The Backto60 pension campaign group is looking to secure compensation from the Government for roughly 3.8 million women born in the 1950s who feel “insulted” by an “abhorrent” decision to raise women’s retirement age to 66 by 2020 to bring it into line with men, sparking a crowdfunding effort launched today. A judicial review last week ruled against the group’s appeal on the grounds they had not been treated unfairly or discriminated against. But the women insist they have not been given adequate time to adjust to the state pension changes and are suffering as a result.
As the women continue their fight they have launched an online crowdfunding page to garner support.
Speaking to Express.co.uk, Backto60 founder Joanne Welch said: “We are under siege – but we are strident and confident in the latest advice we have received. Calls from women born in the 1950s to challenge the decision of the High Court resonate with the advice from our legal team to appeal. Our crowd funder to appeal the decision from the High Court facilitates both.”
The crowd-funder page states: “Our journey enabled us to mount a legal challenge at the Royal Courts of Justice where at the Substantive Hearing stage, the Government’s arguments were dismissed. The Judicial Review was dismissed, however, the justices provided an opportunity within the judgment to take our case on behalf of 3.8m women born in the 1950s to the Supreme Court.
“Our world-class legal team, experts’ team and digiteams are fired-up to finish the job: with your ongoing support, we can do it. Our mission is almost complete: with your support, the WIN will be secured.”
Meanwhile, Yoland Howden said: “Us #1950sWomen are ALL in this together. SISTERS BETRAYED BY THEIR OWN #Government who know nothing of our fight.”
And another Twitter user penned: “Both men and women aged 63 the Government will still collect £5.1 extra every year. But please don’t insult us with £159 a week pension when it already stands at £168 in April next it will be £175. Do not try to financially abuse again. We will not tolerate it.”
The national retirement age for women has risen from 60 to to 65, in line with men and is due to rise to 66 by 2020 and to 67 by 2028.
Women born in the 1950s say the changes are unfair because they have not allowed them enough time to adjust their finances accordingly and cope without the state pension they were expecting.
Their case was based on the argument they were discriminated against – but the High Court judges disagreed.
They said: “There was no direct discrimination on grounds of sex because this legislation does not treat women less favourably than men in law. Rather it equalises a historic asymmetry between men and women and thereby corrects historic direct discrimination against men.”
At the time a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesman said: “We welcome the High Court’s judgment. It has always been our view that the changes we made to women’s state pension age were entirely lawful and did not discriminate on any grounds.”
Resolute, campaigner Jo Camp refused to be dampened by the court ruling. She said: “They are just kicking it further down the road hoping we give up or have died. If I die I have told my family to fight on, NEVER giving up and letting this happen to younger generations.”
MPs in the House of Commons on Monday also raised their concerns for women born in the 50s who have “built Britain”.
Labour’s Jack Dromey said: “3.8million women born in the 1950s who built Britain face hardship as a consequence of pension changes made by this Government.
“The Government has committed to nothing. The Prime Minister said however during the Conservative leadership contest that he is committed to doing everything he can to bring justice to the 1950s women.”
And Dr Julian Lewis MP added: “Successive Governments despite their best efforts failed to get the message across to enough people that the retirement age for women was rising exponentially. Will the Government try to look at some of the proposals?”
Adding to the debate, Labour’s Yvette Cooper said: “Does the minister not get that the real injustice here is for so many women who have had no time to plan with pensions or their savings but were told in their late 50s they would have to work much longer?”