'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.

@Viviennemary I would think a lot of families could manage on 1 wage if they didn't all want so much.

Most of the families I know run 2 cars, both have the most up to date mobile phone, have Sky tv, netflix, have a couple of holidays a year (at least 1 abroad). Quite a lot of them smoke (almost all the ones under about 35 do), drink quite a lot.

Oh and all that struggling with housework in the evenings! What with washing machines, tumble dryers, dishwashers etc?

My mum didn't even have a washing machine when I was young. Nor did my parents expect to have everything new - carpets, furniture etc unlike most couples today

And there was no nonsense about men doing housework in those days. If you were a woman you did the lot.

A lot of women in the fifties and a lot of the sixties had the life of riley. No struggling with childcare and housework in the evenings. Husbands on even a modest wage could support the family. If women wanted a bit extra they could work a few hours a week for pocket money

This is the biggest BS I have read for a long time.

The reason women were at home was because they had to be.

There were no affordable childcare places so the woman stayed at home whether she wanted to or not.

Just things like clothes washing could take a whole day

If women had a life of Riley then why were so many on pills to get through the day

Unless you were a natural domestic goddess I think for most women in the 50s and 60s it was a depressing and sad life.

As for taking a little job in the evening. Firstly what sort of job would that be? And secondly only if their husbands allowed it.

I am taking you weren’t around in that era.

No one can describe the boredom of cleaning, food shopping, cooking and childcare everyday for years and years.

Anyway, no worries, we lost the appeal anyway and we'll all be dead in a few years so won't be bothering anyone.

Might come back and haunt a few people though

@VinylDetective that's not totally true. My dad always helped with housework. He cooked every evening for me and my 2 siblings and then washed up etc although once we were older we did the washing up etc.

He also hoovered, hung washing out and I am sure did other things that I have forgotten about

[quote lynsey91]**@VinylDetective that's not totally true. My dad always helped with housework. He cooked every evening for me and my 2 siblings and then washed up etc although once we were older we did the washing up etc.

He also hoovered, hung washing out and I am sure did other things that I have forgotten about[/quote]
He was the exception then. My dad struggled to make a cup of tea and I don’t think he ever changed a nappy.

Dear God my dad couldn't cook. I think if my mum had asked him to wash up or iron or something he would have divorced her. Once he got home from work he did fuck all. And that's the way life was in the 70s. Not even the 50s. And my mum worked full time. Childcare was various family members until at around age 7 or 8 I had a key and had to go straight home and stay there until a parent came home. Depending on the day I was alone between 15 minutes and 3 or 4 hours. This was normal.

Maybe my dad was an exception but it certainly made me think it was normal for men to help out.

Luckily my DH has always done housework and we often argue about who is going to cook as we both love doing it!

DH's dad did nothing and would make snarky comments about DH helping. He once saw him hanging washing on the line and said "oh I'll buy you an apron for Christmas shall I". Mind you DH's mum was also funny about DH helping and told me I should be doing everything even though we were both working full time and I had a longer commute. She told me off because I didn't iron his socks and pants!

Iamthewombat.

I think all women and men should be able to retire at 60. Until you reach that age, you have no idea about how knackered you will feel

lynsey91

Definitely the exception

In my neighbourhood women waited with baited breath to see if their husband would come home straight from work on a Friday or Saturday night or drink the weekly wage away in the pub.

If in the pub, come Wednesday or Thursday there would be bread and jam for tea or they would be hiding from the Tally man behind the sofa.

Your mum was lucky.

Nowadays the msn wouldn't be there at all. He'd be long gone.

@Oliversmumsarmy yes my mum was, and still is, lucky. My dad is a lovely man. He has never really been a drinker and would definitely never have gone to a pub without my mum.

@Viviennemary not sure what you mean by that. Plenty of men stay in relationships. Certainly in my family there are very long happy marriages (all first marriages) and only 2 divorces. I am talking parents, siblings, aunts, uncles and cousins

I think all women and men should be able to retire at 60. Until you reach that age, you have no idea about how knackered you will feel

So your argument has changed now? It’s no longer about feminism (since that gambit has failed), it’s that you deserve to retire early at vast expense to the taxpayer because you’re just so tired?

