Skip to main content
article icon

Pensions will cost teachers 50% more

News | Published in TES Newspaper on 14 January, 2011 | By: Irena Barker

That’s an average increase of £100 a month

A radical overhaul of the teacher pension scheme that will see individual contributions soar by 50 per cent is to be pushed through within a month, The TES can reveal.

The Department for Education has revealed that contributions will rise from a current flat rate of 6.4 per cent of salary to an average of between 9.5 and 9.8 per cent by 2014/15, prompting outrage from teaching unions, which are holding emergency meetings.

The announcement, which will save the Government £768 million to £852 million a year, is the first time the hike in teacher contributions has been set out in detail.

Overall annual spending on public sector pensions is being reined in by £2.8 billion.

For a teacher earning £35,000 a year, contributions are set to soar by up to £1,190 a year - £100 a month. The increases will be phased in over three years from April 2012.

The move comes on top of a two-year pay freeze from September this year, and the controversial switch from calculating pension payouts from the Retail Price Index to the generally lower Consumer Price Index.

Teachers’ leaders say the announcement on extra contributions is “politically motivated”, coming before the outcome of the independent John Hutton review of public sector pensions, due in March.

Unions held emergency meetings on Monday to decide on their next course of action, with widespread industrial action a strong possibility.

Minsters this week invited unions and employers to discuss how to impose the contribution rise, which is likely to result in the highest-earning teachers paying a higher percentage of their earnings so that lower paid workers are not unfairly hit.

In a letter to the Teachers’ Superannuation Committee, a cross-union group devoted to pensions, the DfE’s head of pay and pensions, Paul Bleasdale, wrote that there would have to be a “tiered approach” to contributions to “strike the right balance between fairness, ease of understanding and administrative complexity”.

But unions say a deadline of mid-February to finalise the details is unrealistic and motivated by the Government’s desire to announce savings on Budget day on 23 March. Chancellor George Osborne said in the comprehensive spending review in October that he expected all public sector pensions to rise by an average of 3 per cent.

Chris Keates, general secretary of the NASUWT, warned that pensions will be the issue that unites unions in taking action. She said: “Teachers will be deeply aggrieved about the coalition Government continuing to wage war on their pensions, when changes had already been agreed with the previous government, which, according to the Treasury itself, made the scheme affordable and viable in the longer term.”

Not knowing the “full context” of the situation, including the outcome of the Hutton review, which will address issues such as the final salary scheme, would make it “very difficult indeed” to engage with the Government in such a short time frame.

Martin Freedman, head of pay and pensions at education union the ATL, said: “The Government wants to get this out of the way before the Budget, presumably so George Osborne can say we have made X amount of savings in public sector pensions. It’s completely political.

“This announcement will inevitably speed up any union action to take over pensions.”

The DfE said the union outrage was premature and that ministers were keen to sit down and talk.

A Department spokesman said: “We wrote to employer groups and teaching unions, so we can work with them to look at options for how the changes could be introduced fairly and progressively from 2012/13 onwards, and whether high earners should pay proportionately more, while protecting the lower-paid members of the pension scheme from the full effect of the contribution increase.”


Subscribe to the magazine

3 average rating

Comment (43)

  • Is this as well as no longer getting a final salary pension if you are currently under 50? The rumour I hear is the Hutton report will suggest a pension based on your median salary !!! Huge pension cut! It will all result in teachers claiming more benefits in retirement. It's a false economy.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    14:33
    14 January, 2011

    Tyne5mouth

  • It will be left to others to calculate whether this makes teaching generally less or more attractive, amongst the restrictions proffered through various "Govisms" of 2:1 Degree entry, psychometric testing, fast track entry for ex- service personnel, faster track entry for Mathematicians, no qualifications required to teach in a Free School etc etc.
    I now wonder at what point Early Retirement again becomes an option for those 50-59 year olds faced with a very real cut in take home wages through various indirect taxations - particularly if it means you safeguard your Tax Free Lump Sum before it to disappears down the drains.

