WASPI Women - getting compensated

[CanSeeClearlyNowTheRainHasGone]

I've just read this:

The government will reconsider its decision not to award compensation to Waspi women, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has said.

And I'm livid at the incompetence of Labour.

Having put the issue to bed once, they are now going to create a heap of trouble for themselves.

Either they decide (again) not to make any payouts - in which case, cue more outrage from WASPI and negative headlines.

Or they decide now that they will make payouts - which goes directly against the whole "we have to raise taxes" budget.

Or are they really so stupid that they're going to carry on paying everyone, raising salaries for Public Sector, 2-child cap, WFP, etc and carry on bleating about a black hole and how we must all pay more tax.

Am I being unreasonable that this seems like madness?

Yes we were paid less than men even for the same job. In my job, women couldn’t join the workplace pension scheme. Women were overlooked for promotions and many of us gave up work when we became pregnant.

I became a single parent in the 70s, I couldn’t get a mortgage. I was told patronisingly to go home and talk to my husband.

No you're talking rubbish, this did not happen 😉
Older women suffered no hardship, we were living the life of Riley with our feet up all day.
No mother has ever suffered like today's 30-40 somethings. They are the benchmark from which all suffering, unfairness and hardship is measured. 😂

I can accept you being angry because you feel hard done by, but there is no need to make things up about me.

You say I am centred around money, nothing could be further from the truth. I have plenty of money and don't expect any compensation. I'm afraid I think that people who rely on unpaid childcare are centred around money, obviously they would have less if they paid for childcare.

I suppose some grandparents are short of things to do and don't mind being taken advantage of but I have my own busy life. Helping adults to parent isn't really helping, too often it seems to de skill them and they become even more dependent. My children have been completely independent since leaving university. Our relationship is one of equal adults.

"Perhaps I should have followed my own advice'
Why on earth do you think I didn't?
I brought up two families (2 husbands), gave up work to look after them myself and would not have dreamt of asking old age pensioners to help me. I loved every minute of it, but have no interest in children who aren't my own.

You should try not to make things up about other people to fit your own narrative.

You keep changing the story. First it’s about the changes. Or accelerating the changes. Then it’s about not getting enough notice. Or not being told clearly enough. Or not seeing any news articles for twenty years. Now it seems to be that your generation were so uniquely hard done by that you deserve oh so special treatment.

I'm a late 60's boomer. My response to the increase in retirement age was to simply continue working for a further 6 years. I'm grateful for the free bus and reduced price train travel I receive. Also WFA, free dental and eye check. Concessionary prices for art galleries etc. I doubt the current and future generations will fare so well.

Someone else inventing things about me. It's stupid, pathetic and childish. Don't say that people have said things that they haven't.

Sounds like the DUP did quite a lot of awareness work, even though some of it was not perfect. From your link:

76. DWP told us it made considerable efforts to communicate State Pension age changes and to ensure those affected could access detailed and bespoke information about their State Pension entitlement, including:

• running pensions education campaigns, which included information about State Pension age equalisation
• publishing ‘numerous’ leaflets from 1995 onwards
• making State Pension age clear in the 22 million State Pension statements issued online, by post or over the telephone since 1995
• issuing around 17.8 million automatic pension forecasts (APFs) between 2003 and 2006 with a leaflet explaining the increase in State Pension age for women
• making information about State Pension age available on its website, including an option for individuals to calculate their State Pension age
• writing to 1.2 million women affected by the Pensions Act 1995 between 2009 and 2011, and those affected by the Pensions Act 2011 between January 2012 and November 2013.

Pensions education campaigns

77. The evidence we have seen confirms DWP did make considerable efforts - across a variety of formats and using a range of media channels and stakeholders - to promote pensions awareness and planning for retirement through its pensions education campaigns. This included:

• a TUC-led ‘Pension Power for You’ campaign and helpline in 1997, and a second TUC helpline campaign in 1999 that was partly government-funded
• a ‘Monopoly’-themed pensions campaign (June 1998 to April 2000). Adverts were displayed on buses and trams, in telephone boxes, on fast food containers and on screens in Post Offices. Adverts, advertorials and inserts were placed in national and local press, magazines and catalogues. Information was shared through mailings and mailshots (based on marketing data), in pensions packs, on flyers and at exhibitions. A new series of pensions leaflets (PM1-8) and a pensions website were also introduced
• a ‘Working Dogs’-themed pensions campaign (January 2001 to March 2004). Adverts were placed in national and local press, on postcards, and shown in cinemas and on television
• various waves of issuing information about pensions, including information about State Pension age changes, direct to people who requested it, who had responded to surveys and to advisers.

This is one of the biggest issues with the WASPI campaign. The women have never been singing from the same hymn sheet.

There has never been any consistency over what they were actually asking for. The face of the campaign seems to have depended on any given woman electing herself to speak to the media, and then the next time a completely different woman speaks to the same source but says something completely different.

It doesn’t help that some of the women are not particularly sympathetic. I remember one who claimed she had worked for “thirty years!” and so couldn’t possibly be expected to wait any longer for her pension. Another who took umbrage to a fact read out by an interviewer or minister and just went on to screech “ridiculous, ridiculous, ridiculous” over and over again until they cut off her mic, instead of actually having a conversation.

And so many of them seem to have been teachers or headteachers, from affluent backgrounds and in middle class professions despite not being particularly well-qualified. They seem to have lived lives of comfort and relative privilege. Very much the female equivalent of the “mediocre white man” we read so much about.

