WOMEN’S INCOME NETWORK
Founded on 12 October 2010 in the Houses of Parliament
A Network of Women Campaigners and Charities Creating a Consensus
To Save Universal Child Benefit & Improve Women’s Income & Pensions
Are you an unpaid Family or Friends Carer? Find out how much you are worth with Carers UK’s Care Calculator
Check out the Gender Pay Gap - Contact us - Join campaigns-
STOP PRESS –
3 November finds the City’s women are set to lose £45 million in Coalition Cuts – twice the impact on men
28 October West Norfolk Women and Carers’ Pensions Network publish Blueprint for Vickers’ Challenger Bank .Could helping Carers and Sustaining Communities help solve the financial crisis?
13 October Pension Victory for Women-Maximum Extra Wait for State Pension for Women in their late fifties down to 18 months from 2 years
But is it enough? Are you one of the 4.5 million people affected?Tell us here
|
Carers feel unappreciated despite their important contribution to society says the latest DWP research on Carers |
Single Mothers, Singled Out the new Fawcett Society report is released today 27 June. Tax and benefit changes will impact most on single mothers, who stand to lose a month’s income annually once all the changes have been introduced. This was the finding of Institute of Fiscal Studies’ research on the cumulative impact of all tax and benefit changes to be introduced up to 2015 on households.
|
|
Women act as shock absorber for the cuts, bear the brunt of job losses and the roll-back of public services like the NHS says Anna Bird of the Fawcett Society. Read the new report Unravelling Equality here What do you think? Tell us today at campaign.women@btinternet.com |
|
Join Age UK’s Women’s State Pension Age Campaign and send for your free campaign postcards
12,000 women have signed the Petition - will Government listen? |
Carers Week, Carers Income Kate Green campaigns for Carers in paid work to keep the money they earn – now they can keep the first £20 they earn with Income Support, but could they lose benefit with every £ they earn under the new In-Work Benefit Universal Credit? |
||||
|
Cuts to Women’s Pensions Too Far Too Fast say Patricia Hollis & Rachel Reeves |
||||||
|
Lifestyles are still gendered Caring responsibilities continue but are still unequally shared writes Alexandra Kemp |
||||||
|
|
||||||
  |
_links_ThePensionsbill_Welfarebill_HealthandSocialCareBill_SocialPolicydigest____________________________________
The Blog
Help Homeworkers Worldwide’s Bid to Change the law on Women’s Income and Benefits
26 May 2011 Women Homeworkers- Will Universal Credit Make Low-Paid Women Poorer? Up to a million employed and self-employed women work from home in jobs like textile production and dress-making, particularly in Asian and Cypriot communities, produce food items to order for local shops or restaurants, work as hill-farmers, make greetings cards, knitted goods, jewellery and dried flowers for craft markets, pack DIY products or sell beauty products on commission – all jobs that still don’t pay the National Minimum Wage – £5.93 an hour for people aged 21 and over – once their time and expenses are taken into account. These women, collectively known as Homeworkers – can claim Tax Credits to make ends meet.
But Jane Tate, Ruth Pearson of Leeds University and Nesta Holden of Homeworkers Worldwide which like Community Links represents the interests of Homeworkers have told the Women’s Income Network that the UK Government’s plan to work out entitlements to Universal Credit, the future replacement for in-work Tax Credits, based on hours worked instead of actual earnings, will mean a fall in income for these women who already earn less than poverty pay.
So Homeworkers Worldwide is calling for a special disregard or “ allowance” within Universal Credit to cover expenses where a woman has to pay for the materials or ingredients she uses to carry out the job.
Homeworkers Worldwide also opposes the payment of Universal Benefit in just one household payment including the child elements and Housing Benefit as there is a risk that this will bypass women altogether.They are also critical of the new household-based disregard in Universal Credit which will tend to make it less profitable for the woman to earn where she is the second earner in a household.
Homeworking as an offshoot of globalisation is set to increase, encouraged by business as a means of slicing overheads and creating a more flexible workforce with more data-inputting, word-processing and telesales carried out from home. Helen Jackson of the former National Women’s Commission and Sarah Veale of the TUC have also highlighted the economic effect on women as businesses encourage the workforce into false self-employment to shed the responsibilities, protection and duties of care owed as employers to employers.
Are you a Homeworker? Should the law on Universal Credit be changed? Should there be a special disregard or allowance in Universal Credit for expenses? Should Universal Credit for working people be calculated on hours worked or on your actual income? Speak to Us today.
19 May 2011 latest job figures bad for women and the over 50’s Richard Excell of the TUC analyses the latest figures – women’s unemployment is 57,000 higher than it was a year ago. The claimant count for women is at its highest for 15 years. As more women than men work in the public sector, mass redundancies and recruitment freezes affect women more. The new Lone Parent obligation to find work when the youngest child is 7 means more women forced to look for jobs that just aren’t there.