    I am now very secure in my bed knowing that I, like many other Public Service Workers, am assisting eradicate the black hole of fiscal deficit as early as possible, instead of hampering the entrepreneurial capitalistic urges of the finance and banking community from ushering in National growth and prosperity.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    15:56
    14 January, 2011

    HAL5000

  • This is the thin end of the wedge getting thicker. First it was a new scheme for teachers beginning their careers in 2007, then the RPI to CPI switch. Next the increase in contribution coupled with a pay freeze and finally will be a switch for the under 50's to career average schemes.

    Enough is enough, we need to show this crappy coalition that we will not be the whipping boy for mistakes made by their city spiv friends' gambling.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    16:17
    14 January, 2011

    Lurch

  • Not a great suprise, logical progression really. Privatise the eduction system with the new academies, switch to CPI, increase the contributions, switch to average salary, next ( and this is a prediction) increase retirement to 66+ and finally convert to private pensions. Do we role over again and accept it or will the unions and teachers resist? I hope so.

    Strikes I feel would be counter productive as the harm the childrens education and as the parents would have to find child care it would rapidly lose public support ( I remember being sent home in the 70's). Would not work to rule be more effective 8:30 to 3:30 and the system would crumble.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    22:09
    14 January, 2011

    stuwght

  • Firstly a pay freeze, then I discover I will no longer get child benefit as a single mom of two. I later discovered that I have to pay 20% for VAT. I am now being asked to increase my pension contributions. At this rate I will not any money left to pay food or the increased nursery fees. There will be no point going to work if I can't feed my family.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    22:46
    14 January, 2011

    vsharpe

  • Why do the ConDem's need to rein in spending on teacher pensions; the TPS was sorted out 4/5 years ago?

    The statistics for forcing this current increase in teacher pension contributions through are FUNDAMENTALY FLAWED. There is no Public Sector Pension 'Black Hole'; it is a statistically created crisis. Once again the ConDem's are lying to us; nothing new there!

    No Black Hole?
    The ConDem's take the pensions of teachers alongside the Police service pensions, Fire service pensions etc and then add in the BLACK HOLE which is the Armed Forces pensions. Teachers currently pay in 6.5% of their pay for up to 40 years, and the Police/Fire service pay in a greater percentage for less time alongside the employer’s contributions which pay in huge amounts. The Armed Forces pay absolutely no contribution to their pensions. In the words of Monty Python; not a sausage, bugger all!..........that is why we have a Public Sector Pension Black Hole. If the Armed Forces were asked to actually contribute to their pension there would be no need for teachers to pay a penny extra. The ConDem's know that that idea is political suicide!

    The cure?
    1. Look at teachers, fire service, police service and others who PAY MONEY IN large pension contributions already separate from those who don't.
    OR
    2. Pay the Armed Forces 10% extra in pay & then take it off them as a 'pension contribution'; then include them with teachers, fire service, police service and others in calculating overall pensions.
    Either way the Public Sector Pension Black Hole will vanish completely or at least reduce to a manageable size in seconds! That way the ConDem's have no excuse for 'reining in' pensions!

    Do not be taken in; this is simply the ConDem party telling teachers to pay for a financial crisis that was created by the banking sector. A banking sector who currently are raking in millions & paying themselves a huge bonus out of what is effectively public money! Why aren't bankers being TOLD to rein things in?

    I say strike. Let the multi-millionaires of the cabinet know that they touch our pensions at their peril.

    (NB. The ConDem's have 'form' with statistical lies. Take for instance the bogus reasons for increasing student fees. Future students in the HE sector have already had debt created by the banking crisis shifted onto them by future student fee rises; if you calculate how much extra tax a graduate pays over a lifetime due to the actual possession of a degree you quickly realise that there is no moral reason to charge one penny for a degree. I've calculated that I paid well over £45,000 extra tax from aged 22-50 by having a degree and being a 'low' paid teacher; that is £45,000 the government took off me and although I didn't pay a penny to get my B.Sc. I have more than paid for it now thank you very much.)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    18:12
    15 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • stuwght,
    Strikes may harm the childrens education for a day or so but the bigger picture is that if we don't take a stand on this the childrens education will suffer far more in the long term.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    19:20
    15 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • stuwght
    I have to agree with Bond. Pissing about with work to rule could go on for ages and still have no effect. A coordinated strike with the other public sector unions until either the coalition collapses or they reinstate the pensions with the previous conditions and a guarantee they wont be touched in the future.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    19:57
    15 January, 2011

