Campaigners urge government to free up jobs by giving women over 60 access to state pensions

Women's state pension campaigners

Women’s pension campaigners claim that up to 1.5 million job vacancies throughout the UK could be created if women in their 60s could access their State Pensions early and retire from work.

Penny Anne Wells, coordinator of East Kent Women Against State Pension Injustice (WASPI)., said: “Around one million women aged 60-64, and over half a million women over 65, in the UK are in work. In fact we make up over 10% of the workforce.

“It would be a win-win solution to help the current unemployment crisis. Older women whose jobs have become too strenuous could retire if they wished. Much-needed jobs would be available to younger people. Many of those who joined the workforce would leave the benefits system. Their spending power would increase, and the economy would benefit.

“Women in their 60s are advised by the Government to minimise contact with other people because of COVID-19. But many over-60s women are working in public-facing roles such as social care, the NHS or retail. They are frightened to go to work but cannot afford not to because they have no other source of income. It is not just common sense, but also humane, to allow them to retire.

“We have written to MPs Craig Mackinlay and Roger Gale to ask them to raise the matter in Parliament and help their constituents. We await their reply.”

To join the campaign or for more information contact [email protected]

Facebook: Waspi East Kent

Court of Appeal dismisses Backto60 state pension age challenge


  1. Women wanted equality…

    Of course, an even better idea would be to give both (all?) genders an earlier retirement age.

          • And who says men don’t support equality in pay? Certainly this man does! Yet you’re not campaigning for an equal pension age.

        • My argument is that i and many women had no time to prepare or save because of this change , It’s ok for some women who are fit and well to work another 6 years if they want to , not every women has a husband to provide the daily bread or savings of their own , I am not saying women should retire earlier than men , perhaps both should retire at 60 but women have been badly let down . How would men cope if they then had to work another 6 years ? All hell would be let loose . If men or women over 60 are deemed unfit to work due to chronic illness which is not likely to improve then these people should be able to retire early .

    • All the benefits of reducing the women’s pe sion age would also apply to men. Many men have been out of pocket by the increase in the women’s sp age. For instance the winter fuel allowance which used to be paid at 60 to women and men now isn’t paid to either until 66. Married men would have benefited from extra money in the household from their wives pension at 60 easing the financial pressure on them. But yes reduce for both sexes give the young people a chance.

    • But men aged 60 were able ti claim pension credit before all this bruha. I know of one man whose wealthiest years were between 60 and 65 as he received pension credit.

      • You should stop getting your I formation from biased sites like BT60, WASPI and WPIYPO.
        Yes SOME men received pension credits from age 60 to 65 but remember a woman born the same day received her SP at aged 60.
        As SPA for women rose so did the date of commencement of auto credits for men, when women received pension at 63 that is when auto credits started for men.
        Remember these were only credits towards a future pension . What would you prefer a pension or s credit?

  2. I bet they do!They make no mention of giving that same access to men over 60,as well.
    These women just do not get it.We now have gender equality in pension age and they cannot accept it.

    • It’s the “Older women whose jobs have become too strenuous could retire if they wished” bit that gets me. I’ve a brother who’s still doing scaffolding in his mid ’50s, with little hope of retirement until he’s pushing 70. Shouldn’t they be arguing for the likes of him too?

      • Agreed,Peter.They go about how old and tired they are and deserve a good old rest from active service,as if men do not suffer this,as well.
        As you say,there are many men in their 50s and 60s who are as fit as a fiddle…as there are women,too.
        They just cannot accept having to work 6 years more,like men have had to,since this pension age disparity came in

        • As a woman approaching 60 I totally agree. Men suffer just as much in physical jobs. I don’t believe that men who wanted equality in the pension age wanted the womens age put up they undoubtedly wanted the men’s reduced. In the same way women who are on lower pay than men don’t want the mens wages reduced they want theirs increased. The argument for increasing pension age all round that people are living longer and we can’t afford to pay them pensions for the extra years only holds up if there are enough jobs for everyone. When you have families on benefits because there are not enough jobs it doesn’t add up

  3. Good luck with that but don’t hold your breath. I’m happy still working at 72 years old. Had the government said all new workers pensions would not be paid until such and such a age that would have been fair enough, but to move the goalpost after workers have been paying for years expecting to retire was very unfair. It would not surprise me if the government reintroduce National Service to reduce the number of youngsters who are unemployed. Every time I have told my employer I am thinking of retiring he tells me not to and gives me a pay rise. So I am very lucky.

