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.

I don't call that radical, I call it a sweeping statement. If women want equality in the workplace and elsewhere it's absolutely right that the pension date for men and women is equalised.

According to Wikipedia only 9% of UK households had Internet in 1998. Which surprises me, as we had it at home in about 1993 (Demon Internet, if anyone remembers that?) and I definitely had it in my university house in the late 90s.

More will have had access at work, though.

The selfish generation are just looking for another handout from the government, from the youth of today who they continue to trample all over. Perhaps they can use these £1000s to block housebuilding as they so like to do

The point is that many women weren't aware of the first increase in the 1995 Pensions Act - and weren't informed by the DWP - hence the Ombudsman's finding of maladministration because letters weren't sent out in a timely fashion. Of course some were aware (like me), some weren't. I was aware because I made sure I got my own pension forecasts, but when I told a colleague about it she was horrified as she was unaware that the pension age was no longer 60.

People have different levels of financial/business acumen, but the DWP should have ensured that everyone was given direct information from them, rather than having to request it. Hence the maladministration judgement.

The internet was widely used in the 90s.

😂

I think I was one of the first among anyone I knew to have home internet - that was a dial up connection in about 1998 and less than 10% of the UK population had a connection at that point.

The BBC created it's news site late 1997.

By 1999 I had MSN messenger and was never able to chat to anyone I actually knew - because no one was connected.

@MartinsSpareCalculator but if it was "widely known", surely you would plan for it. Planning for it in this instance means taking a trip to the Post Office and asking the question, or asking others at work. And they had most of the 90s and a literal decade in the 00s to do so.

You can't complain about "not being able to plan" whilst also making no attempt to actually do any planning!

Sure.

But until wrong number 1 (unpaid labour) is not sorted, I cannot see why you should add wrong number 2 to the pile.

I'm sorry you feel like that. Do your parents not help you? Please don't believe everything you read in the tabloids. Inter-generational strife only benefits this Government who love to set one generation against another - don't fall for it.

It wasn't just for Waspi. It's changed more than once for others of younger ages as well. I was born in the 60s and when I started work it was 60. It's now 67.

This is a disgusting and offensive generalisation. My mum is the opposite of selfish. She has always and continues to do everything she can to support me and my children. Don't blame a whole generation for decisions that were actually taken by Government.

I'm 60 this year, and while I am very capable and willing to work longer, it is harder in my field as an 'older' woman. My husband is 67 and retired 2 years ago, so really we are missing out on up to another 7 years of having time together - which we wouldn't have had if the ages had stayed the same. It's difficult.
I don't feel I am necessarily 'owed' an earlier retirement but I am fully behind my slightly older peers regarding the unfairness and speed with which all this was done

That is up to you to sort out in your household. Unpaid labour is even in ours.

This is correct. I worked in IT and at home in 1998 I only had a dial up connection which enabled me to access emails. The internet wasn't widely available in 1995.

However I find it incomprehensible that anyone didn't know about the 1995 changes. It was nearly 30 years ago and it's been in the news many times since.

I don't think the Government should be allowed to move the goalposts for ANYONE that was already working and paying NI. If they wanted to raise the Pension Age, don't apply it to those that have already been paying NI, in good faith

I'm 54. I had been already working and paying in for 32 years when they changed the age (in 2018). So instead of getting my pension in 6 years, I have to wait 11 years. That's a loss over £60k, and I won't get any compensation. That's not what I signed up for. I'm too young to be a WASPI. How is that remotely fair?

Someone may have addressed this but if not, you are in for bad news because if you are 54 now you are not receiving your SP until 68 - so fourteen years to work, not eleven.

Yes, my 60 something year old mum in her million and a half pound, mortgage free house, with 4 foreign holidays a year. Really needs £10k from the state that I am going to have to pay for.

THE GOVERNMENT DONT HAVE ANY MONEY! All they do is redistribute taxpayer money. If you want to hand £35Billion out I have a list as long as my arm of better places it can go.

