Teachers blocked from swapping gold-plated pensions for higher salaries
A radical plan to offer teachers higher pay for giving up their gold-plated pensions has been blocked by the Government, reports suggest.
United Learning, England's largest academy trust, wrote to teachers last summer offering pay rises of up to 15pc to leave the Teachers' Pension Scheme.
However, the Department for Education has now opposed the move, according to reports in the i newspaper.
It comes as current and former teachers launch legal action against the Teachers' Pension Scheme over severe pension valuations delays.
Teaching staff are automatically enrolled in the generous pension scheme and pay between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary in contributions, with a further 28.7pc added by their employer.
Contributions are boosted by inflation each year, plus another 1.6pc for those still teaching. Upon retirement, the final pot provides retirees with inflation-linked pensions for life that already cost the taxpayer £1bn a month.
Although state schools must legally offer the scheme, teachers can opt out and United Learning planned to induce this by offering increased pay and a less generous pension from April.
Starting salaries would have jumped from £32,850 to almost £38,000 outside London and from £39,000 to £45,000 inside London.
However, teaching unions said the move was 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' and asked Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, to intervene.
Civil servants have now reportedly written to United Learning – which contains nearly 100 academies – and opposed the plan. It is understood that the Government suggested that part of the trust's funding could be ring-fenced unless it was used to pay pension contributions, before warning of a financial notice to improve from the Education and Skills Funding Agency.
When approached by The Telegraph, the Department for Education declined to comment but did not deny the reports.
It comes after law firm Leigh Day and teachers union NASUWT on Monday launched a legal claim against the Government over long-running pension delays.
Pension valuations, known as Cash Equivalent Transfer Values, are usually requested in instances of divorce as a pension needs to be valued when assets are split.
Official guidelines state that they should usually be completed within three months, or six months in exceptional cases, but the process has since October been wracked with delays.
A Freedom of Information request by The Telegraph revealed that 1,053 were outstanding at the end of January. Almost 400 teachers had experienced delays of more than six months and 160 had waited over a year, while the oldest overdue case was first lodged in April 2023.
One teacher told The Telegraph she had waited more than nine months, which had affected her health and left her trapped.
According to the latest figures available, 621 are still outstanding, and the two organisations claimed the delays were causing financial losses and emotional stress
Patrick Roach, the general secretary of NASUWT, said the time for excuses was over.
He said: 'The unacceptable delays in processing CETV requests are placing intolerable financial and emotional burdens on teachers, many of whom are already dealing with significant personal challenges such as divorce or separation. Teachers who have dedicated their careers to public service deserve better than to be left in limbo.'
Ryan Bradshaw, of Leigh Day said: 'This backlog must be cleared immediately, and those affected deserve compensation for their financial losses and the stress endured. Without proper accountability and reform, this situation sets a dangerous precedent for how we value and treat our public servants.'
The Department for Education was contacted for comment.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ventura County government pay practices benefited CEO employees, audit shows
Employees of the top administrative office in the Ventura County government won substantial pay increases at disparate rates during the last few years of ex-CEO Mike Powers' tenure, an audit shows. Ventura County Auditor-Controller Jeff Burgh released a report on the audit of pay practices in May, three years after ordering the investigation from the Washington, D.C., law firm of FordHarrison. He has tied the delay to the complexity of making comparisons between the County Executive Office and dozens of other county departments and more recently the departure of Consuela Pinto, the firm partner in charge of the audit. Pinto informed him she was leaving the firm and that no other staff members were familiar with the audit, Burgh said. Reached via email, Pinto declined to comment. The county paid FordHarrison $82,000 before the auditor's office took over the audit in April 2024 and completed it, Burgh said. The audit examined a four-year period when Powers was the top executive for the county government, from January 2018 until he was forced out by the Board of Supervisors in March 2022 over a harassment claim filed by a female manager. Powers, who served as CEO for 11 years in all, denied any wrongdoing and filed a wrongful termination lawsuit that is still pending. The audit looked at whether employees of the CEO's Office received reclassifications of their positions into higher paying ones more often, started employment at higher points on the county pay scale, and won merit raises above 5% at a higher rate than people in several other departments. The query compared the pattern for employees of the CEO's Office with those in the General Services Agency, Information Technology Services, the Public Works Agency and the Auditor-Controller's Office. Burgh had initially said the analysis would compare compensation decisions for the CEO's Office with roughly two dozen other agencies in the large county government, but that it was narrowed down to four due to the volume of documents that needed to be gathered. The findings showed: Of 38 people whose jobs were reclassified, 20, or more than half, worked in the CEO's Office. Part of the paperwork was missing to support the reclassifications for 16 of the 20 CEO employees, but no omissions were cited for workers in the other departments. Typically, reclassification results in a 5% pay bump and a higher salary range. It's allowed for a variety of reasons including when someone's job duties change. Significantly more employees in the CEO's Office were eligible for and received merit increases above 5% than employees in the other four agencies. Three received the highest possible merit increase of 10%. CEO staff were hired above the midpoint of the salary range at a significantly higher rate than new hires in the other four agencies selected for the comparison. Almost half of 54 new hires in the CEO's Office got the benefit during the four-year period covered by the audit compared with a quarter in the auditor's and information technology offices and about 10% in the general services and public works agencies. Neither Powers or an attorney representing him in his lawsuit against the county could be reached for comment. In her response to the audit, current CEO Sevet Johnson said the audit report did not provide any evidence of preferential treatment, much less actual abuse of the personnel system for the benefit of the CEO's office. Nor did it show any violations of personnel rules, regulations or policies, she said. When he ordered the audit in 2022, Burgh said he did so after some