Times article claim that Waspi women are tone deaf and should read the room

Basgetti

Looking at the prospects for our adult children, sorry, I agree with him.
The information was out there 🤷‍♀️

?

Casdon

The wealthiest pensioners are those aged 65-74 though Doodledog. One of the main reasons is that although as you say there were lots of struggles for that age group (I am there too), pension schemes were then much more generous than they are today.

It would seem the oldest are weathiest, more years to diligently save. Silent generation, imo, was blessed in many ways. No high interest rates when purchasing homes, leading to high interest savings.

Mollygo

Thanks Allira.
But
In any situation you can mention doesn't make it better for those being told that others are in a better situation.

Apparently those on the old, lower State Pension are also in receipt of SERPS, Graduated Pension, Age Addition (for over 80s) etc.

Not all are.

Thanks Allira.
But
In any situation you can mention doesn't make it better for those being told that others are in a better situation.

Mollygo

However true your figures may be, it’s no consolation to those who don’t fit into your lucky retirees.
It’s like listening to Keir Starmer telling us how well the NHS is doing now whilst you’re sitting at home still waiting for a consultation, then for a referral, to maybe get some Treatment.
Congratulations to the lucky ones and tough on those who don't fit those criteria but can just enjoy hearing that others do.

However true your figures may be, it’s no consolation to those who don’t fit into your lucky retirees.
Absolutely spot on, Mollygo!

It’s like listening to Keir Starmer telling us how well the NHS is doing now whilst you’re sitting at home still waiting for a consultation, then for a referral, to maybe get some Treatment.

So well that I heard the other day that waiting times for some non-urgent surgeries eg joint replacements are now down to about 12 months, even less in some areas.
That makes my six years look like a figment of my imagination.

The UK receives the lowest paid state pension in Europe. And yet I think we are the 5th wealthiest country in the world. As pensioners we don't usually have the ability to increase our income. Whereas younger generations, if they're able to can find opportunities to boost their income.

The wealthiest pensioners are those aged 65-74 though Doodledog. One of the main reasons is that although as you say there were lots of struggles for that age group (I am there too), pension schemes were then much more generous than they are today.

Mollygo

However true your figures may be, it’s no consolation to those who don’t fit into your lucky retirees.
It’s like listening to Keir Starmer telling us how well the NHS is doing now whilst you’re sitting at home still waiting for a consultation, then for a referral, to maybe get some Treatment.
Congratulations to the lucky ones and tough on those who don't fit those criteria but can just enjoy hearing that others do.

But in any situation in life you can mention, some people benefit and some lose out.

I lost 12 years of pension because, I didn't stay 5 years in a job, so was given my pension payments back when I left, without interest or employers contributions. Later I worked part-time and part-timers couldn't join the pension scheme.

As we go through life we all win some and lose some

I don’t know where I fit because I’m neither an early not a late boomer, all I know is I didn’t get my pension at 60, I’m still on the old pension, I experienced some of the good things but also high mortgage rates, stagnant wages, and I’m still working at over 70, and not to fund cruises. I’m seeing the gap between the old and the new pensions widen every year and quite frankly, I’m fed up. But I still think the younger generations have it much harder than we did.

SueDonim

Evan Davis has an article today on the generational divide. He poses that it’s a subset of late Boomers, of which he’s one, who have benefitted most and also the problem isn’t intergenerational, it’s the lack of economic growth over the past two decades that’s causing this divide.

I am not knowledgable about economies, so maybe others here will beg to differ with him!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj6pyk7e3w4o

I could contest that, as a 'late Boomer', arguing that the early ones had a 'better deal' with cheaper housing, mortgages paid off when interest rates rose (so could benefit from high interest on savings), a ready supply of council houses as a safety net, degrees that set them apart, pensions at 60 for women (often with SERPs to boost them), relatively secure employment, grammar schools etc.

I am deliberately generalising, but it's true that in my experience it is friends who are around ten years older than me (so mid to late 70s) who had all of those things and are enjoying cruises, golf and the stereotypical 'Boomer' lifestyles. My generation came of age in a time of very high unemployment, had comprehensive schools, high inflation and interest rates, increased SPA at a flat rate, low interest on savings, high mortgage rates and rents and so on.

