Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 11 Jul 1972

Vol. 262 No. 7

Secondary Teachers' Superannuation. (Amendment) Scheme, 1972: Motion.

Minister for Education (Mr. Faulkner)

I move:

That the Secondary Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Scheme, 1972, prepared by the Minister for Education with the consent of the Minister for Finance under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, and laid before the House on the 11th February, 1972, be confirmed.

This amendment of the Secondary Teachers' Superannuation Scheme is designed to cater for three matters.

Firstly, it provides that the period of the secondary teachers' strike in February, 1969, may be reckoned as pensionable service.

The findings of the teachers' salaries tribunal resulted in a situation where allowances are now paid for pass degree qualifications, masters and doctors degrees, special functions, posts of responsibility and teaching in the Gaeltacht. The effect of the second amendment is to make these allowances pensionable.

Under an agreement made with effect from the 1st July, 1968, the school or basic salary was increased from £200 to £400. The third amendment provides for this change.

It might be mentioned incidentally that at the time the increase in the school salary was made, there was a compensating increase in the capitation grant payable to secondary schools.

Mr. E. Collins

This motion to amend the secondary teachers' superannuation Scheme is to be welcomed. It goes some way towards improving the secondary teachers' pension rights. The whole scheme, which was implemented under the 1928 Act, is in need of overhaul. It has been amended 16 times. It should be updated. There should be a definite move towards having a common superannuation scheme which should cover primary secondary and vocational teachers and which would permit easier exchange between these three areas of the profession. There is more difficulty in moving from the vocational to the secondary sector than in moving from the national to the secondary sector. This is connected with the question of mutual recognition. This is a wide topic. Perhaps it is not suitable to discuss it now. If a common superannuation scheme could be established for all three sections of the teaching profession, that would be in line with the recommendation of the Ryan Tribunal.

The amendments to the scheme affect three separate areas. They allow the 1969 strike period to be recognised as pensionable service. I approve fully of this attitude. The teaching profession as a whole have always acted in a responsible manner. It is only right that the unfortunate strike period should be recognised for pension purposes.

The second purpose of amending the scheme is to give a wider interpretation in respect of qualification allowances. This, too, is to be welcomed, and is in line with the recommendations of the Ryan Tribunal.

There is, however, a glaring defect in the present system. It is in relation to the recognition of service abroad. I am sure the House will accept that such experience abroad can only add to the maturity of the teacher and to his experience. Teachers who have been abroad and come back have a different and a better approach to teaching sometimes. This should be recognised and I suggest a certain amount should be added to their pensions as an earnest of this recognition. This would be a major contribution by the Department.

When the motion was before the Seanad the Minister spoke about increasing the basic figure from £200 to £400. This was apparently done by agreement and I should like the Minister to widen his explanation of it. He said recently there had been an increase in the capitation grants to cover the difference between the £200 and the £400. I hope he will elaborate on this, because in relation to capitation grants in general it must be obvious to anybody who has had contact with education that the present grants are inadequate and a source of much criticism in regard to post-primary schools. It has come to the point at which parents are being asked for voluntary contributions towards schools attended by their children. It is therefore essential that capitation grants should be increased substantially if we are to provide the up-to-date secondary school curricula that the Minister has been asking for.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise on the motion, which is restricted to three matters only.

Mr. E. Collins

There are a few points of a general nature. First of all, I suggest there should be interchangeability as regards pension schemes for the three teaching bodies. What I mean is that teachers opting to enter employment in industry and vice versa should carry their pension rights with them.

There should also be some provision for the payment of pensions to widows of teachers or retired teachers. The present maximum level in respect of contributory pensions is £1,600 per annum and most teachers who have reached their maximum have gone beyond that level. Therefore teachers are excluded from contributory old age pension rights as operated at the moment. A widow therefore cannot get a contributory widow's pension.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are going outside the motion. I have told the Deputy it deals with three specific matters only.

Mr. E. Collins

At the moment the only payment made to a widow is a gratuity based on the number of contributions the husband had made. No widow should be left in such an insecure position. Finally, the most important point I want to make is in regard to the calculation of a teacher's pension. The scheme at the moment is based on units of one to 80 and a teacher must have served 40 years to have a maximum pension of half of his retiring salary. The modern practice in industry and commerce is to retire a person on two-thirds of his retiring salary. If we are to attract qualified people into the secondary teaching profession we must improve their pension at least to the rate of similar personnel in industry. The House would welcome such a move and I recommend it to the Minister. A final point in connection with retirement pensions——

An Ceann Comhairle

I have told the Deputy we are dealing with secondary teachers' superannuation. What he has been saying is not relevant in any circumstances.

Mr. E. Collins

The teachers should have the benefit of all the allowances they had in their last few years rather than have an average of the allowances in a period of three years.

Dr. O'Donovan

I cannot understand why this Government treats secondary teachers as they do. Of all parties in the teaching profession those treated worst are the secondary teachers. To the best of my knowledge, they contribute 5 per cent of their salaries each year to their pensions. They pay in good money and all they get out are buttons.