    Lurch

  • when is everybody going to realise that isn 't enough in the pension pot and if people don't contribute then in the future there wont be any at all!! It is nothing to do with governments - ALL this country's workforce should be made to contribute because soon there wont be a state pension and with people living longer we will all be s***! My husband is in the construction industry, he hasn't had a wage rise for 5 years and is now taking a 20% cut. My supply teaching has almost dried up thanks to budget cuts and HLTA's covering absences. We want to retire next year and have saved hard to do so. Think yourself lucky you have a job and a pension!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    13:56
    16 January, 2011

    hotkey1

  • @hotkey1
    When are you going to realise that there isn't a pension pot, there hasn't been one since the 1930's when it was fully funded by member contribution. The governemnt of the day raided it because they were short of cash and guaranteed the teachers would be funded directly out of taxation. It has been the same ever since.
    I take your point about the whole country paying in, I thought they did through national insurance? But I'm not about to start feeling sorry for people in the construction industry. I have yet to meet a poor builder. They had some extremely good times over the last 20 years and we all know that trade is cyclical.
    The tories want to steal the public sector pensions. Its as simple as that. If the pot is empty try pulling out of illegal wars, propping up failing banks and subsidising farmers.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    16:24
    16 January, 2011

    Lurch

  • hotkey1,
    Lurch hit the nail on the head. Most public sector pensions are a variation on the old Ponzi fraudulent investment scheme. Teachers, Fire service people, Police etc have all paid huge sums of money into the scheme to fund current pensions & are right to be upset that now they're going to be asked to cough up yet more.

    Your husband may be is in the construction industry, & maybe hasn't had a wage rise for 5 years; but that has nothing to do with the Teachers, Fire service people, Police etc who have all paid huge sums of money into the current pension scheme...........Just in case you are deaf: WE DO NOT GET OUR SODDING PENSION FOR FREE WE PAY FOR IT OVER OUR LIFETIME!!!!!! If you listen to Tory & ConDem propaganda you'd think they were giving us a free pension! They are only giving the armed forces a free pension; I don't think they'll be asked to contribute a penny.

    If your supply teaching has almost dried up thanks to budget cuts and HLTA's covering absences join a union & take up arms against GOVE, don't side with the enemy and pretend that teachers need further kicking. There is no need for these cuts & there is no need for a rise in pension contribution.

    LOOK at the Tory rhetoric. They are bending over backwards to let the bankers pay themselves huge amounts even though it is a few months ago that OUR MONEY saved those thieving bast**d bankers. In the Tory mind-set rich people need more & more money to enable them to be 'competitive' and to work harder, but poorer people need to be paid less in order to make them more 'competitive' and work harder. Only a rich person could think that up & guess which party support the rich?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    19:41
    16 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • And the pensions of the ministers will cost ....... how much more? I dont think!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    21:14
    16 January, 2011

    wattie54

  • £100+ contribution more from next month
    41% less pension - based on median salary of your teaching career and before actuarial reduction!!!!!
    Affecting anyone currently under 50.
    I am almost 49 - for me it will reduce my pension from £26,000 to £16,000 before actuarial reduction took place

    We need to make teachers aware of what is being proposed - it is a public scandal and we should not tolerate it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    9:52
    17 January, 2011

    Tyne5mouth

  • I have just turned 59. I am on the SLT in my school, still teach full time, and still feel I have much to offer the school and its pupils. Yet last week I handed in my notice. Why? The reasons are not hard to find: a two-year pay freeze, threats of a huge hike in my pension contribution amounting by itself to a de facto 3% minimum pay cut, the EBac a transparent attempt to reintroduce grammar schools by the back door, and don't let us forget Mr Gove (who of course knows best and is always telling us that we're not good enough) with his 'radical and urgent' reforms...it's a long list and I haven't anything like exhausted it.

    Like all teachers, I've paid for my pension since the day I started and, rather than face the threat of having it snatched away at the last moment, I've decided to cut and run while I can. I'm lucky because I have that option, but it's been forced on me.