So much is subjective, isn't it? Molly is right that not everyone fits the stereotype of their 'generation' anyway, or even their subset of it. I think that subdividing us into Marketing groupings was a cynical move to turn us against one another and see one another in terms of 'sets' rather than people.

Mollygo

However true your figures may be, it’s no consolation to those who don’t fit into your lucky retirees.
It’s like listening to Keir Starmer telling us how well the NHS is doing now whilst you’re sitting at home still waiting for a consultation, then for a referral, to maybe get some Treatment.
Congratulations to the lucky ones and tough on those who don't fit those criteria but can just enjoy hearing that others do.

It’s about averages though, that people write these articles, isn’t it?
There are always going to be exceptions, but to the younger people in the UK that’s what they look at, just as we all generalise about those we don’t know.

Evan Davis has an article today on the generational divide. He poses that it’s a subset of late Boomers, of which he’s one, who have benefitted most and also the problem isn’t intergenerational, it’s the lack of economic growth over the past two decades that’s causing this divide.

I am not knowledgable about economies, so maybe others here will beg to differ with him!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj6pyk7e3w4o

However true your figures may be, it’s no consolation to those who don’t fit into your lucky retirees.
It’s like listening to Keir Starmer telling us how well the NHS is doing now whilst you’re sitting at home still waiting for a consultation, then for a referral, to maybe get some Treatment.
Congratulations to the lucky ones and tough on those who don't fit those criteria but can just enjoy hearing that others do.

Casdon

The bottom line is, as a generation, we having it good now. I asked AI whether this was the richest generation of pensioners.

‘Yes, current retirees in the UK are, on average, the richest generation in history when measured by accumulated wealth and post-tax income. This demographic has significantly benefited from surging house prices and lucrative defined-benefit pension schemes, though severe inequalities remain within the retired population.’
The response was linked to the Telegraph +4 as source material.

And the generations below us will also do well in old age because with longevity, children will be in their 50s and 60s before their parents die and they will be able to sell their parent's house and have a large lump sum to take into retirement.

Only 20-30% of old people will ever need residential care. That means 70-80% of the generation below will be able to inherit an estate that has not been depleted by care costs.

Casdon

I’m a WASPI, but I do think the battle is lost now, so there is no point in keep bringing up the grievances, because the time has past when compensation might have been forthcoming from successive governments. It makes little difference who is to blame once it’s water under the bridge. That doesn’t mean I’ve forgiven.

Unfortunately I agree. We now have to move on.

The bottom line is, as a generation, we having it good now. I asked AI whether this was the richest generation of pensioners.

‘Yes, current retirees in the UK are, on average, the richest generation in history when measured by accumulated wealth and post-tax income. This demographic has significantly benefited from surging house prices and lucrative defined-benefit pension schemes, though severe inequalities remain within the retired population.’
The response was linked to the Telegraph +4 as source material.

I think we all did (and do) what our peers do. No, we didn't have 'the latest' mobile phone or carry expensive coffee around, because those things weren't available to us. Younger generations don't have shampoo and sets on Fridays like my mother's generation did. We may have Netflix, but previous generations had numerous cheap cinemas, and so on.

It's not virtuous to have 'done without' things that didn't exist, and it's not sinful to enjoy things that previous generations didn't have.

I think there was a brief period in the 60s when social mobility was a possibility for some. Grammar schools and university expansion gave some an opportunity to go to university when having a degree set them apart, and they didn't pay for any of it. Most went to secondary moderns, however, and many left grammar schools at 15/16 with few qualifications, however, and university wasn't an option for people whose families needed them to earn money.

By the 70s comprehensives came in, then as universities expanded again, degrees didn't give the passport to a good career than they used to, and student loans are a huge encumbrance for many, so things have moved back when it comes to social mobility.

The fact that so many have degrees, despite the fact that that they don't guarantee anything, means that those without find it even harder to get a career, rather than a job, so young people (understandably) want to get one, and to have the rite of passage of being away from home to grow up. They do what their friends do, just as we all did in our different ways at different times.