  4. The article states “They are frightened to go to work” Well they do not seem that frightened to mix in a group without face masks do they? If they can not listen to the government rules on the Covid-19 situation why should the government listen to them.

    • I’m assuming the photos are old ones (Kathy?)… If not, not only are they putting themselves at risk, but they’re also breaking the law!

      • I took the photographs and yes, they were before the pandemic. I’m not commenting anymore because I’m afraid I would be rude.

  5. Yes – this is certainly something that has backfired on the women’s libbers !

    They have campaigned for equality to eradicate discrimination between the sexes – and now they have got it they don’t like it. Statistically, women live longer than men in any event so therefore draw state pension for longer – now they want more cream on the cake as well as a bigger slice of the cake.

    The matter has been to the High Court and the court said no.

    They continue to campaign for retirement at 60 for women but make no mention of retirement for the men-folk who now have to wait till 67. They clearly want to return to the “good old days” when the “old man” was out flogging his guts out till he dropped dead whilst the “old lady” was sitting at home drinking tea and doing some knitting.

    • Women also statistically don’t suffer as bad as men with Covid.

      If they campaign for both sexes to retire at the same age (whether it’s 60, 65, or whatever) they’ll get my full support.

    • Women are usually NOT sitting at home drinking tea and knitting, they are holding the heart of the home in the palm of their hands , a difficult balance when having to multi task from child bearing , child rearing , cooking , cleaning, sorting the laundry, Attending various appointments, caring for sick or elderly family members ,the list is endless , never ending , lifelong commitment, hardest job in the world , back breaking work done with love for their family. We are hardworking and committed to the most important job in the world , contributing to society, rearing our children to be hardworking people them selfs . Women today have more opportunities to work outside the home and actually get paid for it , where as women in the 1950,s generation had less opportunity to build a career and be able to save for their retirement. Any man who says we are sitting on our backsides knitting and sipping tea should ask their own mothers or grandmothers how they spent their days , evenings and then apologise and beg forgiveness 🙄

      • Every time,we get this response about child bearing ,child caring,looking after the home etc etc.This is a lifestyle choice.You are not forced to do these.Girls of my age, in the early 1970s found work easily and could have remained in those jobs.
        It is like parents now,who have children,and then complain they can’t afford to look after them.Simple choice,don’t have them.

        • Actually , yes I chose to get married , have our children and do the work , my ex husband was in the forces and we moved around every year / 2 years , abroad for 4 and the 2 in zimbabwe . I am divorced due to his abuse and am now left to struggle at 61 , I’ll health , disabled and other personnel things I won’t mention .
          I did not choose to be in an abusive relationship and as army family were treated like exess baggage . I chose to be married , to be there for my husband and support him in his career which I thought would benefit all of us . Little did I know or expect what I got , no support for me , I divorced him , no army pension for me from fact that most army wives find it difficult if not impossible have a career when moving home so often out of area , unlikely to be employed as no other half around to take over child care , back then it’s men before women for ring the Hunter gatherer

    • I haven’t seen the phrase”women’s libbers” for several decades. I have never seen a woman sitting at home all day (John’s implication) drinking tea and knitting. From childhood upwards I have known many women who not only had a full-time paid job but did most of the housework and shopping. Research this year show that this situation has barely changed.

      • I think that any woman that does all the housework is daft but that’s her business. In our house I’m the cook and shopper, my wife does the cleaning. DIY we share, she prefers painting I’m better at mending things etc.
        Sorry the division of labour is down to each household not part of the state pension system.

  6. Manual workers of sexes will probably find it hard going in their 60’s. I know woman want equal rights so that get them that do manual work to retire at 60 but the blokes doing manual work well pass their 66 plus years carry on. Why is that fair ladies ?

    Sorry ladies you wanted equal rights , which I agree with but you cant choose which parts you want and which parts you do like.

