Back to 60/Waspi Women

On the issue of pensions for men and women being equalised. I agree, that is appropriate eventually. However, it is not just to increase the pension age for those of us born at a time when, in at least the first 10 years of our working life, we were paid a fraction of what men were paid for equivalent work, and many well paid job had a glass wall around them excluding women! We lost enough money then, it’s only fair that we should be compensated by receiving our pension earlier than men, especially since the powers that be didn’t bother to write to those effected. After all, a computer could easily have spit out the National
Insurance numbers of everyone effected. Remember, they managed to send a leaflet to every household about the Brexit referendum, but nothing to the homes of women for whom such a momentous decision was being made.

The judicial review was brought by Back to 60, Stella14, not WASPI.

Im one of these women. Born in 1955. I think it was long overdue to equalise the ages at which men and women get their pensions. But I do think the process should have been much more gradual in order to give women more time to plan their finances, especially as many women of our generation, unlike many younger women today, dont have their own savings or private pensions. But I really don't think we are going to get any satisfaction from the government because it would simply cost too much to compensate us all.

The judicial review has put a few things on hold, Crazygran. I’m a paid up member of the WASPI group (been to the demos, lobbied and written to my MP, got the sash etc), and had gone through the whole longwinded process of formal complaints recommended by WASPI’s legal people. I’d just had confirmation after four (five?) letters that my complaint was going to the Independent Case Examiner when the judicial review was announced and it was immediately blocked. They’d said they needed 6 months to review my case, but couldn’t get that news to me fast enough.

We’ve no guarantee our cases will be re-opened but I’m still wishing Back to 60 well. If they’re successful I won’t need to push for it!

Fortunately, it’s not up to the Tory Government any longer. The high court rules on the case taken by two WASPI women. The excellent Michael Mansfield is the QC arguing the case. The Court’s ruling is due in two-weeks. If the Government loses, it will of course use large amounts of tax payers money appealing. I think, and hope the case is a strong one, since the Government did not ensure that the women concerned were properly informed. Therefore, they didn’t have the opportunity to effectively plan for the change.

I am 62, thankfully have been able to retire on my occupational pension and have to wait until I'm 66 for the SP. I never received any notification from the DWP, have never seen that advert, because I have never regularly taken a newspaper. I only heard by word of mouth about the change of date, and only latterly through social media such as this forum. Likewise I only learned of the change of goalposts from age 65 to 66 through word of mouth. Never mind, perhaps we should be pleased to support the lazy, grasping workshy waste-of-spaces sitting in parliament, especially those captured fast asleep, and being paid exorbitant salaries and expenses for doing so.

According to a meeting I went to in Wales if the Back to 60 group hadn’t gone to court something could have been sorted with a private members bill in parliament but that can’t go ahead now due to it being sub juricy.
No point in fighting it now as nothing will happen !

We are waiting for the result of the Judicial Review - hoping that as the recent appeals by the Judges, Fire Service and Civil Service have all been upheld and the Government is going to have to restore their pension rights ours will follow the same pattern. Thousands of us who have been affected by the six year increase in our pension age have said we had no notice of this, the DWP is unable to produce evidence that we were informed. In fact, several internal reports by the DWP have been discovered under FOI requests that show the DWP knew most women were unaware of the huge hike in our state pension age but did nothing about it. Women in my age group (1955) did not have the opportunity to join company pension schemes so we have been discriminated against on that basis alone. I was told I did not need to have the same salary as my colleague (who was male and doing precisely the same work as me) as my husband would make up the difference. I also had to take unpaid maternity leave when I had my children, I was the principal carer when they were ill and needed attention and many of us were the carers for older relatives too. Men, in general, did and do not have these extra responsibilities that, sadly, impact a woman's ability to earn the same sort of income as man would. We don't have true equality today - women, even those in the public eye, still receive a lower salary than their male colleagues. There have been many reports on the inequality women still face...

I reckon the government owe me £20,000 in lost pension. It will be a lot more in other women's cases , I'm sure. Pensions ages should have been set up as equal in the first place.

Another little known fact for those of us who receive or are about to receive the SP is that they have also pulled out the pension payment date by further months. My friend is a month younger than me being born in Mar 54 and rang the DWP to find out why she wasn't going to get hers until Jul this year. She was told that they were extending the dates over this year so that by the end of the year everyone will be 66 when they get it. Another saving to the government. Another friend born Jul 54 won't get hers until next Jun and yet someone else born Oct 53 received hers in Jul 2018 at 64y 8m.