On the other hand I have a very working class family member who worked for many years as a hospital cleaner and she knew exactly when her pension age was, because she had to! She didn’t have the luxury of ignorance, even though she’s the last person to claim she’s “good with money”.

There’s an irony somewhere in that this has been an incredibly disorganised campaign despite being led by the sort of people who would claim their biggest strength is their “organisational skills”.

It doesn't really matter anymore.

They have been denied compensation for a second time after rather shamlessly trying to work around their final legal loss (which was a complete repudiation of their arguments)

Now they will just have to live with the vitriol and shame of their arguments. This was a colossal (and expensive) waste of Government time.

I didn’t mention awareness. Your post bears no relation to the one of mine you quoted. And I agree with your analysis @SpoonBaloon, it’s been a shockingly bad campaign.

I’m not a WASPI woman - too young. I also had the understanding (it wasn’t a contract) that I could get my pension at 60 when I started work in 1986. It changed. Twice. Ikbew about it and had to suck it up. I don’t understand why it’s different or why anyone needed to plan. Just keep working, or use other pensions if you have them, like the rest of us.

It's not the change of retirement age - it's the notice given of that change. My retirement age has changed three times and I am not a Waspi woman. I will retire at 67 in 2035 and I would not appreciate being told in 3033 I had to work another six years - would you?
Pps are not listening to the reason for the campaign (although I agree it has been muddled) they are just jumping in with 'well I have to retire at 68 so why shouldn't You' with side helping of 'greedy boomers' thrown in for good measure.

We are listening to, we just don’t agree. Absolutely nobody was given three years notice of a six year delay to their pension. The worst affected women were given five years notice of an 18 month delay to their pensions. From the ombudsman findings “The revised timetable capped the further increase consequent to the 2011 Act at 18 months (relative to the timetable set out in the 1995 Act), at a cost to the Exchequer of £1.1 billion” . The ombudsman report also confirms those women were all sent letters during 2012/2013.

"with side helping of 'greedy boomers' thrown in for good measure"

To be fair, the government's main reason for the rejection of any compensation is "fairness to all taxpayers".....

The worst affected women got 18 months notice, it’s right there in your quote.

No. The quote is about the increase in pension age. The impact of the 2011 act was to increase the pension age by a maximum of 18 months for any individual.

"The worst affected women were given five years notice of an 18 month delay to their pensions"

"The worst affected women got 18 months notice, it’s right there in your quote"

The quote said 5 years notice.....on top of the years of media campaigns before that

But it wasn’t. Mine was pushed back by three years further than the 1993 increase, my friend who is four years younger than me had hers increased by five years.

How could anyone have got five years’ notice in 2011 when they were expecting to claim in 2013?

Why would anyone have thought the age would have stayed the same despite the increases in life expectancy? That doesn't make sense. I remember the 1995 change from when I was a child because it was such big news, but even if you somehow missed it, wouldn't the reality of having an ageing population make you consider checking?

If you were in your early sixties in 2033 it wouldn't be such a big tragedy though would it? Sure no one wants to work to 65 but it's a straightforward remedy and one that the vast majority of us are now having to take (and then some).

Preaching that it was terrible for some women to have to work to 65 is never going to play well to an audience of women that have to work to 67/68 or possibly longer.

I’m sorry, but that’s simply not true. It may have been pushed back from where you expected, but if so that would have been because you hadn’t taken into account the 1995 changes.

I’ve been looking for a graph but can’t find one, but here’s another quote from the parliamentary briefing that confirms the 18 month maximum delay. The 2011 changes didn’t start until 2016, hence the five year notice.

The Pensions Act 1995 provided for the State Pension age (SPA) for women to increase from 60 to 65 over the period April 2010 to 2020. The Coalition Government legislated in the Pensions Act 2011 to accelerate the latter part of this timetable, starting in April 2016 when women’s SPA was 63 so that it reached 65 in November 2018, at which point it started to rise to 66 by October 2020. The Government’s initial intention was that the equalised SPA would then rise to 66 by April 2020 (Cm 7956, Nov 2010, Foreword). However, because of concerns expressed at the short notice of significant increases for some women (as much as two years compared to the timetable in existing legislation) it made a concession when the legislation was in its final stages. This limited the maximum increase under the Act at 18 months, at a cost to the Exchequer of £1.1 bn – see Library Briefing Paper, SN 06082 Pensions Bill 2011 – final stages (Nov 2011).

It is true. My state pension age rose to 61 in 1993, it increased to 64 in 2011. The 18 months refers to the notice. Are you seriously telling me I don’t know my own circumstances?

I’m saying you have misunderstood. The data is very, very clear that the maximum impact of the 2011 act was 18 months. I’m sorry, but I’m going to believe the official data over your recollection.

Edited to add I’m also not sure why you keep referring to 1993? That was the white paper date but no changes were made until 1995. So if you’ve been relying on 1993 data that might explain your mistake.

I haven’t made a mistake. You’re misinterpreting what you’re reading.

Here’s the best graph I can find. From the pension policy institute which incidentally is pro compensation. If you look at the top graph you can clearly see the impact of the 2011 act compared to the 1995 act. The impact of the 2011 act (the dotted line) doesn’t start until 2016, and the impact (the gap between the solid 1995 line and the dotted 2011 line) is never more than 18 months. https://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/media/oqijsfwe/201607-bn83-effect-of-rises-in-spa-mitigation.pdf