Women lose pension plea - for now.

A board for news and views on what's happening in the world

Re: Women lose pension plea - for now.

Postby Kaz » 17 Oct 2019, 08:58

Workingman wrote:
TBH complaints against the ages being made equal are as rare as hen's teeth, just about everyone agrees that it was the right thing to do. The anger is about the "How" it was done. The WASPI case failed in court because they were going on about it being 'unfair and discriminatory'. Had they challenged the method and timing of its doing with facts they might have had more success. WASPI are now campaigning for a ‘bridging’ pension for women affected and that could work if they stick to facts and leave emotions out of it.


Frank it was the Back to 60 challenge in the High Court that failed, the media have got it confused. WASPI have always campaigned for a bridging pension, and never for the SPA to return to 60. That was always the fundamental difference between the two groups
User avatar
Kaz
 
Posts: 43352
Joined: 25 Nov 2012, 21:02
Location: Gloucester

Re: Women lose pension plea - for now.

Postby Workingman » 17 Oct 2019, 13:38

Thanks for that, Kaz. It's still clear as mud and just as unfair to you all. :x
User avatar
Workingman
 
Posts: 21745
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 15:20

Re: Women lose pension plea - for now.

Postby Kaz » 17 Oct 2019, 16:32

Indeed :( xx
User avatar
Kaz
 
Posts: 43352
Joined: 25 Nov 2012, 21:02
Location: Gloucester

Re: Women lose pension plea - for now.

Postby Suff » 17 Oct 2019, 17:06

Kaz, they were never going to get the bridging pension. The money is spent.

I did a bit of digging on pension deficits per country. UK state pensions are nearly $4 trillion in deficit. That is around 1.5 times our total gdp or 11 times the total tax fund.

The moment that the decision was made, the government grabbed that extra funding with both hands and they are never going to give it back.

Medsec, the campaign was not about the fact that some employers would allow pensioners to keep working. It was about insisting that women could not be dismissed simply because they were pensioners until they reached the pension age of men.

The end result was obvious. The campaign was treated as removing pensioner status from women so they could not be forced to retire.

Not a pensioner, no pension.

People have been hurt. Absolutely, I agree. But bridging the pensions of women currently in the system would have created massive unfairness. Essentially degrading the pay of men between 60 and 65.

It falls under the heading of "be careful what you wish for, you may get it".

I am not unsympathetic to the plight of those caught in the trap. I just feel that those who created the situation are the ones first to point the finger.
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand Binary and those who do not.
User avatar
Suff
 
Posts: 10785
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 08:35

Previous

Return to News and Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 170 guests