An Ceann Comhairle

The motion before the House is an amending one designed to cover only three matters and it does not open up a debate on pensions in general.

Dr. O'Donovan

May I ask a question? Are we not discussing the secondary teachers' superannuation scheme? The motion states:

That the Secondary Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Scheme, 1972, prepared by the Minister for Education with the consent of the Minister for Finance under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, and laid before the House on the 11th February, 1972, be confirmed.

Have we made no progress since 1928? Is that what we are being told? As the years pass this community and every other community have been taking a different attitude to pensions. We should have here a Ministry of Pensions. We could not have a worse thing than the pensions section of the Department of Finance because they were knit way back in the dark ages. I am not unaware of how long it takes to decide to pay the most simple pension. Take the pensions of those who left the Ordnance Survey in 1916. Our secondary teachers pay contributions towards their pensions, but what has been done for them? I am told the Government do not pay any money whatsoever into this scheme. There is a token sum in the Secondary Education Vote every year but it is purely token. I am told no money has ever been paid into this scheme——

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise on this amending scheme which deals only with specific matters.

Dr. O'Donovan

Would the Ceann Comhairle be so kind as to tell me what the specific matters are? If I am out of order I should be told why.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am telling the Deputy he is out of order——

Dr. O'Donovan

I appreciate that but you have not told me why I am out of order.

We are told that this is designed to cater for three matters. First, it provides that the period of the secondary teachers' strike in February, 1969, may be reckoned as pensionable service. We all remember what the Department told them at that time. We were not born yesterday and we all remember what the Department said about the breaking of service and all the rest of it. There is only one group of people who can really be dictated to and the reason is that they are associated with the clerical end of the community who are so decent and obliging that they do not know how to deal with Ministers and civil servants or how to handle them. The explanatory memorandum says that the findings of the teachers' salaries tribunal resulted in a situation where allowances are now paid for pass degree qualifications, masters and doctors degrees, special functions, posts of responsibility and teaching in the Gaeltacht. The effect of the second amendment is to make these allowances pensionable. Why should they not be pensionable? Is this supposed to improve the pension of the teacher who has given long service?

It further says that under an agreement made with effect from the 1st July, 1968 the school or basic salary was increased from £200 to £400. The third amendment provides for this change. It also says it might be mentioned incidentally that at the time the increase in the school salary was made there was a compensating increase in the capitation grant payable to secondary schools. I do not know why that was put in. Is it in order? If my remarks are out of order, this is not in order either because it should not be there at all. It has nothing whatever to do with the scheme.

I have one thing to ask about secondary teachers' pensions and it is quite simple: why are secondary teachers treated differently from other public servants, from national teachers, vocational teachers and university professors? We all know they are and that is what I protest about this evening. The answer I got from the Minister last week to a question I asked about recognition of service abroad was a disgrace and was outrageous. Recognition of service abroad is related to pensions and it is entirely wrong that people who serve abroad in the advanced countries where education is worthwhile should not have their service recognised. The fact is that of all those in professional or semi-professional occupations today the worst treated are the secondary teachers. They are certainly the worst treated of all the services when one thinks of the way they pay for their own education, long service and all the rest and the Department have shown themselves to be retrograde and their attitude entirely contrary to decent thinking in the way they treat them.

Mr. Faulkner

I was under the impression when I came in with this amendment that it was non-contentious but it would appear from some of the remarks of Deputy O'Donovan that there is some contentious matter in it.

Dr. O'Donovan

Did the Minister expect to get away with it?

Mr. Faulkner

I do not know exactly what I am getting away with. I am grateful to Deputy Collins for his acceptance of the proposals as put forward. There were some points made by him in relation to mobility and I can say that I propose to introduce further amendments later on which will allow for greater mobility.

With regard to the widows' and orphans' pension scheme, there is a provision for widows and orphans. The situation in regard to the amount of pension payable to teachers is comparable with that in the public service generally and therefore is not a matter with which I could deal on my own.

Dr. O'Donovan

That is entirely wrong because teachers pay for their pensions and public servants do not. The Minister should not make that kind of statement.

Mr. Faulkner

I would like to point out that the secondary teachers are treated in exactly the same way in regard to pensions as vocational and primary teachers.

Dr. O'Donovan

With respect, they are not. It is a disgrace that the Minister should make that statement. I do not know why he makes it.

Mr. Faulkner

I am making the statement because it happens to be a fact.

Dr. O'Donovan

It is not a fact.

Mr. Faulkner

Perhaps the Deputy would look up the situation and he will find that what I have stated is a fact. Deputy Collins raised the question of the increase from £200 to £400 and asked why this was done. The reason for this was to rationalise the situation in all the schools. The £400 is a recognition of the fact that the teachers are employed by the conductors of the school and not by the Department. As I mentioned earlier, all the salary increases which are expressed as percentages are paid by the Department and for the purpose of calculation include the £400 as well as the incremental salary. I am grateful to the House for its acceptance of the proposals I have put forward.

Motion put and agreed to.