Plight of Waspi Women.

[NMPalace]

Prominent Labour politicians bent over backwards to show support for the campaign for compensation before the election. Now they have betrayed these women.

That is all you need to know about the current government.

An independent ombudsman recommended compensation, and the government have ignored that recommendation. That is virtually unprecedented.

well that's opposition for you - easy to disagree with things, more difficult to find the money when you are in govt.
Similar to the Tories not sorting out the Post Office and the infected blood scandals - not heard many whinging about that.

Incidentally WASPI stands for Women Against State Pension Inequality - having an earlier retirement age seems the definition of inequality to me!

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

well that's opposition for you - easy to disagree with things, more difficult to find the money when you are in govt.
Similar to the Tories not sorting out the Post Office and the infected blood scandals - not heard many whinging about that.

Incidentally WASPI stands for Women Against State Pension Inequality - having an earlier retirement age seems the definition of inequality to me!

Dismissing it just like that?

We are talking about real people here. People who stood next to Labour politicians while they splurged out their undying support for their cause. It demonstrates the cynical nature of the current cabinet.
The fact that they have ignored an independent recommendation also once again displays Labour's authoritarian attitude.

You are obviously no better if you defend it.

 

[kayjaybee]

Don't normally get wound up with politics but because the wife is a waspi it hits a bit closer to home, but this is really making me furious, to have all these politicians agreeing and promising backing when in shadow cabinet to completely do a 100 percent turnaround when in power just shows how fickle these people are. I can see why turnouts in elections are so small, why should I be bothered to turn up at a polling station to vote for liars who will tell you anything to get your vote

 

[Badger11]

Don't normally get wound up with politics but because the wife is a waspi it hits a bit closer to home, but this is really making me furious, to have all these politicians agreeing and promising backing when in shadow cabinet to completely do a 100 percent turnaround when in power just shows how fickle these people are. I can see why turnouts in elections are so small, why should I be bothered to turn up at a polling station to vote for liars who will tell you anything to get your vote

You've only just worked this out? 😀

I agree it is shabby treatment but the campaign should have focused on the poor rather than on all women, many of whom are quite well off.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

You've only just worked this out? 😀

I agree it is shabby treatment but the campaign should have focused on the poor rather than on all women, many of whom are quite well off.

Why should you be penalised for doing alright in life?
The better off already contribute more to society through tax. They at least deserve equal treatment.

 

[georgenorman]

It's absurd to pretend that women were not made aware of the change to pensionable age, it was widely advertised at the time.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

It's absurd to pretend that women were not made aware of the change to pensionable age, it was widely advertised at the time.

If it is so cut and dried, then why the fuss?

Even Labour MPs former and current, including Diane Abbott, spoke against the government decision.

What bothers me is not so much the money itself, but the shameful sight of Labour cabinet MPs standing with these women prior to the election, claiming terrible injustice on their behalf with total conviction.

These politicians have no shame at all. How can anyone ever trust anything they say?

 

[georgenorman]

If it is so cut and dried, then why the fuss?

Even Labour MPs former and current, including Diane Abbott, spoke against the government decision.

What bothers me is not so much the money itself, but the shameful sight of Labour cabinet MPs standing with these women prior to the election, claiming terrible injustice on their behalf with total conviction.

These politicians have no shame at all. How can anyone ever trust anything they say?

Why the fuss? Because these days people and organisations try to get so called 'compensation' on the filmiest of excuses, to the detriment of justified causes such as the Post Office and Blood scandals.

 

[kayjaybee]

If it is so cut and dried, then why the fuss?

Even Labour MPs former and current, including Diane Abbott, spoke against the government decision.

What bothers me is not so much the money itself, but the shameful sight of Labour cabinet MPs standing with these women prior to the election, claiming terrible injustice on their behalf with total conviction.

These politicians have no shame at all. How can anyone ever trust anything they say?

Absolutely spot on, to say one thing and then another when it suits is shameful. The two faced aspect of it is what really gets me annoyed.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Why the fuss? Because these days people and organisations try to get so called 'compensation' on the filmiest of excuses, to the detriment of justified causes such as the Post Office and Blood scandals.

