Jo Letson, 29, is a drama teacher in a state secondary school in east London. She earns £32,000 a year

Jo Letson fears she may have to leave her job and home in London as a result of the pension reforms. The 29-year-old teaches at Leytonstone Business and Enterprise specialist school in east London. She says she loves her job and the capital.

But, on £32,000 a year and still paying off her student loan, she says she can ill-afford to have her pension contributions rise from 6.4% to 9.6% by 2014, as the government plans. It is hard enough paying her current contributions of £200 a month, she adds. Letson is thinking of returning to her hometown of Portrush in Northern Ireland as a result.

"These reforms are really making me think about where I want to be," Letson says. "London living costs are so high … I'm not sure I would be able to afford to live here."

She says it is "totally crazy" of the government to require teachers to retire at 66 in 2020, and then at 68 later on.

"I would have to work another 37 years at least … While it's a rewarding job, I don't think you can expect teachers to keep up the energy levels they need at the age of 66." Jessica Shepherd

Kate Harris, 49, (not her real name) is an executive officer for the Department for Work and Pensions' pensions and disability carers service in Preston. She earns £23,578 a year

She is striking over cuts to jobs and services, as well as pension changes. "This is the second year of a two-year pay freeze. If the government imposes this increase in pension contribution, I'll have to pay £60 a month more, and work six extra years. My current pension would be £6,000 if I retired at 60, but now I'll have to work until 66.

Harris is single, lives alone and rents a flat in the north-west. "I'm not extravagant; two-thirds of my salary is rent, utilities, council tax and so on. I've a small grandchild who lives in Manchester. Eighteen months ago I gave up my car because I couldn't afford it, so it costs £15 on the train to visit him. The £60 extra pension contributions is equivalent to this weekly visit. I shouldn't be thinking if I can afford to see my grandson.

"I'm also striking about the service. We're having job reductions, offices closing, and the increased targets mean we're prevented from taking the time we need on calls. We're dealing with really vulnerable members of society, many claiming for the first time in their 40s or 50s, and needing more advice because they are confused about benefits." Anna Bawden

Sarah Allen-Melvin, 36, is an assistant revenue and customs officer in Devon. She earns around £14,000 a year

"I'm striking because I have worked out how much I am going to lose each month," says Sarah Allen-Melvin. "I will have to contribute an extra £37 a month towards my pension. That's equivalent to one day's pay. It's better to lose one day's pay from going on strike than losing one day's pay every month for the rest of my working life. I've calculated that I will lose just over £75,000 over 20 years in retirement and work an extra eight years, so to me it's a no-brainer."

Allen-Melvin works part-time out of necessity, she says, because she has two primary-school-aged children. "It would cost me more to pay for full-time childcare than I would make up by working full-time. My husband doesn't earn brilliant money either … We're always playing catch-up.

"I'm not sure where I will find the extra £37 … We already try and buy food with reduced to clear labels in the supermarket and I can't remember the last time we had a holiday.

"An HMRC inspector earns £30,000 but brings in £500,000 in revenue, so investing in us would help reduce the deficit … People talk about 'gold-plated pensions' but the thing about gold plate is it might look all right, but it wears off pretty quickly." AB

Dr Leigh Wilson, 44, is an English literature lecturer at Westminster University in London

Leigh Wilson calculates she will be up to £180,000 worse off over the course of her retirement, under the reform plan. Dr Wilson, 44, says she cannot afford to increase her contributions by an extra £82 more each month.

But it's not just pensions that persuaded her to strike. It's the government's wider agenda for higher education in England. "It seems all about turning over universities to the private sector. The government likes to say the changes are because of the economic crisis, but they are actually about ideology." From 2012, universities can treble tuition fees to up to £9,000, but fees are a "red herring", Wilson says.

"Some of the other things the government is doing are even more radical, stopping us seeing ourselves as public sector workers, and making draconian cuts. It's forcing some of our universities to near bankruptcy. " Lectures are over, but Wilson will put aside her research to be on the picket line at one of her university's London campuses on Thursday.

Alex Loach, 30, is a case worker for the Crown Prosecution Service in Hull. He earns £19,000 a year

Alex Loach complains that the government is "scapegoating" public servants. "I feel the changes are deplorable, and will drive people into poverty. We're not exactly Sir Humphreys," says Loach, who earns £19,000.

"I'm robbing Peter to pay Paul as it is. It's getting to the point where my partner and I have to decide which bills we can afford to pay, and now I will have to pay an £50 extra in pension contributions a month.

"But there's a tax gap of £120bn. If the government made the effort to collect this money, maybe there wouldn't be the need for these cuts. The poorest in society are suffering for the richest."

Loach says that when he joined the civil service, in his late teens, the pension wasn't much of a consideration, but over the years has become one of the reasons he has stayed.

"Two years ago, we had 15 staff doing the same amount of work we do today; but now there are only nine or 10, so there's lots of pressure to work longer hours. Anything the coalition has done recently has been to the detriment of public services and civil servants." AB

• This article was amended on 27 June 2011 to correct Alex Loach's pay details, a subheading in the original version gave his salary as £23,578; the subheading also originally referred to Loach as "she". This has been corrected