    I would happily retire at 60 my body is falling apart but I have another 6 years of knackering my body.

  7. It is awful that these people think it is acceptable to protest for women to retire in their 60s but are, seemingly, quite happen to let men continue breaking their backs at work.

    Ladies, you wanted equality (rightly so). This is what it looks like. If women should be allowed to retire from 60, so should men. One rule for all. You should be protesting against continued increases to the age of state retirement for everyone.

    Anyway, as a man in my mid-thirties who, by checking his NI contributions online has already fully paid everything needed to receive a full state retirement pension, yet will be expected to continue paying into the pot for others for at least 40 more years, you won’t be getting any sympathy from me. Chances are, I’ll never get the luxury of retirement, nor will I see the return on my investment.

    “What do we want? Equality! When do we want it? Now! WAIT…NOT THAT MUCH EQUALITY!”

  8. I would just like to point out that these women (WASPI) are not against the equalisation of the pension age. What they are campaigning about is the process that has been followed to bring this about. There was a lack of information about the changes which were introduced much faster than had originally been intended.

    Because of the way the increases were brought in, women born in the 1950s (on or after 6th April 1950-5th April 1960) 3.8 million women have been hit particularly hard. We are angry that we have been treated unfairly and unequally just because of the day we were born. Significant changes to the age we receive our state pension have been imposed upon us with a lack of appropriate notification, with little or no notice and much faster than we were promised

    • But surely you knew at what age the men retire at and that you would be going up to that age to gain equality. I bet if your wage was put up to a mans wage ( which it should be ) would you want to wait 6 years to get it ? No of course you wouldnt so why should you wait years to get to a mans retirement age. Instant equality pay = instant equitable retirement age.

      I find it odd that you complain about the 65 retire age when you knew that. Now if you ladies want to fight for both sexes to be treated equally and retire at 60 I am right behind you 🙂 personally I think it would be great for both sexes to be able to retire at 60.

      • You are missing the point. The notice period is what has made these women’s lives untenable. An uncaring and irresponsible (& documented as being too sudden) legislation was rushed through without proper notice. If you cared to read the charts that show the level of hike in pension age for the 1950’s women – who the Waspi’s campaign refers to – you would see that they were not given sufficient time to make provision for their retirement. Where ‘equality’ comes in is that this group of women never had any in the first place.

    • Lack of notification!The ruling came about in 1995,25 years ago,when ma y women were in their mid/late 30s.
      You were told on numerous occasions,but buried your hand in the sand,thinking itwould not happen.
      Liebour tried to bribe women into voting for them,by promising to reverse it,but that failed too.
      There are some women who only want selective equality,when it suits them.
      You were told,as far back as 25years ago.There is no excuse for not making any provision,in the same way that men have had to,for 75 years.

      • I don’t think they all buried their heads in the sand, some may have done, but not all. I knew, way back in 1995, that my SPA had increased from 60 to 65, but I used to watch the TV news every day and I read a newspaper. Women who didn’t do this could have missed it? There were letters & leaflets in 2004/5, I saw friends get them, but my criticism would be that the info was in the leaflet, not the letter itself & I think some didn’t see/read/understand the leaflet. I believe those that knew absolutely nothing at all are few and far between. I think that some women knew something was happening, but just assumed it wouldn’t affect them, and/or they guessed their new SPA. I think most women knew & I believe some have just jumped on the bandwagon, but some, genuinely, didn’t know at all.

    • Weasel words. You want paying from 60 but don’t want to call it a pension.wd can all see through it and you have no case.
      Im a 50’s born man, we all knew of the rise announced in 1993. No point in trying to hide behind your no letter nonsense.

  9. Lets just free up jobs and bring state pension down to 60 for both men and women!
    And we can all enjoy our later years !

  10. I agree with Elaine’s comments and suggest you men consider it from our point of view. I believe that if women want equality in the workplace, then they too should accept equality in pension age. As someone who was born in the mid 1950s, for the majority of my working life I was expecting to retire at 60 – I am not saying that was fair, but it is how it was. Then suddenly when I was 56, I was found out by reading a newspaper article – I never received anything in writing from the government or pensions office – that instead of retiring at 60, it would now be 65 and then it went up to 66. All I am saying is that the increase should have been a bit more gradual – perhaps with a 56 year old perhaps retiring at 63. I am certain there would have been a lot of noise if men suddenly found they had to work an additional 6 years before getting their pensions. I know a lot of men who were complaining they had to work an additional year when the pension age went up from 65 to 66. So don’t pretend you would not have reacted in the same way that a lot of women are now.

