JL1985
Striker
As soon as men start giving birth, you might have a claim.
WASPI Women Report
- Thread starter Hettonlass
- Start date
mickb2112
Striker
Great point - all that technology was going to free us from laborious work - what happened??
ontap
Striker
You must be an orphan are you ?
This shit happens all the time. Bus drivers striking, after years of declining wages, get the blame for buses not running on time. Striking nurses and doctors get the blame for problems in the NHS. Teachers and "wokeism" get the blame for problems in education.
Last edited:
mickb2112
Striker
Not sure how that`s relevant as men die on average 5 years or so sooner. Surely it`s just a question of men and women should be able to retire at the same age? How do the different retirement ages fit in with sex discrimination legislation??
JL1985
Striker
It's one of the main reasons women have a lower retirement age. Caring responsibilities often mean women withdraw from the labour market completely, these interruptions to employment have a huge impact on their pension contributions.
Invictus
Winger
Not really, from 1978 women looking after children got Home Responsibilities protection which paid the NI for their pensions.
Most of the women effected by the pension change would have likely had HRP payments if they left work for childcare reasons.
General Zod
Striker
Are you saying they pay less into their pension contribution but should still retire earlier than men?
JL1985
Striker
I'm stating one of the facts why the retirement age is lower for women, nothing to do with my personal opinions.
General Zod
Striker
I Must be having a slow day but I dont understand the logic - if you've had more gaps from the labour market I dont get why you should retire earlier. If anything it should be later, but I'm happy enough for it to be the same age.
Its also a sweeping generalisation to say all women are carers so should retire early (not saying this is your personal opinion). Not all women have kids or are carers. If that is the rationale the law shouldnt have been gender specific.
All of this should have been clearly marked out when the equalities act came in in the early 70s with clearly marked out phasing in and tapering of retirement ages for in the future so that eventually they'd have been the same age
gegsongegsonlegs
Midfield
Yet here you are.
Fwiw I believe they people affected should be compensated. It was, at that time, what was due to them. My mother was affected by the change and due to redundancy at 59 was without an income until 66. Struggled to get alternative employment in her profession which I’ve no doubt was an age thing. My old man worked to 66 to keep them both. They’re not exactly reeking of money.
Scoobies-Mate
Goalkeeper
I can only speak for what I saw at home and for the folks trying to compare back then (Waspi Women) with now, don’t; there’s zero comparison.
For many women born 1940 to say 1960 they were stay at home mams caring for kids & sick relatives including the husbands sick relatives.
Some had part time jobs and drifted between them never having the opportunity to set up a proper private pension.
We had little as kids but my Dad worked hard and came home to a skimmering home, home cooked grub and well behaved kids.
He had no idea where the Bissel was kept and his only interaction with the poss-tub, later to become a twin tub, was when the wringer jammed or the fuse blew.
My Mam cleaned and cooked for her parents and my Dads parents cos he was an only child.
Money doesn’t buy that love and devotion; as can clearly be seen by the mess some of our care homes are in. I didn’t know of anyone in a care home as a kid. All relatives were looked after by mams like mine.
And when my Dad retired she kept going.
Baby sitting, cleaning, school run, cooking, mending, caring. And all paid for with gratitude not contributions to pension pots.
Dad went fishing and his bait box was still full of home cooked, his clothes clean and his home immaculate and comfy.
If those lasses are due more it should be paid.
We’re ignoring our own and fawning over blow ins.
For many women born 1940 to say 1960 they were stay at home mams caring for kids & sick relatives including the husbands sick relatives.
Some had part time jobs and drifted between them never having the opportunity to set up a proper private pension.
We had little as kids but my Dad worked hard and came home to a skimmering home, home cooked grub and well behaved kids.
He had no idea where the Bissel was kept and his only interaction with the poss-tub, later to become a twin tub, was when the wringer jammed or the fuse blew.
My Mam cleaned and cooked for her parents and my Dads parents cos he was an only child.
Money doesn’t buy that love and devotion; as can clearly be seen by the mess some of our care homes are in. I didn’t know of anyone in a care home as a kid. All relatives were looked after by mams like mine.
And when my Dad retired she kept going.
Baby sitting, cleaning, school run, cooking, mending, caring. And all paid for with gratitude not contributions to pension pots.
Dad went fishing and his bait box was still full of home cooked, his clothes clean and his home immaculate and comfy.
If those lasses are due more it should be paid.
We’re ignoring our own and fawning over blow ins.
Man About Town
Winger
Oh boo hoo, they've earned it. If you can't respect or look after your elders then you deserve sweet fa.
Ageing Grey Mackem
Striker
You can always fuck off somewhere else you know, there is an option.
If the crack about some demographic ruining the country for future generations was a Brexit reference, plenty of non-pensioners voted for that shambles too. Idiocy spans generations mate.
Roker Mackem
Striker
Did the women who didn't have kids have to retire at 65?
High Entropy
Midfield
Cheeky bassads got their pension five years earlier than the boys !
Butcher's Coat
Striker
They deserve every penny of compensation.
They were left high and dry thanks to the changes ( from the 1995 Pensions Act) - getting implemented by the DWP - and it was imposed on them with lack of appropriate notification by the DWP.
They were left high and dry thanks to the changes ( from the 1995 Pensions Act) - getting implemented by the DWP - and it was imposed on them with lack of appropriate notification by the DWP.
Some men have suffered inadvertently.
My Dad was five years older than my Mam and they planned on retiring together at 65 and 60. Mam had to work longer to get her state pension and Dad was bored being in the house on his own, so he got a job delivering prescriptions for a chemist until Mam was of state pension age.
On their first holiday abroad after retiring, he had a heart attack and a stroke which left him paralysed down one side. All their retirement plans went out the window and Mam spent the next five years caring for my Dad instead.
If they'd been able to retire as they planned to, Dad would have had some time to enjoy retirement before he took ill.
My Dad was five years older than my Mam and they planned on retiring together at 65 and 60. Mam had to work longer to get her state pension and Dad was bored being in the house on his own, so he got a job delivering prescriptions for a chemist until Mam was of state pension age.
On their first holiday abroad after retiring, he had a heart attack and a stroke which left him paralysed down one side. All their retirement plans went out the window and Mam spent the next five years caring for my Dad instead.
If they'd been able to retire as they planned to, Dad would have had some time to enjoy retirement before he took ill.
Dash riprock
Central Defender
And thats what the low level of compensation (£1-3k) is about as far as i understand
People think the debate is 60 v 65, its compensation for maladministration, specifically post 2010 i think . The age change was a done deal .
Last edited:
