I suggest a campaign about ...

This govt's proposed changes to women's retirement age (for those already having to work to 63-65)

10 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    AnonymousAnonymous shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    8 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Dawne LawtonDawne Lawton commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        There are too many arguments aimed at the wrong focus. We have to accept equality. What we should not have to accept is the time line for our age group of 1953 birthdates. I have seen my SRD move from 60 to 63.5 in 2 and half years without notice or advice from the DWP. Only because I have been planning my retirement do I know about the initial changes which were not highly monitored in the press, as is the current proposed changes. Nobody, male or female, can make sufficient savings to compensate for two to three years loss of State pension, if they still want to retire and, of course, could retire, with a company pension to support them, at 60. That I believe is the crux of the matter. Those without additional support of a spouse / partner or company pension scheme will have to work longer and, if in a manually intensive role, may not, necessarily be able to do that work and the employer then has to look at that aspect. You cannot be put in a position where the employer has to make decisions about your abilities to do your job just because the State required you to work longer. So many issues to address, youth unemployment, lack of skills and education, which means they cannot replace you because they do not have the desire or ability so to do and therefore remain a drain on us, you and me, the tax payer, who continues to pay for the unemployed and our own delayed state pension. thank you very much.

      • StarStar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We are seen as an easy target. Who cares about something that will affect just old women? Well, that is how I feel the reality is. I worked as a teacher in inner city schools for most of my working life. I expected to retire at 60, and planned accordingly. I was divorced, and worked part time whilst my children were little. I was made redundant last year at 56, and have not been able to find another job. I discovered that 60 had turned into 63 and 10 months, and worried how I would cope. Now I discover 60 will turn into 66! I have no argument with equalization of retirement ages for men and women. It is the speed of the change which will effectively steal two years pension and other benefits from me. Being my age I hate to have become both invisible and it seems a 'burden', just because I am getting older.
        This ConDem plan is unfair and will no doubt occur as the plight of older women is not deemed important or interesting for many to campaign about. We will just become yet another forgotten minority.
        Please sign these petitions if that is all you do.

        http://www.saga.co.uk/media-centre/petition/index.asp
        http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/handsoff

      • JulieJulie commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Woment shouldhave the same retiremtn age as men, but the way thsi is proposed to be imlpented is outrageus. Not only does it give women almost no time to plan for retirement ( the original cahnges have been known about for years, but no longer valid) the DWP information on their wb site is incorrect , lulling wowen into a false ilusion of a retirement date.

      • Sally PuddephattSally Puddephatt commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I was born in October 1954 and all through my formative years I thought I would be able to retire at 60, then they brought women's retirement age into line with men's and I thought that was a good idea, why should men retire later than women. I was sent a letter by the DWP to advise me that my retirement age was 64 years and 7 months (approx) and I got used to the idea. To find out today that I have got to work until my 66th birthday, i.e. another 1 year and 5 months is appalling. It doesn't give me enough time to save the money to be able to retire at the date I should have retired. It affects those of us born in 1953 and 1954 more than anyone else. This is unfair and surely against Human Rights as we are being victimised because of when we were born and our gender.

      • Disabled mum, Disabled kidDisabled mum, Disabled kid commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        You're right, it isn't fair. But I think we need to campaign against the current pension age across the board. There are few enough jobs for young people as it is and if more people are forced to work longer, that will reduce the jobs available even more. And why should those who have already contributed to the country for many years be punished by being forced to work even longer? We should demand parity with other EU countries on retirement age.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base