WASPI women can do one.

TheBigFella said:
Lots of political posts on the forum, with arguments going back and forth, so.....

as a general question, how many of you really think labour / starmer / reeves et al, are actually doing a good job ?
Click to expand...
They are trying to turn the economy round and focus on growth. The budget was all about filling the black hole and ending the strikes in the NHS and railways. I said at the time the budget would be inflationary and it is proving so. It is costing jobs and hitting working people through higher prices. It, so far, is looking very ill thought through.

The waspi women are not seen as important as dealing with the NHS, Ukraine, a possible war, ending strikes etc. I can’t argue with that. They clearly did and said everything they could to win power. The previous government did everything they could to make it a financial nightmare economically so it would be hard to govern. They were set up to fail by the tories as they kicked everything they could down the road and cut and run and did so knowingly.

Yes Starmer and his government are looking like Jordan North in the Thames, wet, out of their depth and struggling to keep afloat. However, we must not lose sight of the tory trap set. In my view it was always going to get worse before we see any green shoots. I can see why the waspi women are furious, but in truth how big a priority are they given the other more important matters to hand? The pending war with Russia has to be funded or we are all fecked.

До свидания - Do svidaniya
 
hewielewie said:
Sherlock you said that he had immature and condescending attitude to challenge and then you come out with that.
Click to expand...
He does.

If I’m wrong in what I said, perhaps you (or he) can provide a summary of the top 5 things he has achieved for the people in his ward?
 
dalefamily said:
I am a Waspi lady now 67.I finished teaching at 55 believing I would get my pension at 60 having received no notification that the years would increase to 65.Therefore all my forward planning went to pot as I had 5 extra years .I left work to care for my ageing mother.To add insult to injury I had done 34 years work so had enough NI payments in only for it then to go to 35 years.Letter did not go out as even MPs agreed they hadnt.I dont know where the 10 billion pounds comes from as the offer was to be £1000 to £3000.We never argued againstthe pension age for men and women to be the same it was just the non notificatioto us at the time.
Click to expand...
How can you say you never argued against it and you didn't know? Surely, it's one or the other.

The problem in this situation seems to be choosing to retire 5 years early, even if the SPA was 60, without doing any research into whether it was affordable.You weren't forced to retire and you weren't out of pocket because you could continue to work. This is exactly the sort of behaviour that doesn't deserve compensation and asking for people that have an SPA of at least 68 to pay compensation to people that chose to retire at 55 seems massively out of touch. Not to mention that even your teacher pension is far more generous than teachers following you allowing you to take full pension at 60 instead of 65 (or SPA).
 
Nano said:
How can you say you never argued against it and you didn't know? Surely, it's one or the other.
Click to expand...
Not the case though is it.

She might not have known about the change until it took effect, and then argued that the lack of notification wasn't acceptable, whilst still accepting that there should be an equalising of pension age.
 
I'll not embarrass sherlock with a reply, but I will say I was re-elected and during the last election, I gained the most votes of all the 6 candidates that put up for election.

I'll happily leave that as a comprehensive reply to sherlock.

It's called democracy.
 
TheLodger said:
I'll not embarrass sherlock with a reply, but I will say I was re-elected and during that election I came top of the 6 candidates that put up for election.

I'll happily leave that as a comprehensive reply to sherlock.

It's called democracy.
Click to expand...
Oh go on, embarrass me by all means. Being re-elected is not evidence of achievement.
 
sherlock said:
Not the case though is it.

She might not have known about the change until it took effect, and then argued that the lack of notification wasn't acceptable, whilst still accepting that there should be an equalising of pension age.
Click to expand...
There was notification. It wasn't a last minute decision. The changes were made in 1995. I'm nowhere near SPA but I know that SPA for me won't be 60 or 65 and I know that there is a good chance that it won't be the age it is currently saying that it will be. I don't see why ignorance should be used as an excuse. I just completely refuse to believe that the complaints are from people that genuinely didn't know rather than people that think it is unfair that it applies to them.

As I said in my very first post, it is a group of people that accept that state pension ages should be equalised but they should be equalised for all the women born after them and they should be exempt. WASPE.
 
dalefamily said:
To add insult to injury I had done 34 years work so had enough NI payments in only for it then to go to 35 years.
Click to expand...
The 30 years qualification period was for the old state pension, which only pays a maximum of £169.50 per week (your extra 4 years’ contributions wouldn’t have earned you anything under that system). The new state pension pays a maximum of £221.20 per week, hence the additional contribution requirement.

Based on your contribution history, you would qualify for 34/35 of the new amount, so would be much better off as a result of the changes. That might have been reduced slightly, to account for the years when you will have paid a reduced NI rate as a member of an occupation pension, but everyone is guaranteed to be better off as a result of the changes.

Incidentally, the qualification period for the old state pension was reduced by the Labour Government in 2010 to 30 years, down from 44 years for men and 39 years for women. However, no-one seems to be complaining about not being notified about that change for some reason.
 
Nano said:
There was notification. It wasn't a last minute decision. The changes were made in 1995. I'm nowhere near SPA but I know that SPA for me won't be 60 or 65 and I know that there is a good chance that it won't be the age it is currently saying that it will be. I don't see why ignorance should be used as an excuse. I just completely refuse to believe that the complaints are from people that genuinely didn't know rather than people that think it is unfair that it applies to them.

As I said in my very first post, it is a group of people that accept that state pension ages should be equalised but they should be equalised for all the women born after them and they should be exempt. WASPE.
Click to expand...
I'm just pointing out that your view that it had to be one or the other in relation to her post wasn't accurate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top