1950s women "Fight Back Rally"

So as a Waspie I was in favour of raising the age, though not in one huge leap and I actually don’t think we were given adequate notice. Yes, on the whole statistically men do have a slightly lower life expectancy, however many of us born in the fifties raised our families as well as worked and though men did help more and tried to be “modern” most women actually still did far more in the home as well as organising the children, I worked full time throughout four children (part of this as a single Mum) and then prior to retirement also cared for my Mum for 7 years til she passed away last year when I was able to take “early retirement” at 64. I say good luck to rallying, as for disruption, we’ll I’m sure men were highly disrupted by our suffragettes and had they given up we’d not have the freedoms to vote etc that we all now enjoy. 😊 Have a lovely weekend one and all

Calendargirl

^I think we need to remember women weren’t even allowed to open their own bank accounts until 1975^

Well, I opened one when I started work, back in 1969. A proper current account.

Had a Trustee Savings deposit account in my own name before then.

That's right, Calendargirl, of course we did.
There were thousands of women who weren't married - of course they had bank accounts.

I had had a Post Office account since I was a child in my own name (not a current account) then opened a current account in about 1963.

Yes I was told about the rise but only after it was to late to make up my contributions so consiqentley I dont get a full pension but originally after i had a pension review i was told I would be ok then just a few years later the age changed not once but three times just didnt stand a chance to make it up

It's not been well done - but not much is, it seems. And although a rally won't change things it's still important to protest. Showing feelings/opinions is bound to have some effect on those in power who want to stay there

I had zero notification

I had zero notification and found the information by accident myself

I hope everyone who goes has a good time and that the weather holds. Solidarity, sisters!

I hope the rally goes well, CrafterinCumbria. I won’t be at this one, but I’ve travelled down for three WASPI rallies and found there was something very cathartic about a bit of chanting and fist waving. It was heartening to have so many MPs come out and support us, as well as others such as Joan Bakewell and Martin Lewis. Who’s organising this one?

I should have added that my hubby is going also. All men and women welcome. 💐

I know very little about the old pension as compared to the new, but one inequality is likely to come in when people have an old pension and an occupational one that takes them over the benefits threshold, so compared to someone on old pension alone may be worse off. People on pension credit get all sorts of things free that have to be paid for by those who have bought an occupational pension. That is another anomaly that is difficult to unpick without disadvantaging pensioners who claim benefits, particularly as many on pension credit haven’t paid in at all.

freyja and maddyone - 1 was born in August 1953 and was put on the new state pension (SP), which I could claim from 6 November 2017 when I was 64.
I had thought that the old SP was more generous but if that's not correct I am pleased.
I bought just one year of missing NI contributions to increase my SP as I was told that under new rules I couldn't buy any more than that. I was also told that I would be worse off doing that unless I lived another 17 years.
I knew from my husband who is older than me that you have to claim the SP, it won't be paid to you automatically. He chose to defer claiming for 5 years because he would get the old SP which is much more generous if you defer claiming it.
Call me a cynic but I think the changes in the age when people could claim SP was more about saving the Government money than equality. DWP has a shocking record of dealing with pension entitlements - look at all the women who received less because they didn't know they had to claim a higher a.ount because of a rule change in 1982. And that was picked up on by an ex-pensions minister as the Government either didn't know or had kept quiet about it.
They make these things so complicated so no wonder many don't understand their entitlements.

maddyone

Glorianny

Even I (and I'm old enough to have got my pension at 60) know that this is not about the raising of the pension age, but about the amount of notice given and the inaccuracies in the notices sent out. Some women received two or three different dates for the age they would qualify for their pension. Mostly the corrections involved it being later, not earlier. It is damn difficult to manage when you expect your pension at one age, only to find you won't get it until 3 years later.

You’re right Glorianny I was given a state pension age, it was after 60 but forget exactly when, and then later I was given a different and later state pension age. I also missed out on the new state pension by three weeks, whilst my dear friend, three months younger than me, is on the new pension. I was contracted out anyway and so didn’t lose as much as some with this anomaly, but still was £10 a week worse off from the beginning and I think it’s more now. This is also a huge inequality, to give one set of pensioners a larger state pension merely by an accident of birth is highly immoral in my opinion.

But those receiving the new state pension are, on the whole, the ones who have had to work longer and have paid more. What's unfair about that? In any case, people on the old state pension who need a top up can apply for Pension Credit, which most people on the new state pension can't.

There are a handful of anomalies, which should be sorted, but I wish people would get their facts straight.

freya you should be eligible for the new pension, not the old one, as the cut off date was 6th April and your birthday wasn’t until July. My friend, born in June, is on the new, higher amount, and so should you be. You also did not need to wait till you were 65 if you were born in 1953, as I was, you should have received your state pension round about your 63rd birthday. Please look into this, it very much sounds as if you are owed money from the pensions department.

Glorianny

Even I (and I'm old enough to have got my pension at 60) know that this is not about the raising of the pension age, but about the amount of notice given and the inaccuracies in the notices sent out. Some women received two or three different dates for the age they would qualify for their pension. Mostly the corrections involved it being later, not earlier. It is damn difficult to manage when you expect your pension at one age, only to find you won't get it until 3 years later.

You’re right Glorianny I was given a state pension age, it was after 60 but forget exactly when, and then later I was given a different and later state pension age. I also missed out on the new state pension by three weeks, whilst my dear friend, three months younger than me, is on the new pension. I was contracted out anyway and so didn’t lose as much as some with this anomaly, but still was £10 a week worse off from the beginning and I think it’s more now. This is also a huge inequality, to give one set of pensioners a larger state pension merely by an accident of birth is highly immoral in my opinion.

I am a waspi, born in the July of 1953, cut off date was April 1953.

I had no letter telling me that I couldn't get my pension until I was 65. Consequently, my job come to an end in July 2018 because I was 60 and an old age pensioner. I did not worry as I would receive my pension.

It was only after my 60th birthday and no pension arrived that my husband and I started to ask questions, such as do you have to apply for a pension or is it automatic. This may sound strange as we did not live in another country or on another planet but I was not informed.
I knew that ignorance is no defence and it meant that I had no income and had to rely total on my husband's pension for another 5 years, even though I had worked 30 years for my pension. To add insult to injury it is the old basic pension.

Whilst working I checked that my pension was up to date and that I did qualify by working 30 years. I asked the pension office if I could top up, to get the newer pension as I was still working but was told no. At no time did they tell me the pension age had changed.

In real terms this meant the government stole £30,000 from me and I can not get back . So I may not be at the rally in person but I will be there in spirit. I will not be voting for this lying , cheating corrupt party in a million years.

Hobbs1

I chose to retire at 60 as I had a decent workplace pension that I could take and after working full time for 45 years thought I’d have more than enough national insurance contributions for my state pension. I then applied for my state pension back in July 2022 in readiness for my 66th birthday in Sept. I had 45 years full National insurance contributions, but because I chose to retire at 60, I lost out on the new state pension, and my state pension is about £130 less as according to the DWP, I am 6 years short on my contributions. You only need 35 years, I have 45 so how does that work out 🤔.
However my friend who never worked full time from the age of 21, then only went part time for the last 20 years gets the full new state pension. A gross unfairness in my opinion to all of us who had to work full time to pay mortgages etc.
To add insult to injury, I also pay tax on my pension…….

That was nothing to do with your retirement at 60. It was because you had an occupational pension and had been "opted out". Even now, you could buy back some lost years, but you'd have to consider your personal circumstances to calculate whether it's worth it.

I agree totally with Doodledog and Stoneof Destiny and I am shocked to read the 'I knew, so everyone knew' attitudes of some. I know so many people both men and women who never reached pensionable age and I hope if the WASPI women ever get their compensation, the women who don't think they deserve it, will donate their payout to their less well off 'sisters'. By the way nobody mentions the toll that childbirth has had on some women's bodies, mine included, where is the equality there? It's no wonder that some of the younger generation think all baby boomers are over privileged. I would tend to agree if I was one of them reading this thread.

Germanshepherdsmum

The retirement age had to be raised given the increasing size of the ageing population and dwindling birth rate. I always thought it inequitable that a woman could retire at 60 but a man, with a shorter expected lifespan, had to wait until 65.

