WASPI -Women Against State Pension Inequality

[fuddyduddy4 11]

What about the women already on pension getting just £60 or less a week and no hope of an increase due to lack of stamps through not working and bringing up children look at the disparity of that.

[unbeliever 10]

There's no legitimate case to be made that women should be allowed to retire earlier than men.

This organisation should have been called Women For the Restoration of State Pension Inequality.

If "WASPI" think that there are other inequalities left in our society that should be addressed, lets address them directly and not make out that an earlier retirement age is due as some sort of compensation. It's silly.

 

Although having chosen such a blatantly false name for their organisation, it would take a lot to convince me that anything they say can be trusted.

[Berberis 10]

No, it didn't affect women. So why didn't the men do something about it...errrm like start a campaign?

 

So you agree with my statement (ignoring my grammatical error).

[xfox3x 10]

I was referencing your fairly childish signature, I have no need to grow up.

 

Your comparison to cancer is an awful one. What i and others have asked is what inequality it is you are campaigning against. I have looked on the fb page and can't really identify any inequality.

 

It seems you are campaigning against the newly imposed equality in state pensions. If I am wrong please point it out, I do a fair amount of work campaigning for equality (mainly within the mental health sector) so would be happy to help.

 

I'll use whatever signature I like, thanks for your opinion though.

Don't try and guilt trip me about comparing the campaign to the breast cancer awareness one. Both were started by women and both have been slated by men who saw women doing something for themselves and then moaned about men's lot in life but were unable/unwilling to do anything about it.

WASPI is NOT about the introduction of equality in age - it is about the fact that women were told in 1995 that their retirement age had increased by 18 months, then in 2011 were informed that this had been increased by 3,4,5 years. This left many women born in 1952-56 who were a couple of years off retirement with no chance of altering or amending their retirement plans. It is this group of women that the group is concerned with.

I did not start the group, I did not choose it's name or ethos, I merely put it on here as information for those who were interested or affected by the issue. I find it quite appalling that by doing this people have seen fit to challenge me on men's retirement age that was decided in 1940-long before I was born. Indeed women's retirement age was actually lowered at that time so that men could claim their pension at 65 when previously they had had to wait for full pension until their wives reached 65.

I have put a link on for those who are interested in the history of SPA and it outlines the rapid changes to women's SPA for those born in the 50s.

On a further note I am concerned about the SPA rising to 68 for everyone which imo will result in a future of young people unable to find work as the jobs are filled by a semi-decrepit workforce-but that's another argument.

 

 

http://www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/statepensionage/SPA_history.htm

[unbeliever 10]

I'll use whatever signature I like, thanks for your opinion though.

Don't try and guilt trip me about comparing the campaign to the breast cancer awareness one. Both were started by women and both have been slated by men who saw women doing something for themselves and then moaned about men's lot in life but were unable/unwilling to do anything about it.

WASPI is NOT about the introduction of equality in age - it is about the fact that women were told in 1995 that their retirement age had increased by 18 months, then in 2011 were informed that this had been increased by 3,4,5 years. This left many women born in 1952-56 who were a couple of years off retirement with no chance of altering or amending their retirement plans. It is this group of women that the group is concerned with.

I did not start the group, I did not choose it's name or ethos, I merely put it on here as information for those who were interested or affected by the issue. I find it quite appalling that by doing this people have seen fit to challenge me on men's retirement age that was decided in 1940-long before I was born. Indeed women's retirement age was actually lowered at that time so that men could claim their pension at 65 when previously they had had to wait for full pension until their wives reached 65.

I have put a link on for those who are interested in the history of SPA and it outlines the rapid changes to women's SPA for those born in the 50s.

On a further note I am concerned about the SPA rising to 68 for everyone which imo will result in a future of young people unable to find work as the jobs are filled by a semi-decrepit workforce-but that's another argument.

 

 

http://www.web40571.clarahost.co.uk/statepensionage/SPA_history.htm

 

Women were the subject of preferential treatment which they had no moral entitlement to. That preferential treatment has been removed. And about damn time.

There's a case to be made for a softer landing in terms of removing the preferential treatment of women in terms of retirement, but not a very strong one.

In any case, the false nature of the organisation's name undermines anything they might have to say on the matter as it immediately identifies them as dishonest, or at least highly disingenuous.

[xfox3x 10]

There's no legitimate case to be made that women should be allowed to retire earlier than men.

This organisation should have been called Women For the Restoration of State Pension Inequality.

If "WASPI" think that there are other inequalities left in our society that should be addressed, lets address them directly and not make out that an earlier retirement age is due as some sort of compensation. It's silly.

 

Although having chosen such a blatantly false name for their organisation, it would take a lot to convince me that anything they say can be trusted.

 

Oh dear, you really don't understand do you? The campaign is NOT about reversing the SPA for women back to 60.

 

---------- Post added 06-11-2015 at 12:23 ----------

 

What about the women already on pension getting just £60 or less a week and no hope of an increase due to lack of stamps through not working and bringing up children look at the disparity of that.

 

So- do something about it then like these women have.

[truman 10]

Wake me up once there's 10,000 WASPI's .

 

I saw what you did there...

[unbeliever 10]

Oh dear, you really don't understand do you? The campaign is NOT about reversing the SPA for women back to 60.

 

In what way is the rule that men and women retire at the same age "unequal"?

[999tigger 10]

In what way is the rule that men and women retire at the same age "unequal"?

 

Its to do with the lack of notice at which the retirement ages were increased. This affects 1950s women as they are the group on the verge of retiring at 60.

[xfox3x 10]

So you agree with my statement (ignoring my grammatical error).

 

Lots of things aren't 'my' problem. The cuts in Working Tax credits don't affect me, junior doctor's hours don't affect me, penalties for missing a job seeker appointment don't affect me but if I see a petition that I agree with I will sign it and share it for those interested. If I don't agree with it I don't sign or share but neither do I argue with those who believe in it.

Start a petition to bring the male retirement age down to 60 and I will sign and share.

[unbeliever 10]

Its to do with the lack of notice at which the retirement ages were increased. This affects 1950s women as they are the group on the verge of retiring at 60.

 

That's not an inequality!

Where is the supposed inequality the group is supposedly against?

[999tigger 10]

That's not an inequality!

Where is the supposed inequality the group is supposedly against?

 

Presumably because it affects exclusively women?

 

Putting the inequality argument aside for one moment, then I can see why they might wnat to protest about the way its been implemented. Im not really invested in it one wat or the other, just observing and read some stuff to find out what the OP was about.

 

I am bemused slightly about what the OP expects to achieve considering what the forums are like.