JANH

I was born in the early 1950’s and had to wait just 21 months for my state pension. However, I can not recall receiving any official communication regarding my pension being deferred. I too am on the old state pension and if I didn’t have a private pension, I would be struggling financially. We all paid in for our pensions, struggled during our younger years when interest rates were on 17% and we had no help from anywhere. I would like to know when “we had it good”.

I don’t think we so much as “had it good” but rather we were of a generation who learned to manage with what we had and didn’t feel entitled to anything. Expectations are much higher today. My AC for example would be horrified if they couldn’t go on holiday or have Netflix or go to meet their friends in coffee shops or pubs.

Young people always think the generation above them had it better than them.

I can remember our generation being envious of the previous generation who all, apparently, had jobs for life, 40years of contributory pension, lived in the same house all their lives etcc etc.

We conveniently forgot that they had been born in one war grew up into a second, saw the destruction of our cities and homes by bombing and so on.

It is the same with this generation. which ever generation that may be. The see the good thing but forget house prices were cheap because interest rates were high. When we bought houses lenders would only lend on one income. Now they lend of two, so, of course house prices have gone up in price relatively. The only reason the governmnt could afford free university education was because so few people went to university. In ur youth the majority of those complaining about student debt wouldn't have gone to university anyway.

Most of my generation lived through the shut down of British industry in the 1960s, Few of us have not been made redundant, some several timea, and may have spent months or years out of work. We have seen the closure of industry after industry, ship building, steel, coal. We did not have the minimum wage, schools were not as good, neither was the education w got. benefits available to those with diabilities were virtually non-exisent.

yes, of course we had some advantages, but most of our capital is tied up in our houses, but it is the whinging generation who will inherit the cash freed when our houses are sold after our death (the majority of old people do not spend their last years in care homes)

Imo it's not only that many women didn't know about the changes - it's unforgivable that women were being sent letters in 2007 with 'retirement at 60' on them - but the rest of us didn't know the date we personally could retire.
We should continue to fight injustice, if only to raise awareness of the devastating effect changes will have on the next group of retirees

Allira

^Also when my DF died my DM received HIS state pension as well the her reduced state pension from 2016 to 2022 when she died.^

I don't think a widow can receive both pensions.
Many older women only received a small old State Pension either based on their own contributions or a 60% pension based on their husband's contributions. In certain circumstances the pension could be increased to the full amount based on the husband's contributions but I have not heard of anyond who has done do.
A widow can also inherit 50% of her husband's SERPS.

Some workplace pensions do not pay out at all to a widow or widower or pay a third of the full amount. This could leave a surviving spouse in poverty and they would then be eligible for benefits so inheriting some of their spouse's State Pension would probably cost less.

My DF died on 2nd Jan 2016, he was born in 1935, DM born in 1934.

DF had three personal private pensions, two ceased on his death, the third had widows pension benefits of almost 60% payable to my mother.

“ Basic State Pension Uplift: If a widow’s own Basic State Pension was less than the full amount (then £119.30 a week), she could use her husband's NI contributions to increase hers, up to a maximum of 100% of the full Basic State Pension rate.Inherited Additional State Pension (SERPS): Widows could inherit some or all of their late husband’s Additional State Pension, commonly known as SERPS (State Earnings-Related Pension Scheme) or the State Second Pension. The amount depended on the husband's birth date and whether he was contracted out of the scheme, but widows could typically inherit between 50% and 100% of these extra amounts.”

Well the Times would say that wouldn't they....they are becoming almost far right. The WASPI campaign wouldn't have got as far as it has if they didn't have a strong case. Also the DWP had to make a full apology admitting that they didn't inform the affected women properly. I personally am affected as many have been. If you were fortunate enough for it not to affect you..then great. But please don't deny it to those that are suffering from this injustice. You can always donate it to a cause of your choosing in the unlikely event of receiving anything. Also many of these women voted for Labour 2 years ago as they promised to really fight for it.

Also when my DF died my DM received HIS state pension as well the her reduced state pension from 2016 to 2022 when she died.

I don't think a widow can receive both pensions.
Many older women only received a small old State Pension either based on their own contributions or a 60% pension based on their husband's contributions. In certain circumstances the pension could be increased to the full amount based on the husband's contributions but I have not heard of anyond who has done do.
A widow can also inherit 50% of her husband's SERPS.