7 April 2011 Widen Affordable Access to Childcare says the Institute for Public Policy Research
Early Years Services - which include childcare and educational and health advice parents can access at Children’s Centres – are an important social good to help children out of disadvantage. Early Years Services help with families' work-life balance, increase employment, social mobility, educational opportunities and gender equality while reducing child poverty and the need for costly later social interventions.
But children living in poverty or at greatest risk of poverty are still less likely to access Early Years Services in the UK than children from better –off backgrounds.
So “Parents at the Centre”, IPPR’s new study by Dalia Ben-Galim, engaged with families most at risk of poverty who do not currently access Early Years Services, including families with disabilities, traveller families and BME families to give a voice to parents who are rarely heard in the childcare debate and the report calls for -:
· more affordability and accessibility for childcare
·the expansion of free nursery places for all two-year-olds
·childcare tax credit at 80% of the reclaimable cost instead of the new reduction to 70%
·the merger of the childcare element of Working Tax Credit and workplace childcare tax relief
· Childcare to be paid outside Universal Credit
· the goal of the universal provision of childcare
Other policy ideas are the development of a new graduate profession in childcare and a new user-led childcare comparison website as well as the protection of current Local Authority Funding for Family Link Workers and outreach staff. Read the full report here.
8 March 2011 International Women’s Day - a Women’s Income Network Idea is taken up by government Is this the dawn of a new revolution for women’s pensions?
Today is International Women’s Day and newspapers are awash with the story that Government backs a bold new blueprint to lift all pensioners out of poverty with a flat-rate pension for all. This was an idea put under the spotlight by WIN members Patricia Hollis and Alexandra Kemp exactly a year ago in their book A New State Pension Now Work and Pensions Sectretary Ian Duncan Smith wants to make it a reality, set at the rate of £140 a week.
The book included costings by economist Howard Reed and essays by the current Pensions Minister Steve Webb and other experts which showed that an end to means-testing in retirement will not only make it pay to save during your working life. It will also end the unfairness that a lifetime of bringing up children and looking after elderly relatives, with a broken career and often low-paid, undervalued work fitted around the caring, all too often still places women in poverty in old age.
Caring impacts on a woman’s ability to work, save and build up a pension of her own and can leave her socially isolated, in inferior health both physically and emotionally, as well as economically excluded, with relationships as well as earning capacity placed on hold, often for years. With an ageing population, the imminent doubling of the UK population aged over 85, and the rise in dementia and other age-related conditions, the demand for caring is not set to lessen anytime soon and it is women who will take up the responsibility.
Just by Parliament is the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst, a tribute to her courageous leadership of the movement for women’s emancipation. Her hand points towards the House of Commons. It is there that this next monumental step for women –for the dignity, well-being and security of older women - will happen. All eyes are now on Government to run with this vision and make it a reality.
The Women’s Income Network says change to Housing benefit is fairer to women 17 February 2011 The Women’s Income Network welcomes Pensions Secretary Ian Duncan Smith’s announcement that the Coalition Government has dropped plans to cut claimants’ Housing Benefit by 10% after a year.
Women’s Income Network Chair Patricia Hollis said, " I am so pleased that government has listened and understood the injustice of punishing job seekers who through no fault of their own could not find a job. I very much hope that the government will also be responsive on other issues affecting women as they seek to introduce universal credit." Read more here
Time to Re -Design Public Sector Pensions for Women? Ahead of the Pensions Commission Final Report we ask what changes could help women?
Campaign News- February 2011
WIN and Women’s Pensions
Are you a woman born 1953-1959? Will you have to wait up to 2 extra years for your state pension under new Government plans ? Check out Rachel Reeves’ Pension Table today to find out. Do you think this is fair to older women ? We don’t! Read more here Tell us what you think here
Campaign News- January 2011
WIN’s Save Universal Child Benefit Campaign
Say No to £2.5 Billion from the Nation’s Children the Women’s Income Network tells Touchstone Join the campaign-send this letter today
WIN and Women’s Pensions Standing up for women’s Rights
Half a Million Women will have to wait an extra year and more for the State Pension according to Government plans in the Pensions Bill 12 January 2011.
The State Pension age was due to rise for women from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020 to bring it in line with men’s. Then State Pension Age for everyone would rise to 66 between 2024 -2026, and to 67 and 68 in successive decades, reflecting increased longevity and the rising cost of state pensions with the increased proportion of retired people in the population. The jump in the retirement age for women from 60- 65 was to be phased in over a decade to help the older women it will affect plan for their retirement.
However, in 2010, the Coalition Government decided to speed things up from 2016 so by 2018 women will have to wait till they are 65 for the state pension.
