To be fed up with the WASPIs' renewed campaign?

[Jane379]

I sympathise with people who genuinely did not know but hiw many was this? And how would we know who to compensate even if the money were available?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/waspi-latest-compensation-legal-challenge-pension-b2976014.html

The rules can be changed - its how it is done to not disadvantage those that are older.

I'm not in the same boat as although I have to now work another 7 years, as I was due to retire at 60 when I started work and it was changed 3 times - I have at least had the time to change, the equality laws on my side and other factors that have helped me plan for when I reach 60

The governments could have increased less for this older and born in the 1950s and allowed them to retire early as they didn't have the chance to make further plans - especially considering the wasp woman would cost at most £10 bn ( that would be if they all were compensated)and there is a £74bn surplus. They could have spent £3bn extra and made life a lot fairer for many of the 3 million woman affected.

Its not an all or nothing situation, its a situation that could have been more gradual

As a Waspi woman who is NOT part of any campaign, as I know there are too few women for it to make a difference re votes, I thought I would add a few comments.
There have been several changes to the state pension age.
The first in 1995, when the state pension age for women was made equal to that of men, so gradually over a number of years the state pension age for women was moved from 60 to 65.
Then in 2007, a change was made to move the state pension age (for both men and women), first to 66 and then to 67, but the change was very gradual.
Then in 2011, the October budget speeded up this change.
In my case, this change in 2011 gave me just 5 years notice of my state pension age being put back another year, and my S-i-Law, only 6 months younger than me, was put back 2 years.
It is this latest change that only gave some women 5 years notice, or in the case of my S-i-Law, 5 and half years notice, that is the problem (if it can be described as a problem).
When it came to MPs changes, it was decided that 5 years was not enough notice.
Also it should be noted that the State Pension is 'means tested' in that it is subject to income tax. Currently, the state pension is less than the personal allowance and there is no facility of deducting tax from it, so if you have a private pension from other employers, the tax code is adjusted to take the state pension into account.
Here it should be noted that as the personal allowance has been frozen, the state pension is going to rise above the personal allowance, but my understanding is that if you ONLY have the state pension, it will not be taxed (thus creating an anomoly), but presumably because it would be too difficult (not enough time) to start deducting tax on the state pension itself.
Personal pensions were introduced in 1988, I believe, and before that there was no such thing, and instead, the pension was just a company pension.
Since then there have been other changes to auto enrolment for example.
I have not campaigned because I know it won't make a difference. The country is more or less bankrupt, and they cannot afford to make up any 'losses', for too few votes.

Hopefully they have learned something and will give you reasonable notice, surely they can plan ahead so maybe ten years notice?

Ten years notice is statuary now precisely so nobody working now can be screwed over like 1953/54 women were.

The state pension isn't a reward for working- it is a state benefit to ensure all older people have a basic level of income. Want more or to retire earlier than the state thinks is affordable - make your own arrangements.

If only the same rationale was applied to the uplift on the two child benefit cap.

That's good, so the poster worrying about last minute changes can relax.

@NoGarlic

Many affected women received only 18 months' notice of a six-year increase in their state pension age, unlike men who received six years' notice.

No they didn't. The second change (from pension age 65 to 67) was the one at short notice. The original change from 60 to 65 was enacted in 1995, so everyone had 10-15 years notice of it coming into force.

@milveycrohn

Also it should be noted that the State Pension is 'means tested' in that it is subject to income tax.

Being subject to tax isn't "means testing" at all.

I think they mean if women didn't know about the first change until the second change. I'm surprised so many women didn't know I suppose there would always be a few but hard to understand so many

They did know, they just want to pretend/claim they didn't know to try to get compensation, i.e. jumping on the band wagon. The 1995 changes were so well publicised, it was impossible not to know (unless they were abroad). The changes were everywhere, newspapers, magazines, TV news, TV current affairs shows, leaflets in NHS waiting rooms, leaflets in PAYE code and benefit letters, etc.

And the ombudsman the Waspis so love to quote said that between 1995 and 2004 the changes were well publicised and there was no issue with the delivery of information.

The vast majority have nothing to complain about. Nor do they deserve "compensation". The idea is laughable.

"I’m a couple of years older than you and I couldn’t disagree more. It’s absolutely right that pension ages were equalised between men and women and with greater life expectancy and pension affordability I don’t think the increase is unreasonable."

This is a good point. You could even argue that women's retirement age should be higher on the basis that because of their higher life expectancy, women will receive greater total pension payments than a man even if both pay the exact same ni contributions, for the same number of years etc.

I've worked with people I'd believe didn't know. A small number but yes I can believe some didn't know like the one who told me her dad fought in WWII to keep non white people out of Britain (I've never heard that speech of Churchills) or the one who was puzzled one December when some one mentioned the shortest day and said she'd always thought all days were 24 hours. They do exist

I'm not worrying. At all.

I expect there to be zero state pension in existence before I get anywhere near the age. Whatever I can scrimp and save into my private pension (not much with CoL) will never be enough anyway with the way things are going.

Retirement will be miserable and the majority of us will be fucked 🤷🏼‍♀️

That was kind if my point, allbeit tongue in cheek

Not worrying. No point. It is what it is.

There will be sort of but it won’t be a pension it will just be universal credit. Everything will go into that and you will be assessed accordingly. Those who have private provision will have to cover themselves.

How do you know what others knew or didn't know?

There is no bandwagon. In the unlikely event that there were a payout it would have to go to all affected women, not just to those saying they didn't know about the changes.

I knew about it and was a teenager in 1995! My mum (a WASPI) definitely knew but sadly died before she was near state retirement age.

You are looking at the life expectancy figures as at today not at the date the State pension was set up.

Correct. And the State Pension is subject to income tax.

So many 'experts' here with strong opinions on weak foundations.

Of course it's a free money bandwagon. May as well pretend you're hard done by, you might get a payout on the back of it.

It isn’t subject to income tax (yet). It counts as income against your personal allowance. Nobody living on just the state pension pays income tax.

But as tax thresholds have been frozen until 2031 in the next year or so they will come into basic tax bracket , particularly with the triple lock guarantees.

That’s why I said yet.

Unless you think there should be no tax threshold for pensioners (why?) this simply tells you the State Pension is currently so small that it falls below the personal allowance - well into relative poverty level.

Pensioners with some income on top of their SP, bringing their income above the threshold, pay tax the same as everyone else. Many seem to think State Pension's tax exempt. It isn't.

As @Lollygaggle's just said and you already knew, fiscal drag will put a bigger tax burden on the least well-off, including pensioners.