TWO women who took the Government to court over state pension changes have lost their appeal.
The Court of Appeal judges made the ruling today which will affect millions of women across Britain. Julie Delve, 62, and Karen Glynn, 63, part of the campaign group Backto60, have been calling for a reversal of the state pension age rising from 60 to 66 for women. However, three senior judges ruled against them in London this morning.
The ruling has already brought in many emotional responses.
Titter user @ BEAUTIFULMUMSIE said: “This country and government is a disgrace. Discrimination against woman. UK State Pension Age ruling.”.
User ManduReid also noted how this decision will be more difficult to manage given the current pandemic: “The gender-blind approach to dealing with the pandemic is going to wreak deep havoc for women.”
@CashQuestions reflected on the ruling details themselves: “Just read the full ruling on the #waspi women #backto60 appeal against changes to state pension age for 1950s women. Reasons for rejection of the case couldn’t be clearer.”
Others noted the technical difficulties present in trying to access the verdict online.
@WASPI_2018 said: “Very disappointing @JudiciaryUK that your servers cannot handle the legitimate requests for up-to-date information from #WASPIwomen looking for more details on this morning’s devastatingly upsetting BackTo60 judgment.”
Royal London also responded with the following: “Today’s Court of Appeal judgement comes as no surprise but is nonetheless a crushing blow to those campaigning around changes to the female state pension age.
“While the decision to equalise state pension age across genders is the right decision there have been well known flaws in how these changes were communicated and a group of women have faced severe financial hardship as a result.
“Today’s judgement has gone in the government’s favour but they have huge lessons to learn from this.”
Additionally, some savers online noted a sense of unfairness in the differences between men’s and women’s financial affairs.
One wrote: “Three men in wigs decided they had adequate notice. Sounds about right.”
Another said: “The verdict this morning 15th Sept is a hurdle not a loss to #BackTo60 my understanding is it will now be taken to the Supreme Court #discrimination against Women must be stopped!”
Some people also called into question the legitimacy of the campaign.
As @BarneyAllen noted: “Millions of women did not say they weren’t informed about state pension changes – only a tiny minority did.
“Most 1950s born women knew about the changes well in advance.”
And @Phostle sarcastically commented: “Women challenging changes to state pension age lose court battle.
“When we say we wanted equality, we didn’t mean that much equality.”
@BarneyAllen went on to argue the case with others who stood firm on their belief that the ruling(s) is unfair.
User @tweet2woos responded to the result with the following: “No win for 1950s ladies but it as ok for men to get their NI paid at 60 for years”
Barney Allen resonsed to this: “It was was perfectly for men to get credits for NI from 60 because women the same age as them were already receiving their state pensions. Autocredits were phased out when state pension ages were equalised.” (SIC)
With this being followed up with the following by @paullewismoney: “A working life paying NICs can be 50 years for men and women now but entitlement to the state pension comes after 35 years. It is neither fair nor unfair, it is just the rules. NI is a tax paid when you work. It is also the way the ticket to the state pension works.”
While the ruling concerns the BackTo60 campaign, the WASPI organsation provided the following comments: “Many women will be disappointed today at the judgement from the High Court.
“Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) will continue to campaign for what we believe is achievable and affordable. Compensation for women who have been unfairly disadvantaged with a rapid increase to their State Pension age (SPa). WASPI is not opposed to the equalisation of the SPa with men but it was done without adequate notice, leaving no time to make alternative arrangements. Women were informed directly some 14 years after the SPa was first changed, many only given 18months notice, of up to a six-year increase, many others were not informed at all. This left their retirement plans shattered.
“The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is currently considering six sample cases of maladministration out of the thousands of complaints made to the DWP by WASPI women. Their progress is reported here. We hope there will be no further delay in their consideration of this matter.”