If your in-laws died decades ago, JenniferEccles, they could conceivably have heard about the first hike to our pensions, brought in by the 1995 State Pension Act (24 years ago), but they certainly didn't know about the acceleration to that which was announced 8 years ago. Many of us lost another 18 months when that came in in 2011.

If we'd all known about the issue and kicked up a stink back in the 90s, perhaps George Ruddy Osborne wouldn't have got away with the 2011 hike. He famously boasted to an international forum that this was one of the least controversial things his government did, and one that probably saved more money than anything else. I'm sure he's very proud of himself.

I hope you get the full pension, paddyann, after the long wait. Of course HM Government played another blinder when introducing the Universal State Pension, when they decided that any years in which we had opted out of the state pension (as we were advised to do back in the 80s and 90s) would no longer count towards the basic pension, as they had done previously. Oh, and nor do years worked before the age of 18, when of course many of our age group started work at 15.

Maggiemaybe thanks for sharing that so called ad. What an insult to us (I'm one of the '54 "losers").

I can't read the text but wonder if the dogs are female and whether the originators of the image had a laugh at their hidden insult.

There may have been talk decades ago, but that's all it was, talk. Nothing was set in stone in any way shape or form to tell those women affected (myself included) that they would have to wait a long time before they would receive a state pension.

The second payment will be the full amount

Maggie I was born in March 1954 I got notice this morning that my pension will start in October this year ..with a half payment of £300 and odd .I've worked since 1969 ,always paid the "big" stamp ,didn't take maternity leave or pay so they've had afull 50 years + from me

JenniferEccles I for one knew nothing about it until I was 59.

People often say they had very little notice about this but is that really true?
I remember decades ago that there was talk about raising women’s state pension age .
I even remember my in-laws talking about it and they have been dead for decades.

I have my pension now after working an extra 4 years and 8 months for it. I was ill and off work for 10 months when I was 62 and was lucky my work paid me but thousands of people suffer financial its just so unjust. I do agree that women should work the same as men . I have a friend who is 6 weeks younger than me and had to wait an extra 8 months longer than me. just crazy.

Thank you Day 6 and others here who are pointing out the pitfalls of extending the pension age with little or no warning, rapidly accelerating the changes in 2015, and failing to allow for even a fraction of the £50,000 a head savings to be used to help those of us who are struggling now (one of the 52-55 cohort here). I suspect our savings money is now nestling in the chancellor's post Brexit war chest - a compulsory gift that the government won't want to return. And I agree that they think the protests will all disappear once we do finally receive our pensions. It's quite disgraceful and every week now I meet more women whose lives have been made poorer and more difficult.

Although I have no issue with the equalisation of pension ages for men and women, the way it was implemented is disgraceful. Women born one year apart ended up with retirement dates that were 2.5 years apart, so if you were born on 5 March 1953 you could retire at 62y 10m, if you were born on 5 March 1954, you'd have to wait till you were 65y 4m. I'm one of the first to fall into the 66 bracket. And the lack of notice given!

This is one of the adverts the Government placed in newspapers in 2001 to inform us of the changes. Apparently there's some small print underneath inviting us to apply for an information pack. The adverts won awards - well, so did our local glass-covered bus station. It's red hot in summer and freezing cold in winter, but hey, it looks pretty.

As former pensions minister Ros Altman says:

How exactly would the Government expect a woman to have a clue that an advert where two dogs are talking to each other has anything to do with her, let alone that it is about her state pension? Any adverts should have had text in big red letters saying: 'Warning: if you are a woman and you think you will get your state pension at age 60, think again'.

nothing will change under a tory government ,trust me .They have no interest in the ordinary pensioner only the ones who vote tory an dmainly they all have decent private pensions so losing £40,000 wont affect them !

I think Amber Rudd was commenting on how things are now, with Eeyore Hammond in charge of the purse strings. Things are about to change.

Hopefully yours,
One of the 1954 shafted

I'm one of the women affected although I'm one of the lucky ones who was in work until just 5 months before my pension started last month. There are thousands who have had to give up work due to ill health, caring for relatives or simply due to employment issues. We have lost out on around £40k worth of pension and whilst I completely agree the pension age needed to change the way it was implemented to our age group was grossly unfair. I've always been sceptical however that there would be a payout of any kind so this news is no great surprise. I hope I'm wrong.

meanwhile the H of Lords wants to take the "free" license away and "free" bus passes amongst other "benefits" while they claim £300 a DAY and huge expenses for mainly sleeping in the chamber !! Couldn't make it up could you!!

I agree Day6 - it will drift along until it eventually peters out without having recompensed any of the women who, like your friend, could really be doing with it now.