I understand that, but this ain't a claim for whiplash. This involves a lot of people and their retirement funds.

£3k isn't a lot for some people, but it is for people who are hard up.

For me, this is about the integrity of politicians. Clearly for Starmer, Reeves and Cooper, it doesn't exist.

 

[Spiderman]

Why the fuss? Because these days people and organisations try to get so called 'compensation' on the filmiest of excuses, to the detriment of justified causes such as the Post Office and Blood scandals.

Just seen an interview with Baroness Somebody ( didn’t catch her name). She is a campaigner on behalf of WASPI women, as she herself is one. She stated the letters women received in 1995 advising them of the changes was very “wishy washy” and it was very easy to interpret that you would not be affected. These were the days before the internet and social media were prevalent so information not so readily available.
Let’s also remember that many of these women lost out on building a pension by, either being a stay at home wife/mum ( not unusual in those days) or took time out of work to raise children.
Just been listening to Labour MPs trying to justify it and defend Starmer, Reeves, Rayner Cooper for their previous support of the campaign. “We don’t have the money “ maybe so, but if you haven’t sent £m’s to overseas farmers and climate change projects, given £m’s to train drivers, you might have just had the money to pay up on your promises

 

[dreamwaverider]

Back in the nineties, my company employed literally hundreds of women. Pensions was a growing issue as women were winning hands down by being able to retire with a full state pension at 60 if they wished. At the time, they were pushing for equality of everything, but most importantly wages (and rightly so). Most people have forgotten that it was normal to pay men significantly more in that era. So as part of the levelling process, the government decided to level pensions by moving women's pension to line up with mens to be claimed at 65 as it was an anomaly on men having an advantage.
This was talked about in the early nineties regularly, and following much consultation, advertising, etc. a decision was finally made and announced in 1995 that the ladies pension would line up with men TEN years ahead. I can't see how any working woman was not aware of this at the time. It was finally introduced by the coalition government in 2018!.
The Waspis are claiming they were not clearly made aware of this. That is simply wrong. Everyone was aware of it in that era.
There were literally millions of working women who did not join Waspis and who do not agree with the argument.
The problem is that the parliamentary ombudsman recommended a payment of some £2K to each of the Waspi members.
I dont buy the argument. They must have all known.

Attached BBC doc for anyone interested in the facts.

Waspi: Fury as women hit by state pension age rise are denied payouts

Campaigners say they were not properly informed of a pension age rise to bring them in line with men.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[ASCPFC]

Back in the nineties, my company employed literally hundreds of women. Pensions was a growing issue as women were winning hands down by being able to retire with a full state pension at 60 if they wished. At the time, they were pushing for equality of everything, but most importantly wages (and rightly so). Most people have forgotten that it was normal to pay men significantly more in that era. So as part of the levelling process, the government decided to level pensions by moving women's pension to line up with mens to be claimed at 65 as it was an anomaly on men having an advantage.
This was talked about in the early nineties regularly, and following much consultation, advertising, etc. a decision was finally made and announced in 1995 that the ladies pension would line up with men TEN years ahead. I can't see how any working woman was not aware of this at the time. It was finally introduced by the coalition government in 2018!.
The Waspis are claiming they were not clearly made aware of this. That is simply wrong. Everyone was aware of it in that era.
There were literally millions of working women who did not join Waspis and who do not agree with the argument.
The problem is that the parliamentary ombudsman recommended a payment of some £2K to each of the Waspi members.
I dont buy the argument. They must have all known.

Attached BBC doc for anyone interested in the facts.

Waspi: Fury as women hit by state pension age rise are denied payouts

Campaigners say they were not properly informed of a pension age rise to bring them in line with men.

www.bbc.co.uk

So did knowing about it mean that they could actually do anything about it? I know loads of things that I don't agree with, yet there's nothing I can do about it.
It might seem easy to set up protest groups, lobby groups, pressure groups but look how long it usually takes - decades.
Was there a mechanism where the difference could be made up somehow in a fair and simple manner?
To me, this smacks of discrimination but it's becoming increasingly clear that discrimination only occurs when the powers that be decide it's suitable.