Now the Government wants to raise the state pension age earlier for everyone from 2018-2020. This double whammy of extra changes will make it harder for older women to plan their retirement.. If women haven’t got a private pension, they may have to rely on a partner’s income or suffer a drop in living standards until they can claim their state pension. They won’t be able to claim Pension Credit to supplement their income either as this rises in line with women’s State Pension Age.
These two new changes could particularly affect carers, which a quarter of women aged 45-64 already are, and which is a important reason why older women leave the labour market early. There will be a greater need for caring generally in coming years because of our ageing demographic. Plans to abolish the right of employers to automatically make people retire at the age of 65 so they can keeping on working till state retirement age will still mean that many women could find themselves made redundant or unable to find a job. Only 3% of jobs created in 2010 were full time but part-time jobs are often not pensionable. The Women’s Income Network wants to hear your views.
Do you think these new changes are right for women? We don’t! Tell us what you think here
Making Carers Allowance Fair for Carers-Carerwatch calls on the Coalition Government to safeguard Carers from the Cuts -Send Carerwatch your message of support now Carerwatch is run by unpaid carers for unpaid carers
The Women’s Income Network calls on Government to save Universal Child Benefit and Equal Entitlement to State Pension Rights
Read Government’s Reply to Anne Begg MP’s Question about Child Benefit Changes.Will they be a recipe for confusion and family dissension?
News
The Women’s Income Network joins Fawcett’s Judicial Review Protest
· 6 December 2010 Fawcett took the Government to court claiming the Star Chamber did not consider how the spending cuts would affect women. The Court found that the four male politicians deciding the budget had indeed not thought about its gender impact, which by law, they should have done. Outside the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand, Women’s Income Network members took part in the protest, “ Don’t Cut Women Out”. Find out what happened here
· Gingerbread Speaks to Women’s Income Network on the impact of Benefit Changes to Lone Parents on 26 November 2010 read about it here
· The Womens Budget Group published their Response to the Spending Review 9 November 2010 Find out what it means for Women at http://wbg.org.uk/RRB_Reports.htm.
· Kate Green MP asks the Welfare Minister how Housing Benefit Changes will affect families, at the Work and Pensions Select Committee on 3 November 2010
· Patricia Hollis’s speech in the House of Lords 1 November 2010 shows how the budget cuts could affect women’s jobs, benefits and access to public services
· The DaycareTrust responds to the effect of the Budget Review on affordable childcare here
“Womancentric and fighting financial inequality” Sarah Barber introduces WIN
· The Women’s Income Network signs up to the Grandparents Plus Campaign and Lobby of Parliament 28 October 2010
The Womens Income Network says Save Universal Child Benefit 26 October 2010
Government plans to withdraw Child Benefit from mothers in couple families with a higher rate taxpayer undermines the new principle of equal entitlement to pension accrual established in the important new settlement for women in the Pensions Act 2007.
Click here to see WIN’s LETTER IN THE GUARDIAN 30 OCTOBER 2010.
The loss of Child Benefit will hit women with the double whammy of the loss of automatic Basic and Second State Pension Credits and place them at increased risk of poverty in old age.
Women’s greater longevity and lower lifetime earnings and pensions mean that two thirds of the poorest pensioners are women. Motherhood typically incurs a lifetime downward pull on women’s pay and employment prospects.
It is contrary to the principle of independent taxation for a woman, still likely to less than a man, to lose Child Benefit because of her partner’s earnings.
It prejudices stay-at-home mothers by withdrawing their only guaranteed income. Women in better-off households can still be hit by relationship breakdown or loss of employment.
It penalises women who are basic-rate taxpayers and counter intuitively redistributes from the purse to the wallet.
It undermines women's financial independence increasing reliance on a partner's goodwill.
Income can be unequally shared even in better-off families but money given to direct to the mother is the statistically proven best way of targeting children and the universality of Child Benefit protects a woman and her children in time of crisis without the need for new claims and reflects society’s support for the wellbeing of all children and families.
WIN calls on Government to save Universal Child Benefit and Equal Entitlement to State Pension Rights 29 October 2010
WIN calls upon Government (a) to save the important newly established principle of equal entitlement to state pension rights established for women in the Pensions Act 2007 on the cross-party consensus spearheaded by the ECHR Women and Pensions Network Consortium and (b) to preserve Child Benefit for all mothers because paying money direct to the mother is the tried and tested way of redistributing income from the wallet to the purse and targeting money on children.