Female life expectancy in the most deprived ten per cent of areas has actually been falling since 2011-13. lt, Between 2019 and 2020, life expectancy for men and women in the North West fell by 1.6 and 1.2 years, respectively. This compares with a reduction in life expectancy of 1.3 years for men and 0.9 years for women across the country as a whole.

ageing-better.org.uk

janipans

I don't mind the pension age increasing but what I object to is the fact that it wasn't brought in gradually. A sudden 5 year hike was always bound to upset people.

When I first started work and contributing to my pension it was on the understanding that at the age of 60, I could retire and reap the benefit. Moving the goalposts a little, I could live with, but 5 years in 1 go is just too much.

If there was a class action to sue the government for breach of contract, I would happily join in, but a rally? No thank you! I don't think a rally will bring about any changes other than, as someone said earlier, annoying ordinary people in the area who just want to get to/from work!

But there wasn't a sudden 5 year hike.

I agree with you Elaine. However, WASPI chose to focus on a relatively small group of women and there has been so much misinformation spouted. If they had ever opted to campaign for fairer pensions for all, I could have supported them

There are quite a few articles around which highlight the gender inequality in pensions, which is still far from being addressed.
Many women are main care givers and take breaks from work or work part-time due to childcare responsibilities. Many women did not know about being able to get NI credits while raising children ( and the child benefit book had to be in their name as far as I know) and that there can also be credits for grandparents looking after grandchildren.

There are many articles about this. here are a couple.
www.pensionsage.com/pa/Retiring-women-139-000-worse-off-tha-n-male-counterparts.php
www.unbiased.co.uk/news/financial-adviser/women-have-30-per-cent-less-workplace-pension
One other comment - There are clearly many jobs which are physically exhausting and both men and women would struggle to continue doing them into their mid to late sixties. I was in a job, however, which was not physically demanding but was very mentally tiring. I could not put in the hours of concentrating, analysing complex issues, preparing reports, and responding to complaints which I did before I retired. I do not have the mental stamina any more. I've been a voluntary treasurer and coordinator for things since I retired, but that is quite different.
It is not right that people should be forced to try to work full time in exhausting jobs in their late sixties or even into their seventies, simply to make ends meet. It also leaves very little energy for family life, hobbies and generally looking after our own wellbeing.

I don't mind the pension age increasing but what I object to is the fact that it wasn't brought in gradually. A sudden 5 year hike was always bound to upset people.

When I first started work and contributing to my pension it was on the understanding that at the age of 60, I could retire and reap the benefit. Moving the goalposts a little, I could live with, but 5 years in 1 go is just too much.

If there was a class action to sue the government for breach of contract, I would happily join in, but a rally? No thank you! I don't think a rally will bring about any changes other than, as someone said earlier, annoying ordinary people in the area who just want to get to/from work!

Most women saw little equality (in pay and/or promotion) for 40+ years of their working life, but apparently equalizing pension ages at the end of their working lives is equality. Many women of the 1950s generation were not allowed to join works pension schemes before 1975
The notion that women would not be informed by letter about a 6 year change, while men were personally informed is beyond parody
It breaks my heart to hear of women losing their health and possibly their homes, while some of the sisterhood say 'Well I knew all about it'. Personally in the mid-90s I never read a paper or regularly watched The News, as I was responsible for 2 kids and had a demanding full-time job
Lastly it was men who encouraged women's retirement age being reduced in 1940
www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/statepensionage/SPA_history.htm

Agree - and you can add to that the denial of promotion to so many women who had equal or even superior qualifications to the men.

The so called '6 year warning' was grossly unfair as people cannot suddenly change significant retirement planning provision at such short notice. It would be like paying into an insurance scheme all your life to support you in ill health and old age only to find out the terms you signed up to and paid for decades previously suddenly changed - and your medical needs were no longer covered.

It's unjust and unfair.

Doodlebug. I have two smallish work pensions. I was compulsory opted out of Serps in both jobs. When I began to collect these pensions I discovered one is non incremental. I know I benefitted at the time, but can't help feeling in the long run, particularly with the non incremental pension, that I have lost out. Especially as being opted out means I don't get the full state pension despite having above the required number of years.

I was 54 when they changed my retirement age to 63 then at 58 it went up to 66. I’ve never received official notification, I found out by checking the government website.
Luckily for me I had an office job and can fund myself for 3 years. Many have been caused real hardship by these changes, especially those with manual jobs or health problems.
WASPI will probably never win but good on them for fighting on our behalf.