a loaded term. Even nowadays, when more people of working age who receive benefits are working than not.

However, a benefit is exactly what it is, however you qualify for any benefit - whether by being unemployed/low-paid, being disabled, having children, being over a certain age or whatever.

Many of those of a certain generation would have been too proud to ever claim anything called a 'benefit', so there would even have been old folk freezing and starving to death rather than claim their rightful pension if it had been referred to as 'getting benefits'.

No need to be rude about this. Some women (like me) were informed that their pension would start 3 years later: fair enough, I just groaned, wrote it off as the luck of the draw & got on with it.

But what I wasn't told about in advance was that ANOTHER three years had added to my wait for a pension. That is unforgivable. In fact, accelerating the changes was unforgivable. But since they'd communicated with me about the first three years, why would I suspect that a second change had been made but NOT communicated to me? If you don't hear anything, you assume that everything's the same. It would be a strange way to live, otherwise.

There's also the phenomenon that if you've been told that women's pension age has changed & then you see a news story saying 'Women's pension age to
change', chances are you'll assume it's the story you already know about, or that it's happening to a different cohort of women, because yours has already changed & nothing has been said about multiple changes being possible.

Some women actually checked the DWP website & it was inaccurately stating women's pension age - IIRC women have reported that it was still saying women would get a state pension at 60 after this had changed.