How many men feel the same, do you think? Should retirement at 60 on full state pension be given to anyone who complains about feeling tired? How tired do you think the younger generations will be, when they have finished paying for all the tired people’s retirements, male and female?

Before anyone starts with “you hate older women” again, I’m 49.

The younger generation have always pad the pension of the older generation.

eg when pensions first came in those who first claimed it hadn't paid anything!

Each subsequent year of retirees is paid by those still working. That is the social contract.

I think it is really sad that so many young people genuinely dont seem to understand how the system works.

Hundreds of people pay NI and never us the National Health. they dont stand around moaning that it's unfair.

I am not sure any young people actually say these things but there seems to be a strand of commentators, particularly in MSM, going on about how unfair the system is to them.

There are two different issues. One is how the Government bought in the increase in retirement age for women. The second is whether the idea that everyone should work until they are nearly 70 is actually workable.

There needs to be a far wider discussion about work in an increasingly technologically driven world.

Citizen's income may be the solution. A four day week may be the solution.

The Pension system and the NHS were one of the best achievements of UK politics in the 20th Century. Although as we all know they dont work all of the time.

Finger pointing is getting anyone anywhere.

After Covid - if there ever is such a time - there may have to be a large number of social changes.

IMO the way it was done was unfair. Should have been phased in.

Also I cannot see where it benefitted anyone to have the ages 'equalled'. Yeah, if they would lower the mens to the same as the womens, that would be a win for sure. But, all that happened was men stayed the same and women lost out, but this is a great thing?! Seems a bit petty to me tbh.

I bet it was assued that the mens would be lowered, but it was never ever going to happen that way in reality..of course not!

That said, the pension ages confused me a bit for the plain fact that men die younger. So, if anything, it should have been men getting it earlier than women? As they were not going to (averagely of course) get as much out of it. Theres probably more to it that I don't understand though, haven't done much reading on the topic..especially given I am almost psitive by the time I am near retirement age, the pension wont exist at all and we will have to work til we drop.

Men don't die younger - or not much younger now because they no longer smoke.

I think part of the problem was the staggered age increase - so if you were a 1953 birthday - you only had a couple of years to wait past your sixtieth, whist I, 1954, have had to wait until i'm 66. So 6 years. That would be a long time on job seekers. I am probably at the higher end of the birth years. But seems I was the most stuffed. I hadn't realised til now.

Naturally you will be more annoyed the longer you have to wait, so some with a long wait are outraged, but others are resigned as only had a year or two longer.

That might explain the varied responses.

The younger generation have always pad the pension of the older generation.

Yes, but the WASPI women and the ‘Back to 60’ campaigners want those younger people to pay for their pensions - and theirs alone - to be backdated to 60. Which will be very expensive; acceding to the WASPI women’s demands, in isolation, will cost an estimated £30 billion plus.

Those young people won’t be able to retire until they are almost 70. There are fewer of them, compared to the number of pensioners. They can’t be expected to shoulder the financial burden of a longer retirement for a growing group of pensioners. That would be a pretty unfair variation to the social contract, don’t you think?

This is where the money would have to come from: general taxation on younger people. These are your children and nieces and nephews.

I think it is really sad that so many young people genuinely dont seem to understand how the system works.

On the contrary, I’d say that they understand very well how it works, can see quite clearly that what you are asking them to pay for is unfair, and think, with justification, that you are being unreasonable.

[quote lynsey91]**@Viviennemary I would think a lot of families could manage on 1 wage if they didn't all want so much.

Most of the families I know run 2 cars, both have the most up to date mobile phone, have Sky tv, netflix, have a couple of holidays a year (at least 1 abroad). Quite a lot of them smoke (almost all the ones under about 35 do), drink quite a lot.

Oh and all that struggling with housework in the evenings! What with washing machines, tumble dryers, dishwashers etc?

