MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Just read this article on the BBC about a transgender case and pensions.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44612117
Has the government ever been challenged on the basis of sex discrimination by making males work till 65 and females only to 60? And what was the original reason for the difference? I know it wont make a jot of difference to me by the time I get there we will all be working until we drop dead, but its a pretty clear discrimination.
The last line of the article
"And so it concluded that UK legislation "constitutes direct discrimination based on sex" and is therefore in breach of European law. "
Has the government ever been challenged on the basis of sex discrimination by making males work till 65 and females only to 60?
Yes.
HAHA well that's sorted that one out then, thanks
Aside from a differentiation between genders theres sort of a class/profession discrimination. State pension age is the same regardless of how long a career you've had before you reach that age.
People in low skilled / manual jobs start working, and paying taxes, a lot younger than people in high skilled/ academically qualified jobs. Their work also takes a higher toll on their health to - more wear and tear and more exposure to causes of illness and injury. So they'll have worked longer and then will often have a poorer quality of life (and typically a shorter one) in retirement.
It would be fairer for state pension age to reflect the years worked rather than the number of birthdays you've celebrated.
It would be fairer for state pension age to reflect the years worked rather than the number of birthdays you’ve celebrated.
My Slovenian colleagues keep records of their entire work history. This is then used to determine how much they have paid the state and thus how much they get back in the form of a pension.
Good system if you ask me.
It would be fairer for state pension age to reflect the years worked rather than the number of birthdays you’ve celebrated.
For anyone under 40 worrying about state pension is a bit pointless though
It would be fairer for state pension age to reflect the years worked rather than the number of birthdays you’ve celebrated.
It already does, to some extent e.g. you need 35 years NI contributions to qualify for the full state pension. If you have less, you get a reduced pension pro-rate (IIRC).
Although benefits might make up most of it if you don't have any qualifying years etc.
I am in my 40th year of work by the time I hit 67 I will have worked 51 years
It already does, to some extent e.g. you need 35 years NI contributions to qualify for the full state pension. If you have less, you get a reduced pension pro-rate (IIRC).
Awesome - now how can I persuade them to let me retire at 55?
how can I persuade them to let me retire at 55?
Agree to be euthanased at 61
People in low skilled / manual jobs start working, and paying taxes, a lot younger than people in high skilled/ academically qualified jobs. Their work also takes a higher toll on their health to – more wear and tear and more exposure to causes of illness and injury. So they’ll have worked longer and then will often have a poorer quality of life (and typically a shorter one) in retirement.
It would be fairer for state pension age to reflect the years worked rather than the number of birthdays you’ve celebrated.
The counter argument to that is people with higher paid jobs pay more into the system therefore should be able to retire earlier or take more money out at 67. What about the students paying an arm and a leg for their further education so they can potetnially find a job which requires them to pay more taxes.
Its all swings and roundabouts.
The counter argument to that is people with higher paid jobs pay more into the system therefore should be able to retire earlier or take more money out at 67.
The can from their supplementary private pension. It should probably move to a means tested system soon to preserve the pot
Just because someone has a private pension doesn't mean they are not due more on the public one due to paying in more than others.
Not that they'll get anymore mind you.
The can from their supplementary private pension. It should probably move to a means tested system soon to preserve the pot
The problem with that is, what's the point in having the means to pay yourself a pension if the state will pick up the tab if you don't and won't if you do? I'm all for progressive taxation, but ideas like that always get drawn up with the idea that they should only affect those on £n+1 salary where £n is yours.
What if someone suggested you shouldn't be entitled to NHS treatment because you have a job and if you were ill your employer should have covered you as it's their loss if you die?
There's already adverts on daytime TV to get even daytime TV watchers to put their house in a trust to keep it out of the calculations when it comes to paying for care homes.
Just because someone has a private pension doesn’t mean they are not due more on the public one due to paying in more than others.
It's a last resort fall back scheme that is underfunded as it is. If you want more out you will need to pay a lot more tax.I don't expect a better NHS service because I pay more tax or a more caring fire service.
Just because someone has a private pension doesn’t mean they are not due more on the public one due to paying in more than others.
Many state pensions, of other countries, do just this and thus they have much smaller private pension markets as there is less need. We have a very low state pension (relative to mean full time wage), but a much larger private pension market.
What if someone suggested you shouldn’t be entitled to NHS treatment because you have a job and if you were ill your employer should have covered you as it’s their loss if you die?
It's a decision that needs to be made, as a country we are heading in a direction where there are no honest political conversations about pensions apart from preserving them. There is not enough money going in and we can either carry on with this or sit up and take notice.
I’m all for progressive taxation, but ideas like that always get drawn up with the idea that they should only affect those on £n+1 salary where £n is yours.
Well I fully expect there to be nothing left by the time I get to whatever retirement age it is then it's at least 30-35 years away for me.
There is not enough money going in and we can either carry on with this or sit up and take notice.
As a percentage of GDP, we spend less than many countries...
[url= https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1796/41213175020_63ae6ccfcb.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1796/41213175020_63ae6ccfcb.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/25MSi67 ]Pension affordability[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/ ]Ben Freeman[/url], on Flickr