    So thanks, Coalition Government. Thanks for making the last year of my 36-year teaching career so positive. Thanks for shafting my heroically hard-working colleagues throughout the country who have to soldier on under your onslaught. Thanks, above all, for rushing to pre-empt the 'independent' Hutton enquiry on public sector pensions with your own conclusions and measures. You've shown us clearly just how much contempt you have for your own commissioned enquiries and for your own workforce.

    A plague on both your houses.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    11:39
    17 January, 2011

    martinalford

  • martinalford,

    Gove is telling the country that people don't want to be teachers because they are afraid of being attacked by kids & that we need to be 'free' of LEA control to do our job properly. Gove is also telling the country that we don't need university education on our initial teacher training just a short apprenticeship watching others do it.

    Gove hasn't a f**king clue! Teachers are actually afraid of the ConDem government, they don't want their pay freed up to be reduced by private enterprise entering the school landscape and they want to be recognized as PROFESSIONALS.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    12:11
    17 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • Many of our staff are around my age and are scared. We are watching a financial future we have been paying for, planning for and been assured of by a number of governments being stolen from us by this immoral government. It is truly disgraceful behaviour and symptomatic of their attitude towards the teaching profession - they have no understanding of learning and children - and no educational philosophy underpinning their actions. We must not sit back and accept this treatment.
    Anyone who works in a school who voted Conservative or LibDem should be ashamed of themselves. Neither of these parties has any idea what it is like to be amongst the working and lower middle classes in this country - we are being run by old Etonians with houses in the Costwolds and whose wealth is inherited. They are clueless about life for the majority.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    13:40
    17 January, 2011

    Tyne5mouth

  • If you are an MP, you pay 10% of your salary to get a pension calculated in 40ths. The proposal being made is that teachers pay at least 10% for a pension measured in 80ths.

    If they lose their job, however long they have had it, they get a resettlement grant of between £32000 and £64000. What do teachers get?

    This, ladies and gentlemen, is called "sharing the pain".

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    17:06
    17 January, 2011

    oldpompidou

  • Love the comment about making Armed forces pay into their pensions. Most of the armed forces have served in all the war zones-as has my husband, putting their lives on the line. My husband will be forced to retire at 40 after 22 years service, heaven forbid he is injured in his 3rd tour of duty in Afghanistan, in which case he would get a paltry sum for his injuries. The worst scenario would be he would be killed. How many teachers are killed in the line of duty. At the age of 40, what is the chance of him finding other work in this climate? The armed forces are paid low wages for the dangers they face and having a non-contributory pension scheme is surely little enough thanks for that. Pick on the bankers who can afford to give more of their income in taxes.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    19:19
    17 January, 2011

    INKSPOT

  • For my first 10 years as a teacher, I was never invited to contribute to a pension scheme. No pension plan was mentioned. No deductions were made. I am now a decade behind in contributions. Great system! Any advice?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    20:01
    17 January, 2011

    Yargyenmu

  • Brooke Bond, I agree with you on most comments you have made, but I think Michael Gove really does have a clue. He knows exactly what he's doing, and he's doing it because he's a malicious little turkey-faced turd.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I do not begrudge our Armed Forces their pension arrangements. They are called on to risk their lives. Few of us have to do that. People should not be chippy and mean-spirited towards them.
    However, I fully support strike action to defend teachers' rights, including their pension. I hope the unions will show more grit than they usually do, and that their bellicose words will not be followed by acquiescence. If striking has a negative impact on pupils, that's just tough. We should not feel guilty about putting our own and our families' interests above those of 'the kids' (ghastly term, that!) We are not children's servants. As for working to rule, we should be doing that anyway. Only someone with no sense and no awareness of his responsibility towards his colleagues sets the precedent of arriving at school at 7 am, working through coffee and lunch breaks, staying at school late, and taking work home at night, at weekends and in the holidays. An honest day's work - no more - for an honest day's pay and pension should be our motto.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    20:52
    17 January, 2011

    Gunboat

  • INKSPOT,
    Read my comments. This isn't about picking on the armed forces. I served in the reserve forces for 16 years & have a great deal of respect for them.

    However they do not pay contributions to their pensions and are being used by the ConDem's as a smokescreen for increasing other public sector pension contributions from those who do.