Is it? The DWP have already stated they won't be paying any compensation.

So it would be up to labour to commit to pass legislation in the next parliament to provide compensation. Given the demands on public finances, not sure they will be able to find this (especially given it seems to be a given they will win a large majority and anyway tories are also unlikely to commit to paying it, so labour won't be worried about losing votes on this issue).

can't help but feel the WASPI movement is a very cozy, middle class endeavour by women who feel exposed for not being as financially astute and organised as they want people to believe. This probably isn't helped by the faux intelligentsia Sandi Toksvig jumping on the bandwagon.

Absolutely disagree. There are loads of women who have been plunged into poverty. Women who will never be able to retire ( my DM is one of those). These are a generation who did not have equal opportunities.

Latest estimate I’ve seen is £10 billion for the ombudsman suggestion, but apparently MPs are pushing for £10k payments at a cost of £35billion.

A lot of people had internet access at work though by the late 90s. A large proportion of people had access at home too by 2010.

sorry, by "is it" I meant it won't be because the government will never agree to pay it. So the ombudsman can recommend whatever they want and backbenchers can suggest anything they want, but the government won't agree to pay out.

It is sorted in my household.

But this does not affect you or me only. Not much point denying the reality of structural inequality. It is there. And a long, long way from getting sorted.

(Plus - obvoulsly, I don't know you - but when it comes to your individual household, I'd take a guess at the fact that if you are F and your partner is M, if you counted hour by hour, you'd be working considerably more, the mental load being the greater part of it. If I am honest with myself this is the case in mine. No comparison with other more 'traditional' households but even so.)

It is very depressing that so many (younger?) women seem to think that the WASPI women (of whom I am one) are complaining about the fact that their pension age increased. Of course no one likes that but I think the vast majority of us accepted that it was inevitable and necessary. The problem was the second increase in 2011 which raised our pension age significantly - in my case from 63 to 66 (minus 2 months) - with only a few years notice.
If I had known this in 1995 I could have increased my additional contributions to my work pension to give me more choice about when to retire. (Like many women I do not have a significant work pension as I worked part time for 22 years while bringing up a family.)
I absolutely recognise that life is tough for many young women but please do not resent my generation who won many of the rights you take for granted. For example, I was the first woman in the history of my organisation to be 'allowed' to work part time after having a child - it had previously been return to work full time or resign. And maternity leave was only 3 months.
The way the WASPI women have been treated is very poor and I don't think men would have been treated in a similar way. Women of all ages should be showing solidarity.
I don't personally expect to get any compensation btw. If there is spare money around, I'd prefer to see it spent on childcare and early years education to help my daughters and grandchildren.

We had a PC in 1998 and later a laptop in 01.
It wasn't that good.
I suppose the government will say ' women wanted equality and this was part of it'
They won't address any of the problems and largely hope it is forgotten about and kick it down the road ( for the Labour Party to sort out)
Ditto the post office scandal

So the issue is that a letter wasn’t sent out? I don’t think I’ve had a letter explaining mine has gone up so does it apply to both sexes whose retirement age is over 65 now??
Realistically most of the people complaining couldn’t/ wouldn’t have planned differently financially. If they weren’t saving then it probably wouldn’t have made any difference that the age was changed by a year or two? Surely the compensation for lack of notification should be small. Nobody wants to work longer whether you’re notified at 40,50, 55, fwiw I agree the age shouldn’t be dependent on sex and the women getting to retire at 60 were actually getting a nice bonus rather than those having to retire at the same age as men being hard done by

I can’t believe anyone could defend the successive governments that caused this mess up. The notion that they could make changes that have a vast financial implication for a large number of people and not notify them through writing is mad. Dh got a letter saying he owes £4 of tax the other week. Funny how they can pull their fingers out their arse for that one. Of course the WASPI women should be compensated.