'WASPI women' appeal court ruling

[GrimSisters]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54158832

I'm 41. I'd always wondered why women retired at 60 and men at 65 and have known all about the changes for years because I read the news and don't live under a rock.

Given that, at the moment, I'll get my state pension at 68, I'm struggling to understand what the problem is. Please could someone explain why having to work until 65, along with their male counterparts, is so distressing?

I thought we wanted equality? Must admit that I'm struggling to have much sympathy. I work in a relatively low paid job and have four colleagues aged between 55 and 63 who haven't complained about the situation.

If you're one of the women who has been affected by this change, I'd be interested to know what the real issue is because I'm really confused as to why it is such a massive issue.

@leafbeans - I know. All these silly claims that women retiring now had no opportunity to pay into a pension etc. the claims that women are getting their pension “four years later than their hairdresser” who is a year younger, despite this being totally untrue. And so on.

Thank goodness for @Iamthewombat who stood up to all the vitriol with facts.

What I see is a lot of women having their experiences and opinions dismissed. Not unusual at all though for people to be dismissive of women, especially those in their 60s and beyond.

@VinylDetective - it’s just not true that women who are retiring now couldn’t join Private pension plans or save for their retirement at any time in the last 50 years. Don’t be silly.

Men’s pension age have been increased.

@Leafbeans - I think it’s fair enough to dismiss claims that are factually incorrect, no one has some sort of right to have their opinion accepted as fact just because they’re older. Wombat and I are women too - is the sort of vitriol directed at us ok?

CayrolBaaaskin

ffs - if you don’t watch any tv, read any newspapers or pay any attention to what goes on in the world, you might not know what your entitlement to state benefits is. That’s no ones fault but your own though. You can expect the taxpayer to pay out billions because you don’t want to find out when you are entitled to be paid your state pension. Look it up

We are talking about the 80’s and 90’s

Where were we supposed to look it up.

Whilst the internet might have been around in 1995 I don’t think anyone I knew actually had a computer let alone a mobile phone that was anything more than a phone.

What bonkers logic is this @Iamthewombat

Oh yes you were. The acceleration of the pensions equalisation was announced in 2011. If you were born in 1953, you’d have been 58. If your new retirement age was 66, that was eight years’ notice

@Sertchgi123 LOL!

Image is a quote from the WASPI website, about change notifications for men & women. Slight difference...

Personally, I was never told of the changes so was not able to make any contingency plans. I have lost around £48,000 of my contributions, money I paid tax on, and contributions from my employers.

Women do not get equal opportunities when they give up their careers to raise their family. They don't have the chance to get private pensions.

I'm a member of the FB group 63 is the new 60. We were aiming for a compromise. The group is closed until October.

It’s all a load of shit I have worked for 46 years and raised two children, I paid into state pension and the second state pension which seems to have vanished. Then paid into a final salary pension which then closed. Then paid into the company pension that was offered after that . I’m still working , I now have cancer . Still have 4 years to go sigh ,,

But it didn't happen to men because there retirement age was already five years later than women. I think it should have been left at 65 for everybody. And less benefits for people who have never paid in.

[quote CayrolBaaaskin]@leafbeans - I know. All these silly claims that women retiring now had no opportunity to pay into a pension etc. the claims that women are getting their pension “four years later than their hairdresser” who is a year younger, despite this being totally untrue. And so on.

Thank goodness for @Iamthewombat who stood up to all the vitriol with facts.[/quote]
They’re not silly claims. They’re reality. How dare you accuse us of making this up ? You weren’t even born.

@CayrolBaaaskin well sure, you both seem to lack much empathy so why should it be afforded to you?

I'm pretty sure part timers weren't allowed to join the NHS pension scheme until the 90s, contributions could then be backdated for several years I believe, but that would have been horrendously expensive on part time wages. Part timers of course were mainly women. I don’t think it would be the only occupational pension scheme with this rule.

It was a different world of work in the 70s - girlie calendars everywhere and smoking at desks - not necessarily in the NHS, but certainly where I worked then.

Thank goodness for @Iamthewombat who stood up to all the vitriol with facts.

One of wombat's facts:

The acceleration of the pensions equalisation was announced in 2011. If you were born in 1953, you’d have been 58. If your new retirement age was 66, that was eight years’ notice

I’m 63 with a SPA of 66. So if they raise my SPA to 70 right now, that means they have given me 7 years notice, not 3 years!
Better still if they raise it to 80 I’ll have 17 years notice.

@Sandinyourshoes

I’m 63 with a SPA of 66. So if they raise my SPA to 70 right now, that means they have given me 7 years notice, not 3 years! Better still if they raise it to 80 I’ll have 17 years notice.

Brilliant 😂

There’s nothing to compensate any other age group for.

Then explain to me why so many posters on this thread have bolstered their pro-WASPI arguments by telling us how hard their mothers’ lives were, how few opportunities they had and how women today still suffer discrimination. You can’t have it both ways. Either women’s lives are more difficult than men’s and that’s why you somehow deserve to retire earlier than men, or you were the only generation who uniquely suffered financial disadvantage because you were female. Make your mind up. If you attempt to argue the latter case, I will wipe the floor with you. Again.

I was born in 1953. After the 1995 changes I was expecting to get my pension at 61. After 2011 it became 64. I had three years notice before the age at which I might have been planning to retire

Maybe consider the meaning of the word ‘notice’ again. If I were a landlord giving a tenant notice to quit, I would tell them 6 months before the event. Six months’ notice, see? If the DWP told you in 2011 that you would be retiring in 2018, not 2016, they would still have given you seven years’ notice of the event. Not two years.

Are you being deliberately disingenuous? I do hope so.

The papers (you know that you read so avidly every day) all mentioned quite a few times that a lot of women had 18 months notice of the second change. I can't be bothered to look it up and, even if I did, I doubt you would believe it.

See above re the meaning of the term ‘notice’. Your state pension age was delayed by 18 months. That is not the same as having 18 months’ notice.

Thanks for the laughs, by the way. Anybody who is well-informed and has taken responsibility for themselves has, according to you, had no life, has not worked hard, is smug and has spent their lives watching TV adverts. Not living life, like busy, preoccupied old you. I suppose that news about personal finance and the notion of taking responsibility for yourself was less engaging than reading about Prince Charles and Camilla in the 1990s.

If the DWP told you in 2011 that you would be retiring in 2018, not 2016, they would still have given you seven years’ notice of the event. Not two years

They told me in 2011. I was expecting to retire in 2014. That’s three years.

Either women’s lives are more difficult than men’s and that’s why you somehow deserve to retire earlier than men, or you were the only generation who uniquely suffered financial disadvantage because you were female

Neither. We are the only generation to have the terms of the contract which we contracted with the government at the beginning of our working lives changed twice. We don’t deserve to retire earlier than men. I don’t know how many times you have to be told this. We do deserve not to have the goalposts moved on us twice.

I don’t think it’s me who’s being disingenuous.

I think we should stop feeding the Wombat.

@Sertchgi123

I think we should stop feeding the Wombat.

Seconded!

Thirded.

I don't know why it matters so much to the wombat?

They have made a very good case against WASPI women but instinctively I'm on the side of the WASPIs. 🤷🏼‍♀️

That’s right. Admit that you have lost the argument. Because you have, and you know it.

This might help:

Notice period = the period of time between being given information about the date on which an event will happen, and the event itself.

Delay = the time period between the date on which you expected, or hoped, an event would happen, and the date on which the event actually happened.

Wombat - you obviously have lots of information about this subject. Why is it so important to you? Are you a WASPI woman?