    An honest approach would be to get rid of the military non-contributory pension scheme, pay them more & get that extra back into a a contributory pension scheme. I'm sure they don't want charity!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    22:22
    17 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • If the teaching unions don't organize massive resistance to this...one might ask if one small saving for teachers might be to save on the monthly membership subscription.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    23:58
    17 January, 2011

    anthonyH

  • This is the first time I've been on this site after I followed a link that my brother posted. Reading through the ill thought through opinions and poor calculations on this thread, all I can say is that I am so glad that I took the decision to educate my son privately so he wouldn't have to come across the blinkered nonsense that he might otherwise be exposed to by teachers in a state school.
    Blaming the current government for the state of the public finances is ludicrous after the previous government made such a mess of them and drawing parallels to the armed forces where salaries are on average so much lower is offensive. .
    My job might mean that I have to work 70 - 80 hours a week (every week), getting 23 days holiday a year in a job with no pension provision but I consider myself to be extremely lucky. And if I don't like it, guess what I do... I have to make the decision to do something different, rather than moaning and going on strike.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    0:08
    18 January, 2011

    useyournoggin

  • I object to any change that makes those who are paid more, have to contribute a proportionately higher amount (this means a higher percentage of their salary). It makes no sense at all to do this, as those who get paid more will already have to contribute more. Hopefully teachers understand that a percentage of more is more already.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    5:13
    18 January, 2011

    anon121

  • useyournoggin,

    Hello Tory stooge!

    Quote: 'Reading through the ill thought through opinions and poor calculations on this thread, all I can say is that I am so glad that I took the decision to educate my son privately so he wouldn't have to come across the blinkered nonsense that he might otherwise be exposed to by teachers in a state school.'

    The statistics on the lack of a Black Hole in state funded pensions is available to view (if you are intelligent enough to get hold of a copy of the Hutton report).........I have been through a fact based analysis, not an ill thought through opinion sunshine, and it tries to hide military pensions in among teachers, police etc to create an impression of unaffordable pensions. The TPS is totally self-funding & was reviewed in 2006. I'm happy for the armed forces to have a pension as long as that unfunded pension isn't used to take away benefits from my fully-funded pension. Get off your high-horse about the military as I've done more military service than you've had hot f**king dinners!

    If you work as little as 70 - 80 hours a week (& don't pay into a pension fund) good for you! You have no idea of how long teachers work but they CONTRIBUTE to a pension every week of their working lives which is why they have a pension & you don't. If you want a pension like ours contribute 6.4% of your pay for your entire career into a pension fund but keep your hands off mine.

    I presume you are one of the 'rich' in our society who can afford private education & are therefore happy to let the state sector 'rot' eh? The decision to strike will only happen if this unelected bunch of Tories impose unfair and unjustified sanctions onto our pension for no reason other than their mates in banking f**ked up. You're not in banking by any chance are you useyournoggin?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    11:11
    18 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • Gregory Fox,

    Exactly another hidden Tory ploy.

    In order to justify an increase in contributions or a decrease in pensions (eg career average rather than final salary) the ConDem's need to show that Teachers Pensions is not self funding and they simply cannot, but they can pretend that all state schemes aren't self-funding by lumping us together with unfunded schemes.........Lies, damn lies & Tory strategy!

    The TPS is a defined benefit final salary scheme and is one of the most important and valuable benefits available to teachers. We bloody well pay for it & we'll need to bloody well defend it against morons like 'useyournoggin'.

    As a final word to useyournoggin; his private school kids are taught by teachers who are also in the same TPS as rthe rest of us. If private school teachers woke up & realised that THEIR pensions were due to be raided by Gove, Cameron etc and if THEY stood up against the Tories like the state sector we'd soon see a U-turn.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    11:19
    18 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • Useyournoggin says he/she has no employer pension provision. I recommend he/she pay 6.4% of gross salary per month into a private pension or SIPP (self-invested personal pension.) 6. 4% of gross salary per month is what teachers pay throughout their working lives to ensure pension provision. By doing likewise useyournoggin will have a pension.
    Useyournoggin obviously earns well enough to afford private school fees, so I don't shed too many tears for him/her.
    I agree with Brooke Bond. I am a private school teacher. I support state and private education. It is harder for private school teachers to strike, as their contracts don't allow it. However, they can 'work to rule' by stopping the nonsense of turning up at school at 7 am, working through coffee breaks and lunch hours, staying at school still late and taking work home at night, at weekends and in school holidays. Just say no. Let your head and SMT stamp their feet as petulantly as they like and throw their toys out of their prams in a temper tantrum as much as they like. They can't force you to work ridiculous hours. If their entire staff worked to rule in that way, they'd soon throw their weight behind the campaign to save teacher pensions.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    13:50
    18 January, 2011