    • Yes Jane but you knew men retire at 65 now 66. And by wanting equality you knew that your retirement age would go up to the mens. So you are upset that the rise was to quick for your liking.

      You cant pick and choose which bits of equality you want now and other bits you want in 10yrs or so time !

      • But issue is there isn’t equality in work or pay. Demonstrated in gender paygap and women bening poorer in retirement. So isnt it goverment who are choosing which bits of equality they want now ?

        • That is a massive generalization.There is equality of pay in the public sector ;it is the law.My female peers in touching,received the same pay as me.So,when you make these sweeping comments,penelopeanne,please qualify them.

  11. Disgraceful display of sexism. Why should women, who live generally longer than men , be allowed to get their pensions early . You wanted equality, now stop whinging.

    • I would say the disgraceful display of sexism is coming from the male side of these comments on the whole. I would respect them more if the negative commenters had done their real homework instead of spewing the usual spoon fed clap trap. All I will say is if you hear that next year you’re about to lose every penny of your expected income for six years, let’s see how loud you shout. And before you say it, read the court evidence that proved that they knew up to 50 percent of women did not know and yet they did nothing to rectify it and then consider you are next. Get behind us or be us!

  12. But shouldnt you ladies see it as a victory that you now retire at the same age as men, regardless as to how it was brought. You ladies that were due to retire at 60 in a few years time will be the first to retire at 65 now. Something to be proud of surely ? 😉

  13. Equality is about treating everyone the same at the best level potentially enjoyed.
    I’m depressed by all these grumblers whinging about their male fates by having to work until 67 or so.
    If you don’t like it get off your weary behinds and CAMPAIGN like the WASPI women.
    Stop complaining about what minor concessions that others might enjoy.
    Your bitter whining and petty jibes at “Women’s Libbers”just emboldens the people in charge who want nothing more than to reduce your pension rights.

    Stop criticising the people who want things to improve and DO something yourselves to make things better.
    How about reducing the pension age to 60 for everybody?

    • No, the country cannot afford 60 as an SPA for all, that is why it was raised for women in the first p!ace.
      I think 66 for both men and women is right but that should be as far as it goes. If there was a campaign to stop future rises I would join it but it is for younger people really as they would pay for it.
      So for now I’ll just make sure we keep Equality alive, no way should women reach SPA earlier than men

  14. Keefogs

    I think all of us on here would back any campaign to lower the retirement. The fact here is the ladies only want to lower the ladies retirement age. If this was about both sexes than fine, but it’s not. It’s about the ladies trying to put of retiring at the same age as men, which isnt fair both should retire at the same age. Retirement age will never be lowered.

  15. Interesting to note that almost all the protests above are made by men. A few facts: men STILL, despite the Equal Pay Act earn significantly more than women on average (around 17-20% I believe). An earlier retirement date for women did something to offset this and level up the playing field. I am 75, so was entitled to retire at 60, which I did, mainly because I wanted to be available to look after my elderly father who was on his own. Unfortunately he died fairly suddenly two months after I retired. Women of this age are more likely to be carers, either for more elderly parents or for their grandchildren. Women still, even if they work the same hours as their partner, are likely to spend much more time on household and childcare duties than a man. Women of my age had to have 40 years National Insurance contributions to get a full pension in their own contributions. The last Labour government reduced this to 30 years, but the Tories then put it up again to 35 years. Women of my age earned far less than men generally and usually had to give up work if they had children because they could not afford childcare, which was rarely available except to single mothers, so very few women of my age had sufficient contributions to receive a full pension. and many had to wait until their husbands were 65 to get a tiny pensions. How many of you men would accept all of this if the boot was on the other foot?

