Men’s final salary pensions nearly double women’s at state pension age

[IwantToRetire]

Men’s DB (final salary) annual pensions are worth nearly twice the value of women’s, at £13,900 compared to £7,500 net per annum, while their DC (contribution) pensions are worth more than three times as much, at £90,000 compared to £28,500.

The findings come from a Department for Work and Pensions analysis of 7,802 adults aged 62 to 65 from the 1958 National Child Development Study, examining their preparation for retirement and overall pension adequacy.

Around 8 in 10 participants had some form of private pension, but women were more likely to rely heavily on the State Pension and less likely to meet a moderate Retirement Living Standard.

Meanwhile, nearly half, 47 per cent, of participants were expected to depend on the state pension for between 67 and 100 per cent of their retirement income. This group was more likely to include women, those with lower educational attainment, the self-employed and renters. Around half were also estimated not to have sufficient pension income to maintain their pre-retirement standard of living.

Continues https://corporate-adviser.com/mens-db-pensions-nearly-double-womens-at-state-pension-age/

So people in their 60s, 20 years ago when they were 40s the time when many of those women would be part-time, juggling kids, kids getting older into their 50s considering full-time again or considering a better roll but slightly further away as kids aren't so reliant on mum. But unable to get back into a final salary scheme.

Its dead easy to bang on about working full-time when you have tons of family support.

But if you have a 1hr commute in each direction kids in breakfast clubs (where such things exist) and afterschool. It makes it a really long day for kids, 8am-6pm and zero slack for the day the train is late. And zero time for them to do the things they'd like to do.

Women working longer into their late 60s means less opportunity for them to be active Granny's doing the wrap around care for DGC and getting them to clubs and things they want to do

All the women I know who haven't had kids will be equal with their male counterparts at retirement.

As often pointed out it's really a maternity pay gap not a sex pay gap.

And as is also pointed out on the relationships board often you can't tell which men will just totally refuse to step up and do their share of childcare tasks. In fact having children often traps women in abusive relationships.

It would help if the fecking government actually took father's pay at source to give to the women doing the unpaid labour of raising their children rather than just letting them getting away with opting out entirely. Or indeed made it easier to stop them pretending to have '50%" but then leave the children entirely unsupervised or in danger, resulting in the woman doing far more unpaid labour but not - even on paper - getting compensated for it.

Women also accept lower paid positions in order to have the flexibility to do the unpaid childcare they can't opt out of without a safeguarding referral / putting their children at risk or in care (where it is much more statistically likely they'll be abused).

I don't know how to resolve this when the majority of powerful people have never done their share of childcare or value it as a task even though also, generally, wittering on about how the mental health of children is at an all time low. I do notice that 'affluent neglect' has made it's way into the proposals for KCSIE, so that's good.

"All the women I know who haven't had kids will be equal with their male counterparts at retirement..."

I suspect that is generally the case.

If you looked at two equivalent people - one male the other female - with the same qualifications and the same experience in the same profession and with the same number of years in work, then they'd most likely both have broadly the same lifetime earnings and broadly the same annual salary at any given point in their careers.

That may not have been true before the 1980s but I think it has been true for the last 30 or more years.

"... As often pointed out it's [ie the difference between men and women in terms of lifetime earnings and pensions etc] really a maternity pay gap not a sex pay gap..."

I'd call it a caring parent pay gap. It arises because the mother seems to be the parent who predominantly decides - for whatever reason - to be the one to take a career break to look after the children.

There might be many reasons for this, but I suspect one of the main reasons is because that is what they want to do.

I also think people forget very quickly what it is like having dependent children. Because they don't become independent overnight its a slow change.

There is also the thing of many in power have the cash to pay for nannies and boarding schools that they are out of touch with the reality of racing back to afterschool clubs or even worse leaving work dash to nursery and then afterschool.

I worked full time nearly all my working life, expecting to retire at 60. But three and a half years were removed . So much for planning. Nothing is ever safe, except it seems the difference between men’s and women’s incomes and pensions.

Well I got made redundant after my first child. I don't think that was unrelated to my sex or maternal status, let's just say. My pay was slightly higher than DH just prior to getting pregnant.

I now earn about 15k less than I did then, over a decade ago. DH's salary has doubled (fortunately we have shared finances so obviously I, and our children, benefit from that). I now have a job where I'm overworked, underpaid where my working life is considerably less cushy than my previous professional higher paid job, despite dealing with much more meaningful human problems, but it fits around the school runs.

I love my kids, but I'd very much like to have a career equal to DH and I was more than capable of it. When he reached the pinnacle of his career and I told my Mum of his achievement she said 'that could have and should have been you'.

The problem of course is that family, children, unpaid labour, safeguarding, love isn't valued by our society. Only money is valued.

And to say it's a choice - for many it's not, not a free choice. I have an absolutely brilliant friend who runs her own business and is trying to grow it. Unfortunately her abusive ex keeps leaving her children in unsafe situations and she has to step in, rather hindering her ability to work and plan her work and grow her business (yes, he's using the children to continue to try and abuse her). One of her children has started refusing to go to her ex's house and begging her to stay with her, so the time he's supposedly looking after them he's not. So, she needs to spend time she can ill afford going back to argue about maintenance payments and access arrangements. Ultimately she puts the children first and he puts himself first and there is little to no support for her or reward for doing the right thing by those kids.

There definitely needs to be more protection for Women leaving abusive partners. Far to many women and children are let down by courts and men using kids to control women
.

Whilst I didn't, and don't, agree with the pension age being raised, I would point out that men always retired at 65 until recently and women 5 years earlier. Women tend to live longer than men. My dad died at 72,my husband didn't even get 1 year of state pension. He was 66 when he died. Not long is it, after a lifetime of work?

The reasoning for women retiring earlier than men was in the average couples men are older than the women. Safe the men folk waiting around until his wife retired.

Yes people are living longer, but are the fit?
We all want to think we'll be 80 something still independent etc but reality is many at 80 are in homes, needing carers or just not their any more.

@Needspaceforlego I do think many are fitter, but extreme old age brings more problems and, from what I’ve seen, is not desirable!

Isn’t this just a reflection of the differences during the working lives?

How would women be paid for that unpaid labour?

Where would that money come from?

And would women who do paid work also receive move from their unpaid labour.

A lot. Not just women - I think people forget the pension is one of the most important parts of the marital assets.

How could you realistically change that?

There was discrimination even when you paid into a pension. I worked for a while in a government job. Men could pay extra into their pensions to provide an ongoing "widow's pension" if they died before their wife. Women weren't permitted to unless they had a disabled husband who couldn't work.

@CastlesinSpain when was that?

I finished working there in 1984. I was about 30 then.

I have a local government pension so did my late husband. Whoever died first the survivor was awarded a pension.

How was that legal after the equal rights act in 1975.

Maybe because it was a voluntary option? Men didn't have to pay into it, they could choose to IIRC.

@JHound No divorce solicitor would let that slip by! House, pensions, cars - all assets in the mix. Someone I know insisted the jewellery he gave his wife was in the mix!

It’s no different for a father being at work and not seeing his DC’s during the day.
I went back to work full time when DT’s were six months old (normal maternity leave then). Financially I didn’t need to but wanted to continue with my career. - fully supported by DH.

I paid into my pension from starting work straight after Uni. My pension is now very healthy.

Depends if you use one / a good one. My brother lost out on half his wife’s pension. Stupidly.

@JHound Using one would have probably paid for itself!

Agreed. It becomes a dirty word but people need to take the emotion out of divorce settlements.