    Gunboat

  • Well - it was as obvious as everything else that's happening - the Tories chance to slap the working people.

    And to think - some alledgedly intelligent teachers voted for this shower.

    Simple equation = stop your pension and stuff your money in your matress.
    You'll probably end up with more anyway because these thieves will stop at nothing to bleed you dry.

    Still - it's all a bit late now. Unelected government in power. Bill to secure their sit-in of government for 5 years passed third reading today.

    It's riots or nothing I'm afraid.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    23:37
    18 January, 2011

    Only Me

  • Whilst i have been entertained by the discussion, i feel the need to endorse a couple of points.
    Yes a percentage is a way of spreading the load fairly, why would anyone then want to tier it?
    I have been teaching for only 12 years, although i am past the age that some teachers retire at, my pension is already small enough, and, of course, that was my choice, so i am not whinging, honest!
    However, i have friends in the army and the prison service, who are both already astounded at the rate i pay for my pension. Add to that a daily grind of abuse from teenagers, constantly moving goalposts and exhaustion, (yes, a lot of teachers use their holidays to catch up on work and sleep as well as a neglected family life) and the latest news seems to me to be the straw that breaks the camel's back. The teacher who has decided to cut and run has my understanding and i must admit, my envy.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    16:27
    19 January, 2011

    mumof8

  • mumof8

    Quote: 'i have friends in the army and the prison service, who are both already astounded at the rate i pay for my pension.'

    Ditto. How very true! This isn't divide & rule, nobody is saying that the military shouldn't get a pension & for free (if we all agree). But we need to somehow let the general public know that teachers don't get a free pension (or a gold-plated pension one either), that we do fully pay for it (over a very long time) and we will not be pushed by a lying, cheating government into paying more just to pay off the debts generated by bankers.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    18:01
    19 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • I am a trainee teacher on the GRTP (GTP) route. Currently, im, now paying £89 a month for my pension...I would much appreciate your advice whether to keep in it or opt out?? what's best? I'm very confussed right now.
    Thank you.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    20:36
    19 January, 2011

    MISSALDO

  • stuffing under the mattress is a good shout

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    21:19
    19 January, 2011

    morlando

  • I think it is absolutely necessary for teachers, en masse, to object to the twelve hours they spend in school each day, followed by the amount they take home, and their sacrificed Sundays.

    What's more, some of the changes being proposed in primary education (aside from the pensions) are blatantly regressive, especially if a move to a traditional knowledge-based curriculum is actually forced through. It would be unprofessional of me, seeing that this goes against most of the professional training I have been given, not to use industrial action if that is the only option left for me to oppose some of the daft changes being made.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Maggie Thatcher stole our milk as children. Now they steal my pension. Who vote these people in? 34 year old child of Thatcher :(

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    22:00
    19 January, 2011

    wilko1977

  • interesting tosee that Useyournoggin hasn't been back to comment!

    will these changes REALLY be allowed to happen?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    22:36
    19 January, 2011

    janice131157

  • The Teachers Pension Fund set up in the late 1920's is £billions in credit. We have paid over the decades for motorways, nuclear submarines and bailed out the banks etc. Now we want our money back to allow teachers to retire when they were promised and we dont need a pension contribution rise to do it. We already contribute 20.6% of our salary and that is enough to sustain the outgoings for the foreseeable future. We should not be lumped with the "public sector" pension hole. It would be good if the TES actually investigated this issue and reported on its findings.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    23:20
    19 January, 2011

    geofffewtrell

  • MISSALDO
    Keep paying in. It is still a 'good' pension. Most under 40's never look twice at their pension entitlement & opting out historically has always been a 'bad' thing.