    • Men also usually die earlier and therefore have far less time to enjoy their retirement (as you yourself very sadly know). As others have said here, why not instead campaign for ALL people to retire at 60 or 62 or whatever? We’ll be marching with you!

    • Yes it is interesting that men comment mainly against the ridiculous WASPI claim isn’t it Magsym.
      I wonder if it is because this is published in the real world and not on one of your echo chamber websites?
      On here you can’t get away with conflating equal pay to gender paygap.
      It’s pointless saying women never had opportunities, look at all the females in the public sector! We even had a 59’s born woman PM recently.

      • Most women in there 60’s where never given the same opportunities as men They were often low paid, part time in manual jobs. They were not involved in pension schemes available to men.

  16. I do not they are complaining about. I had in my mind I would retire when I was 65, for many a year. But being born in 1961 I have to work till 67. But as I bothered to keep checking on the Government website ,for updates as I keep doing to check it has not gone up again. So as not to caught out. I suppose I could have just buried my head in the sand and been surprised when I become 65 and moan then.

  17. Oh dear – my faith in ‘Mankind’ is waning having read most of the ‘male’ comments here. Maybe they need to read the facts, such as we paid in more NI contributions so that we could retire at 60 and that female pensions are not equal to the male’s. The fact http we had no warning etc….
    But I guess it is not worth arguing with them….men after all always know better and are hard done by aren’t they? Wander what their wives think……

  18. So many of you are continuing to miss the point. Women – the majority – are not campaigning to retire at a different age to men – I am sure that most are like me – we agree that it should be equal. The basis of the original WASPI protest was about how speedily the change was introduced for those born in the 1950s who are the ones most affected and the lack of information given. I certainly don’t agree with this latest idea that has been put forward and neither do friends to whom I have spoken.

    And look at all the men who went on strike in the not so distant past (firemen, 2015 as an example) when it was proposed that their public sector job pension age was increased ……….

    • Jane,women were told in 1995 that this would happen.
      You have had 25 years to prepare for this,at a time when you were in your mid/late 30s.
      So,what is all this nonsense about not being given time?

      • I was told 18 months before I was due to retire at 60! I had made plans. I was very fortunate that I could work on – but only to 65, when the job I did, frontline A and E became physically too demanding. I won’t bore you with those details. I only have about £600 a month to live on, and I’m lucky.
        Many women are not so fortunate – many are single and are losing their homes, as there is not the opportunity for women to work after 60 – we are too old and most employers pass us by, or they don’t have the qualifications because women born in the 50’s we’re expected to stay at home and raise the children.

    • Jans,
      It wasn’t the fire MEN who had a complaint upheld it was the fire service that included both men and women. How many men does WASPI campaign for?

    • Jane,
      It wasn’t the fire MEN who had a complaint upheld it was the fire service that included both men and women. How many men does WASPI campaign for?

  19. If you were a woman and were asked”Did you know of this increase?”,of course you are going to say no.That figure means nothing.
    There are many woman who agree that this increase in age,is fair.What do you think of these women?Wasn’t it a female High Court judge who said that the gender inequality had been corrected?

  20. I have never said equality in pension age was not fair and support it. For your information, I lived overseas (still paying voluntary contributions I would add) throughout the 90s until 2013 and so no, I didn’t know anything about it until I was back in this country. And if it was widely publicised from 1995 then there would not have been such an outcry about it in recent years by others who were in this country all those years. And on that note I am going to end my conversation on this thread.

      • I don’t think it’s Jane who is “behind”. What a bunch of misogynistic dinosaurs we’ve got on this thread! Keefogs excepted. (If Keefogs is a man.)

        • Thank you Marva.
          I AM a man. At least, the last time I looked.
          I looked at my old pay slips, then looked at my pension, at the holidays I used to get, at the career progress I might have enjoyed etc. Then compared it to my wife’s .
          Yes, definitely better in all respects.
          So I can confirm that I am male.
          There may be other differences but they are not significant.

    • There really isn’t that much of an outcry. Look at the stats for paid up WASPI members. Look at maladministration complaints no more than a few thousand and most of them to be rejected as ” no letter” isn’t maladministration.