My mum didn't even have a washing machine when I was young. Nor did my parents expect to have everything new - carpets, furniture etc unlike most couples today[/quote]
Boom, and there we have it.
I had a lot of sympathy for your arguments lynsey91 but you have just blown it. You really are only interested in that small cohort of women.
I was born mid sixties. Growing up, I had always thought I would retire at 60 but the goal posts moved, I contributed to a local government pension which was defined (so relating to final salary) but the goal posts moved (average salary, retire later, pay more), then the SPA changed again so that I retire at 67.
I don't think it is fair tbh, I work hard and have made 39 years of NI contributions but still have to carry on making them for the next twelve years until I can collect my SPA. And guess what, now there are rumblings about pensioners paying NI on their pensions - goal posts moving again.
There really were a few lucky 'boomers' (hate that fucking word) like my mil born in the forties. Retired at 60 but carried on working in consultancy role, no NI conts - told us that she had never been so well off.

But your campaign neglects women like me and those born after me who will pay for it.
It is worse for my daughter in her early twenties - lord knows when she will be able to even get a job when she graduates let alone retire.
Your campaign is divisive.

Wordwoman- yes it is.

In the 5th richest country in the world, everyone should be able to retire at 60.

I didn’t know about the NI thing on pensions.

So I’ve paid enough NI to get my pension now. But l will still have to pay more of it when l get it.

NI was devised as a social contract between the young and the old. The younger supported the older until the young became old, ad infinitum.

I remember this conversation with someone years ago in MB. They demanded to see ‘evidence’ of this contract😂l told them to read up on the birth of the welfare state.

Iamthewombat-Fuck off.

It’s not just ‘tiredness’ I’m ill. But l have to keep working.

I’m 60 and have been a teacher for 30 years. I worked in the Civil Service from 18-24, when I had my 1st child. I paid into my CS pension but I had to leave instead of returning from maternity leave (6 weeks full pay, 6 weeks statutory) as I ended up with PND and was sectioned for 3 months. Luckily I managed to train as a teacher whilst my child was very small and started teaching once she started school.
Whilst in hospital, my CS pension contributions were returned to me as I left before I was 25 and this was apparently standard procedure. My dh had to use this money to pay for childcare as I was too ill to look after my baby. I left him when I was 30 due to DV. I got no maintenance off him, no share of his pension as it was 6 months before that became law, and it took him 5 years to give me my share of the equity in our house that I’d paid the deposit for!
I have always worked in challenging schools with children with significant SEMH needs, its absolutely draining, both physically and mentally. By the time I was 55 I was falling to pieces with the stress of it all. I have now retired and taken a hit financially so have downsized and reduced my outgoings to the bare bones. MY CS pension would have helped by adding an additional 5 years contributions to my TP had I not been screwed over that too. I now have arthritis in my hands and knees, so struggle to write some days, and cant walk very well.
Combined with all of this, I've spent the last 5 years helping to look after my MIL, who died in January, and am now doing the same with my own mother, who’s got the beginnings of Alzheimer’s.
Women are still the main carers and get well and truly screwed over time and time again. So, OP, I’m sure in your perfect little world you think you’ll be absolutely ok working til you’re 68. Only time will tell.

The whole increase of retirement age is wrong - what should have happened is men’s retirement age should have been brought down, with the equal RA being 63. Expecting people to continue working when they may not be able to do so easily is false economy for the population. People working for longer means fewer jobs are available for those coming into the workforce in their teens or 20s. Older people generally earn much more than new starters - I know I was paid £20k more than a new teacher! So it costs businesses more. I had to have time off for surgery, and had a reduced timetable to allow for my illness.
This whole debate is not about women not wanting to work as long as men, its about everyone being treated fairly and with dignity.

^ this.

I’m a teacher and have become ill. This isn’t about men v women. This is about a significant amount of people becoming too ill to work until 67.

I think in the distant future, this will be seen as laughable.

Younger people are being denied the opportunity for work whilst older people are being forced to work longer. This is just wrong. The focus should be on getting more opportunities in place for the younger end.

I went shopping with ds now 26 about 3 years ago. Every shop we walked into he knew an assistant. When l asked him why this was he said’ young people are just the bitches of society doing the shit jobs no one else wants to do’

And this is what needs addressing, not forcing people who are too ill to work to keep going.

@Viviennemary

Nowadays the msn wouldn't be there at all. He'd be long gone.

And then the woman would still be doing it all.