    wilko1977
    Thatcher also stole MY milk as a child, followed by putting me (& 75% of the poulation) through a ''secondary modern'' education system which was at best 4th rate just so that her (25%) middle class buddies could go to grammar school. She then deliberately caused mass unemployment (to 'cure' inflation) when I was in my 20's & now the son's of Thatcher are after my f**king pension. The people who voted Liberal actually put these Tory b**tards in power!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    9:11
    20 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • geofffewtrell,

    Well said. We need to keep telling people that the TEACHERS pension fund is generating a surplus. That surplus is used by the sitting government as general taxation money; however when we retire we expect a pension in return for paying effectively 1/5 of our total potential income (our direct contribution + employer contribution) for 40 odd years.

    There simply is NO ECONOMIC OR STATISTICAL ARGUMENT for a pension contribution rise or a benefit reduction, however we've been targetted as easy prey for the Daily Mail right-wingers who want to make the public sector bleed.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    9:16
    20 January, 2011

    Brooke Bond

  • Thank you for the advice x

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    21:05
    20 January, 2011

    MISSALDO

  • useyournoggin, and hotkey1

    I have been a teacher for 11 years and contributed since day 1. In my teaching training, I have seen 22% of the students of my PGCE course( training course in case you are interested about qualifications which are required for our profession) dropped. During our first year as NQT ( new qualified teacher) another 30% did not pursue to their second year. I am sure you can see the picture I am drawing for you.... If you take our pension off, there will be 100% teachers not returning to work. Can you see the big picture now????
    Teaching is exhausting. I started full of enthusiasm and ideas. Now I am drained from il all: the ofteds, the changes of management like the toothbrush you use yearly, the students less and less manageable due to the lack of structure in that society ( I could draw you another pic here regarding a vicious circle psyche there as well if you are interested involving parents/money/support/police/social workers/ financial cuts/school)- The only thing stable in our society are the key workers: everyday we work our ass off because we believe in others and in better. And not for the money believe me. You are working 70 hours every week!!!! Are you paid hourly because I am not. I don't have bonuses either. And my holidays??? Well ask a teacher to his face- we will tell you all the same: we take work with us ( week ends and bank holidays and holidays and maybe even funerals....
    You are insulting us: the government made financial mistakes and we should pay for them???
    We should be content to be ripped off???? We should be happy to have a job??? ( darling I dare you to try my job for a year and we see how happy you are). I am a teacher because I love teaching- But life is hard- I mean real life- and we will all stand together to fight for what we have been contributed so far to remain the same. And I am calling for all of you non teachers to fight with us, to voice your concerns, to support our plea, because I will not be scared to hand in my resignation as thousand others and then what? Will you replace me????
    Take my hand and march with me

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    19:59
    21 January, 2011

    audaki

  • Can I say in reply to 'useyournoggin' s comment, you seem to say that being exploited in your job, like you obviouly are, is a good thing and should be the status quo. The rich and powerful at the top of this hierarchical society rely on people like you acquiescing to unreasonable working conditions. In a modern economy, if you are working 80hrs a week and have three weeks holiday (with banks) then unless you work for yourself, you are being heavily exploited.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    11:59
    24 January, 2011

    dnbtazz

  • I have had 35 years of constant change after change, kicking after kicking - first to the curriculum (who could possibly forget those wonderful multi-coloured folders and all the others that followed!), dilution of a class teacher's powers, transfer of those powers to parents, governors and anyone else who fancies having a go at us, OFSTED, Baker Days, literacy/numeracy hours, performance management, risk assessments, WOODHEAD!!! TLR's (snatching away posts of responsibility), disruption among pupils increasing year on year - with no comeback or deterrent, now our Pensions being eroded. Why oh why did I make that dreadful decision all those years ago to enter this damned profession?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

    12:54
    20 January, 2012

    bobbenjamin

Add your comment

Subscribe to the magazine
Join TES for free now

Join TES for free now

Four great reasons to join today...

1. Be part of the largest network of teachers in the world – over 2m members
2. Download over 600,000 free teaching resources
3. Get a personalized email of the most relevant resources for you delivered to your inbox.
4. Find out first about the latest jobs in education

Images