  21. I think that when the government decide to equal up the pensions they should have met somewhere between 60 and 65 say 62.5 or 63 this would have been fair but as usual the government saw a way to make us older people pay for there mistakes yet still be able to keep putting there wages up we should all campaign together men and woman to change this problem we have a massive voting bloc if we joined together and could influence any elections together

  22. Jane,I am the same age as you and this theory of the “we were expected to stay home and look after the children”is a little outdated.Many women of my age,that I know,have had children and still pursued a life in employment.It is all too convenient,to keep on with that line of argument.
    Women were informed over the years and had adequate time to plan for a belated retirement.Many of you were in your mid/late 30s,when it was first announced.
    Even the female High Court Judge ,who upheld the govt. stance,said it repaired the gender imbalance and that women were given sufficient notice.
    By the way,I am retired and survive on a meagre £450 a month work pension,until I get my state pension at 66.

  23. Marva,just because we do not support your cause for continued gender pension inequality,you use abusive language i.e.mysogonistic.
    There are many women who believe the gender inequality was unfair.The High Court Judge,who said it now balances the previous inequality,was a woman.

      • Marva,read the article, think about the claims of WASPI and the other campaigns. Remember they want special treatment for a group of women based solely on age. It matters not that some knew about SPA rising, it doesn’t matter if they are rich or poor. They want a payout and are even using this pandemic to their own end.

        No wonder people people get upset and angry with such a selfish campaign. No it isn’t misogynistic to be against this at all.

        • My understanding of the article is that women over 60 whose work currently poses a serious risk to their health should be allowed to retire early.

          Perhaps a member of WASPI could clarify. Thanks.

          • Marva,
            Yes I’d like to hear one of these WASPI lot justify this. What they are saying is women born in the 1950’s should be allowed to retire ( or use weasel words to mean the same thing) at 60.
            No mention of men , this despite men being much more likely to be impacted on by contracting the virus.

            Misandry ?

          • These weasel words Marva.

            This translates into a ‘bridging’ pension to provide an income until State Pension Age, not means-tested, and with recompense for losses for those women who have already reached their SPA. There are no specific age groups within the period mentioned above that are favoured above others.


  24. Sandra,whilst you have not had it easy,it is not a reason for early state pension entitlement.
    Again,many men have suffered,as well as women.These individual stories are no reason for women getting a pension 6 years earlier than men.
    Men also suffer bad health etc.It is not the prerogative of women.

    • Reply to Paul- the words you quote are not in the article. Could you give me their source, please? However, I think the suggestion in them is a fair one. It is certain that many women over the age of 60 would want to and/or need to keep working.

      I wonder why men didn’t organize a campaign to have their pension age reduced.

      • Marva,
        The source is the WASPI campaign site :-

        Why is it fair that women can have this solution but not men? Perhaps even more why does their ask end for women born as from April 1960?

        Back in the day there was a campaign for men’s retirement to be lowered in line with women. Of course there was , men had to fight for equality in WFA, bus passes and prescriptions and the treatment of widow’s/widowers. They used the law and of course were right, they had been discriminated against.
        The above isn’t opinion, it’s from fact:-

        BTW I wouldn’t campaign now for early retirement for men ( I’m 63 ) it wouldn’t be fair on younger people whose SPA is even higher.

  25. Norma,thank you for pointing that out.
    This constant claim,by some women,that they have paid more in contributions,is just not true.As you rightly point out,they are income related.
    I will receive a lower state pension than many of the female workers in my profession,as I made fewer contributions.I accept that and do not play the gender inequality card.

  26. Sandra,if women(and men)are chronically ill and unable to work,there is a benefit system in operation,to take care of that.This is not a pensions’ related matter.
    Many women do not need to rely on financial support from a man,to get by.Many women work and have their own financial independence.

  27. The benefit system is not some anyone can rely on have you read the problems people have trying to get the helpful pip through the assessment process ? It’s corrupt through and through .
    Men and women both ! I agree many women do not rely on their partners / husband / wife for an income and the ones that chose that is no ones business if agreed by both parties. Some men are great homemakers and some women are totally career minded .
    It seems ridiculous that chronically ill people who could be claiming their state pension after 60 should be allowed to and the benefit system would benefit the younger unfortunate ones who really need that support

Comments are closed.