TEACHERS' SUPERANNUATION.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Knowing your interest in matters appertaining to teachers, I beg respectfully to bring under your notice the following points :—
(1) All Governments have hitherto been wanting in due con- sideration for the older teachers.
(2) The teaching profession can never command the respect desired while its older members are unceremoniously treated. (3) Why should the pensions of teachers, retiring from April 1st, 1912, onwards, be increased 100 per cent., while those before that date remain unaltered, instead of all being treated alike ? (4) Was it not the grievances of teachers before that date that brought about the change ?
(5) That being so, had we not the first claim to any increase, seeing that we were the actual sufferers ?
(6) Otherwise, why, before the passing of the Act, as each of us retired, were questions asked in Parliament as to that teacher's years of service and Government allowance ?
(7) The simple fact of doubling the pensions for present teachers shows how unsatisfactory they have hitherto been.
(8) Then, why should the Superannuation Act, August 7th, 1912, be made retrospective only to April 1st of that year ?
(9) Was our work before that date less arduous or less deserving of recognition?
(10) Are our lives' expectations, founded on Government promises, to count for nothing ?
(11) Is it thus a nation should honour the "Old Guard," and other old teachers, now left out in the cold ?
(12) Is what was a burning question for all certificated teachers up to 1912 to remain a burning question for us for ever?
No, we shall soon die, like others before us, but the stigma of
Previous page