WIN, the successor to the Women and Pensions Network, believes that Government plans to withdraw Child Benefit from mothers in couple families with at least one higher rate taxpayer will disproportionately affect and prejudice women because -:
(a) Mothers losing Child Benefit will lose their entitlement to the automatic Basic and Second State Pension Credits that accompanies Child Benefit
(b) Neither the Chancellor’s speech to Parliament on the Spending Review nor the CSR CM 7942 guarantees the entitlement of these mothers to continued protection of state pension accrual
(c) This places them at increased risk of poverty in old age
(d) It undermines the 2007 pensions settlement which the Women and Pensions Network worked so hard to achieve
(e) It prejudices stay-at-home mothers by withdrawing what may be their only guaranteed income without guaranteeing its restoration by the earner partner
(f) It penalises women who are basic rate taxpayers where the man is a higher rate taxpayer as it counter intuitively redistributes from the purse to the wallet
(g) It fails to recognise that women in general still face a gender pay gap of 35% for part-time work and 16% for full-time work because they fit their lives around childcare and eldercare, because women’s work is still undervalued, unequally paid, segregated or unpaid.
(h) Many women return to part-time work after having children and part-time work is characterised by low-pay with few prospects for training or promotion.
(i) The state should protect the state pension of a mother married to a higher-rate taxpayer because prevalent divorce rates mean she can still be at risk of a poverty-stricken old age if she does not build up her own pension entitlement whose adequacy will be underpinned by state pension entitlement
(j) The state should protect the state pension of the mother who is an unmarried partner of a higher-rate taxpayer -the DWP Report Women and Pensions: The Evidence 2005 described the ticking time bomb of future poverty amongst unmarried women
(k) Women’s greater longevity means that women are at greater risk of poverty in old age and two thirds of poorer pensioners are women because the gender pay gap, motherhood and caring impacts on their ability to save for retirement and policy must always take account of this
(l) It is contrary to the principle of independent taxation for a woman, who is statistically more likely to earn less than a man, to lose Child Benefit for her children because of her partner’s earnings.
(m) Income may be unequally shared even in better-off families but where money is given to direct to the mother, like Child Benefit, it is more likely to be spent on the children.
(n) The Child Benefit in a household where the male partner is a higher-rate taxpayer may be a mother’s only secure and independent income and so it is inequitable of the state to deprive her of this
(o) Depriving a mother of Child Benefit will undermine gender financial equality by making her more dependent on the goodwill of a man for money at a time when she is vulnerable to earning less in the workplace just because she is a mother.
(p) Mothers who are higher-rate taxpayers should still be paid Child Benefit as they suffer a greater likelihood of a drop in income because of motherhood than a man does because of fatherhood
(q) This policy simply does not recognise the reality of women’s lives and fails to realise that for women in general, “Parenting has a direct and dramatic influence on women’s employment prospects and pay which typically last a life time” ( Fawcett)
· 44% of women professionals who take up part-time work, as women do to fit their careers around caring, move into low-skilled jobs where the average employee does not have A Levels
· One third of female corporate managers move down the career ladder after having a child and move into clerical or other low-skilled jobs which impacts on their pay
(Fawcett Society, What About Women, 2010)
(r) Child Benefit should stay universal to protect a woman and her children in time of crisis
(s) Even women in better-off households can be hit by relationship breakdown or loss of employment
(t) Universal Child Benefit underpins the family finances at times of family crisis without the need for new claims and recalculations and consequent delay
(u) Take-up of universal benefits is higher than means tested benefits including among the poorest
(v) It is the very fact of its universality that makes Child Benefit an effective mechanism for reaching the poor
(w) Universal Child Benefit reflects Society’s support for children and for child well-being in all families.
(x) Women will also be hit more by the Government’s public sector job cuts as 66% of public sector employees are women, by the withdrawal of Surestart to all but the neediest families which means that more mothers will struggle to pay for childcare so they can work and earn.
(y) Government has promised to be the most family-friendly government in history and this is not consistent with the axing of universal Child Benefit.
WIN asks Government to preserve universality of Child Benefit for all mothers for children and would like to meet with Government at the earliest opportunity to discuss the resolution of this important gender issue
SIGNATORIES - WIN
Alexandra Kemp, West Norfolk Women and Carers' Pensions Network
Susan Himmelweit, Professor of Economics, The Open University
Dr Debora Price, King's College London
Ruth Lister, Emeritus Professor of Social Policy Loughborough University
Kate Green MP
Baroness Hollis, House of Lords
Jillian Foster, UK Women's Budget Group
Sam Smethers, Chief Executive Grandparents Plus
Frances O'Grady, Deputy General Secretary, TUC
Janet Veitch, Deputy Chair, UK Women's Budget Group
Ceri Goddard, Chief Executive Fawcett Society
Professor Jill Rubery, Professor of Human Resources, Manchester Business School
Alison Garnham, Chief Executive, Child Poverty Action Group
The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and signatory members of the Women's Income Network (WIN) and do not represent, bind or commit any organisations to which they may belong, are affiliated or provide services nor do they necessarily represent the views of all the members of WIN.
The Womens Income Network Website is edited by Alexandra Kemp, Chief Executive of West Norfolk Women and Carers’ Pensions Network, the Voice of Rural Women and Carers in Pension Reform and Welfare Reform.
