SUPERANNUATION FUND

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 142, 18 June 1931, Page 7

SUPERANNUATION FUND

PAYMENTS BY TEACHERS. OBJECTION TO ANNUITIES. ATTITUDE OF UNIVERSITY. AUCKLAND, June 16. Consideration by the Minister of Education, the Hon. H. Atmore, of the extent of the annuities allowed by the Government on the contributions to the teachers’ superannuation fund is to be asked by the council of the Auckland University College. At a meeting yesterday afternoon the council approved y, report on the subject by the registrar, Mr M. R. O’Shea, and agreed to send the statement to the Minister. Tho position as it affects teachers in the university colleges has been a cause of dissatisfaction for some time. Wliile the Government sets a payment of £3OO as the maximum annuity to be received by a superannuated teacher, it requires from a number of university instructors contributions creating interest which justifies annuities considerably in excess of the maximum provideo under the scheme. In his report Mr O’Shea expressed the opinion that the detrimental effect on the quality of candidates seeking teaching appointments at the university brought about by the Government’s limitations could not be disputed. This aspect was understood in England, and it was time for a similar attitude to be produced in New Zealand. Sums Taken from Professors. “The recent statement by a member of the Superannuation Board pointing out the unsatisfactory condition of the superannuation fund merits attention from the university,” Air O’Shea said. “It should be clearly understood that, with a few exceptions in the lower-paid ranks, tho university teaching staffs, while compelled by law to contribute, not only receive no contrbution from the State, but aro deprived of a portion of the amounts they pay in.” Air O’Shea submitted figures taken from the estimates of a professor of mathematics in a Southern college. In the case of a professor on a salary of £750, rising to £lOOO, and paying 6 per cent, from a commencing age of 30, the estimated net gain to the fund was £2383. In other words, added Mr O’Shea, more than £2OOO was taken from this professor under a fund which most people considered was for his benefit. “The average amount ‘filched’ iron) a list of 32 professors is a little under £1000,” Air O’Shea continued. “Take tho case of a lecturer with 42 years’ service at the age of 65, and on a salary of £5OO. This man loses £1055. The average amount from a representativ- list of 27 lecturers is £lOO. The situation is so deplorable and has continued for so long that much stronger terms than those used aro applicable. “A Shocking Position.” The chairman, Sir George Fowlds, said it was many years after the in stitution of the fund that the staffs of the universities were allowed to be participants. Tho State had, he considered, entered the railways superannnaticn scheme without knowing precisely where it was going, end the scheme fur teachers was the first to undergo a thorough examination. It was a shocking position when £2383 could be taken from the payments of one man. In agreeing with Sir George, Mr S. Irwin Crookes said ho had come to tho conclusion 25 years ago that the scheme was faulty. It had become tho equivalent of a forced benevolence. Mr O’Shea pointed out that the position assumed greater urgency when it was remembered that, within tho next few years, the council would be making new senior appointments. On the motion of Sir George Fowlds the council approved the statement and agreed to forward a copy to the Afiniator with a request for a consideration of the position.