ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,279
I think you already were, but not for the reasons you wanted! ;-)For the record: I am forthwith transgendered and would like to be now know as Two Gun Bobbette.
I think you already were, but not for the reasons you wanted! ;-)For the record: I am forthwith transgendered and would like to be now know as Two Gun Bobbette.
So yesterday the Court of Appeal decided that these WASPI women had not been discriminated against and that the government had given them plenty of notice of the pension age changes that Parliament had legislated for(1995 and 2011).
Indeed the 3 judges decided that the new legislation had reversed decades of discrimination against men.
I still struggle to understand the mindset of these women. They demanded and got equal pay in the workplace via Parliamentary legislation.
But they want better pension rights than men get. Sorry girls but you can't have your cake and eat it. You hypocritical hussies.
So yesterday the Court of Appeal decided that these WASPI women had not been discriminated against and that the government had given them plenty of notice of the pension age changes that Parliament had legislated for(1995 and 2011).
Indeed the 3 judges decided that the new legislation had reversed decades of discrimination against men.
I still struggle to understand the mindset of these women. They demanded and got equal pay in the workplace via Parliamentary legislation.
But they want better pension rights than men get. Sorry girls but you can't have your cake and eat it. You hypocritical hussies.
Equal pay legislation was passed in the late 60s and came into effect in 1975 . So sorry but most of these women have had equal pay rights for MOST if not all of their working lives.I see where you are coming from and going forward you're correct, looking back however you're wrong. What HMG have done is equalise the sexes in terms of pension rights, thereby penalising women who have spent the majority of their working lives discriminated against in terms of levels of pay and opportunities for advancement, so a lose lose for them
Exactly what my wife wanted to happen. Everybody gets their state pension at 63 years old.It's the right decision, the government should have lowered the pension age for men to 63 and put the pension age for women up to 63 IMO.
When legislation like this is passed there are always going to be some people who are disappointed, whilst I have some sympathy for them equality means just that in this instance.
Equal pay legislation was passed in the late 60s and came into effect in 1975 . So sorry but most of these women have had equal pay rights for MOST if not all of their working lives.
They are just being greedy in my opinion.
Some of them are whinging that they have been left destitute by the pension legislation.
The easy way out is to carry on earning a living until they are 65/66. Just the same as every man in the country would have to do if they were destitute.
It's the right decision, the government should have lowered the pension age for men to 63 and put the pension age for women up to 63 IMO.
I would have been delighted with that to be honest :)
Well yes according to Parliamentary legislation they have. Barbara Castle was the labour politician who lobbied for the change in law.Women have had equal pay and working opportunities since 1975 have they........
Although I do agree with you that they could have carried on working and that the penniless and destitute thing is over the top, still isn't a fair change though