Some workplace pensions do not pay out at all to a widow or widower or pay a third of the full amount. This could leave a surviving spouse in poverty and they would then be eligible for benefits so inheriting some of their spouse's State Pension would probably cost less.

Maggiemaybe

It just surprises me that so many women seem to be perfectly happy with the fact that the findings and recommendations of the Ombudsman are being completely ignored. So what exactly is the point of the PHSO? Of the six year investigation that concluded there had been maladministration and compensation was due? Is this going to be the future then, that there will be no recourse for anyone who feels they have been unfairly treated by the powers that be? Because if that’s the case, it won’t only be WASPI women who’ll be expected to put up and shut up.

Precisely! 👏👏👏👏👏

Also when my DF died my DM received HIS state pension as well the her reduced state pension from 2016 to 2022 when she died.

She had teeny tiny private pensions from the few part time jobs she did plus half of my DF private pension plus his full state pension.

I did her banking, bill paying, shopping etc and she was better off than I was despite me still working full time in the CS and running a home.

I didn’t begrudge her a penny, she was extraordinarily generous to both myself and her grandchildren and I encouraged her to spend whatever she needed AND wanted on herself. My DF was extremely well paid so contributed to taxes well and as an only child I was fortunate enough to have a nice inheritance, retire at 64 instead of 67, and pay off my mortgage as well as give our children some cash to boost their savings.

BUT had I been able to retire at 60, I could have spent so much more time with my DM when she needed me, the four years of her life she was very unwell and disabled, cared for by myself with a huge amount of help from my youngest daughter, we both worked full time DH would have helped, had he not been a full time carer for his own DM, who sadly is now in full time residential care with advanced dementia, at 91, living no life whatsoever.

Life can be very cruel.

Exactly, yogitree. When the key 2003 survey showed that only 38% of women doing routine and manual work, the kind that often didn’t offer workplace pensions, were aware of their new SPA, the report made it very clear that the 62% of women who were unaware needed to be targeted.

It says it here - page 29:

webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107093842/http:/research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2003-2004/rrep221.pdf

In order to ensure women who need to know the most about the increase (i.e. those who will be affected by the change) are informed, it is essential that those who are not in work and those who do not have a private pension are appropriately targeted with information.

What did the DWP do? Nothing. They just carried on as before knowing that its information campaign wasn’t working. It took another four years until 2007 for them to admit they needed to tell women individually - but then said their information systems were incomplete and not up to the job, that 2009 was the earliest they could issue letters - just one year out from the first women when would see their pension postponed.

By this time, successive goverments had had fourteen years to sort this. Fourteen years.

I was born in 1955, keep meticulous records and know that, bar a letter sent to me in 2007 after I was widowed telling me (with accompanying leaflet imprint 2006) that my SP age was 60, I had no more correspondence from the DWP until invited to claim my SP in 2021 age 66.

When my husband died, they couldn’t find his NIC records despite him having paid NIC for 40 years with two large employers. When I claimed my SP four months ahead of my 66th birthday as invited to do, the DWP couldn’t find my records either despite having paid NIC for 50 years, also with two large employers. It took eight months for them to process my claim as they had to “locate my paper records”.

I have a very strong suspicion that there was and maybe still is a very big hole in the DWP’s computer systems with big tranches of key records missing. This may well account for why so many women did not receive letters supposedly sent.

In July 2024, former Pensions Minister Guy Opperman wrote about the DWP … It is a big beast made up of 12 ageing computer systems. You don’t say.

And then we had Pat McFadden standing up in Parliament in January saying that had we been sent letters, we probably wouldn’t have read them.

The evidence taken as a whole, including that from 2007, suggests that the majority of 1950s-born women would not have read and recalled the contents of an unsolicited pensions letter, even if it had been sent earlier. Furthermore, the evidence also suggests that those less knowledgeable about pensions—the very women who most needed to engage with a letter, and for whom it might have made a difference—were the least likely to read it.

Don’t you just love it when men tell women what post they would and wouldn’t have read. His sidekick, Torsten Bell repeated the same nonsense. Makes my blood boil.