 

[dreamwaverider]

So did knowing about it mean that they could actually do anything about it? I know loads of things that I don't agree with, yet there's nothing I can do about it.
It might seem easy to set up protest groups, lobby groups, pressure groups but look how long it usually takes - decades.
Was there a mechanism where the difference could be made up somehow in a fair and simple manner?
To me, this smacks of discrimination but it's becoming increasingly clear that discrimination only occurs when the powers that be decide it's suitable.

It's exactly the opposite ASCPFC.
Since the nineties this country went on an equality drive to finally make the workplace equal to all. Re the pensions, women and mens pensions are now equal regardless of sex. So they have eliminated any inequality. So womens' pensions changed from getting them at 60 to getting them on the same deal as men. It's what women had been crying out for. Equal deal. Equal pay, equal working conditions, equal pay etc. They finally got it this century. Then men kicked off, wanting paternity leave like women get maternity leave. Now men have that.
What the waspi group are unhappy about is that they were not aware this was coming. Well it was openly discussed, publicised and finally introduced over a 20+ year window through various different governments who as always made the decisions. So yes they lost five years early pension but they obviously gained the extended work time instead, getting a state pension at 65 just like the men.
It's like wanting your cake and eat it. Keep what you like, but change what you dont like. Sorry, but the powers that be aren't that gullible anymore.

 

[becky]

I understand that, but this ain't a claim for whiplash. This involves a lot of people and their retirement funds.

£3k isn't a lot for some people, but it is for people who are hard up.

For me, this is about the integrity of politicians. Clearly for Starmer, Reeves and Cooper, it doesn't exist.

Those three would think nothing of spending £3K on one posh frock for a big dinner engagement.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Those three would think nothing of spending £3K on one posh frock for a big dinner engagement.

As long as someone else paid for it.

I'm sure some would pay to see Starmer in a frock. Although, he couldn't look more of a bellend than he does already.
I'd pay to see him in a stock.

 

[Spiderman]

As long as someone else paid for it.

I'm sure some would pay to see Starmer in a frock. Although, he couldn't look more of a bellend than he does already.
I'd pay to see him in a stock.

Perhaps some have seen him in a frock 😉

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Perhaps some have seen him in a frock 😉

Possibly, if you believe the rumours.

 

[ASCPFC]

It's exactly the opposite ASCPFC.
Since the nineties this country went on an equality drive to finally make the workplace equal to all. Re the pensions, women and mens pensions are now equal regardless of sex. So they have eliminated any inequality. So womens' pensions changed from getting them at 60 to getting them on the same deal as men. It's what women had been crying out for. Equal deal. Equal pay, equal working conditions, equal pay etc. They finally got it this century. Then men kicked off, wanting paternity leave like women get maternity leave. Now men have that.
What the waspi group are unhappy about is that they were not aware this was coming. Well it was openly discussed, publicised and finally introduced over a 20+ year window through various different governments who as always made the decisions. So yes they lost five years early pension but they obviously gained the extended work time instead, getting a state pension at 65 just like the men.
It's like wanting your cake and eat it. Keep what you like, but change what you dont like. Sorry, but the powers that be aren't that gullible anymore.

I can see your opinion on this and I do understand. However, it seems that a fairer system here would be some kind of pension enhancement for this particular group, I would have thought.
The state pension doesn't exactly make you rich but then to be on a reduced one is not great.
I'm not really totally objective on this as it has affected my sister badly and she has to contribute towards care for my brother in law - who is seriously ill. Which certainly is not ideal.
There are some really badly affected by this, but I realise there will be some who are probably well off enough.

 

[cryrst]

You've only just worked this out? 😀

I agree it is shabby treatment but the campaign should have focused on the poor rather than on all women, many of whom are quite well off.

Surely that’s sharing the wealth badger.
Total socialist policy and wet dream.
You dropped the ball Bert 😂