county employees and managers expressed concerns about the appearance of disparate treatment for employees in the CEO's Office. Burgh said staff in his office had previously considered doing an audit of personnel decisions in the CEO's office, but that the "tipping point" came when former CEO public information officer Ashley Bautista was promoted to senior deputy executive officer three months after being hired. At the time, county officials tied the promotion to an expansion in her job duties. They appeared to grow dramatically during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Burgh said in 2022 that pay decisions benefiting other employees of the CEO's Office had also come to his attention. No specific employees including Bautista are mentioned in the audit report. Burgh said that's because they are personnel matters. The county's human resources department is a division of the County Executive's Office, an arrangement that the report suggested was too cozy. That structure and what was called "lack of independent oversight" appeared to result in more favorable personnel actions affecting compensation of CEO employees than the other four agencies reviewed, the report said. Reclassification of jobs in the CEO's office appeared to encounter fewer obstacles than in the other agencies, was not always supported with complete documentation, and was approved at a higher rate, the report said. The analysis called for additional safeguards to improve accountability for salary and other decisions for positions in the office. Human Resources should report directly to the Board of Supervisors and be moved out of the CEO's Office, the report advised. Johnson took strong exception to the audit findings even though she was not in charge of the CEO's Office at the time covered by the investigation. Johnson said Burgh does not possess the necessary expertise in employment practices to perform the audit himself, questioned whether he could be impartial, wanted to know why the law firm was no longer involved in the project and faulted the sample of agencies in the comparison. Still, she said the human resources division would endeavor to make improvements in cases where the findings clearly support such a change. Burgh said he expected any corrections to be completed by the end of next year. Kathleen Wilson covers courts, mental health and local government issues for the Ventura County Star. Reach her at This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Ventura County pay practices benefited CEO employees, audit shows
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kristi Noem's Net Worth—How the Homeland Security Secretary Built Her Wealth
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has an estimated net worth of $5 million, according to Forbes. Noem's government salary is an estimated $235,100 per year. Noem Insurance, owned by Noem's husband, Bryon, is valued between $1 million and $5 million, per her latest financial of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has a multimillion-dollar fortune through her time in government, as an author, and via her husband's insurance business. Prior to her latest role in President Donald Trump's administration, Noem was the first female governor of South Dakota, her home state. Before she was elected governor, Noem represented South Dakota in the House of Representatives from 2011 to 2019. Noem and her husband, Bryon, have an estimated net worth of $5 million, according to Forbes. Here's how Noem made those millions. Noem's salary as the Secretary of Homeland Security is an estimated $235,100 per year, according to Forbes. Noem's most recent financial disclosure showed $241,519 in salary as governor of South Dakota, or about $121,000 annually. She likely earned about $174,000 per year as a member of Congress. Noem Insurance, owned by Noem's husband, Bryon, is valued between $1 million and $5 million, per her 2024 financial disclosure. Bryon also owns commercial real estate in Pierre, S.D., valued at over $1 million, according to the disclosure. Noem's disclosure shows that she owns livestock and equipment worth up to $100,000. The couple owns pasture land in Castlewood, S.D., valued at between $250,001 and $500,000, which has brought in up to $50,000 in rent or royalties. Noem, an author, has written several books. She reported a $40,000 advance for her book "Not My First Rodeo: Lessons from the Heartland" on her financial disclosure, as well as a nearly $140,000 advance for her book "No Going Back: The Truth on What's Wrong With Politics and How We Move America Forward." Read the original article on Investopedia
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Doug Ford's Bill 5 is now law in Ontario. Here's what happens next
Now that Ontario's controversial Bill 5 is law, all eyes are on what Premier Doug Ford does with the new powers it gives his government. Bill 5, also called the Protecting Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, empowers the government (among other things) to create special economic zones, where cabinet can exempt companies or projects from having to comply with any provincial law, provincial regulation or municipal bylaw. Ford pitches Bill 5 as a way of shoring up Ontario's economy in the face of Donald Trump's tariffs by speeding up major infrastructure and resource projects. Ford's officials insist the government won't exempt any company in a special economic zone from Ontario's minimum wage rules or other labour laws. But the wide-open way the legislation is written would allow cabinet to hand out exemptions from any law, whether labour, environmental or operational. Asked this week which laws he's considering overriding with Bill 5 — and whether any laws are off the table for such exemptions — Ford offered no specifics. WATCH | Your quick guide to Bill 5: "I just want to speed up the process," he said during a news conference on Thursday, moments after Bill 5 received Royal Assent, making it law. Ford then talked of how long it takes for a mine to get into production, an issue that is actually tackled in a different part of Bill 5: revisions to the Mining Act designed to shorten Ontario's approval process to two years from the current four years. Pressed again on which laws he would exempt companies from in the special economic zones, Ford said every situation is different. Ford wants to move 'as quickly as possible' "Let's see what companies come to the table, and depending on how quickly we can get opportunities and jobs, we'll reveal them," Ford said. Ford wants Ontario's first special economic zone to be the Ring of Fire mineral deposit, some 500 kilometres northeast of Thunder Bay, in the heart of Treaty 9 territory. The area is said to be full of so-called critical minerals, such as cobalt, lithium and nickel, in high demand for the tech industry. The premier said on Thursday that he wants to make the Ring of Fire a special economic zone "as quickly as possible" but has also said he won't do so without consulting with First Nations Energy and Mines Minister Stephen Lecce says the province is already "consulting meaningfully" with First Nations and will continue to do so over the coming months. "We're all going to be part of this endeavour to really listen to those voices and help build a common vision for responsible resource development that unlocks the bounty of the resource, to change the lives of northerners and to ensure Indigenous share in that bounty," Lecce said alongside Ford at Thursday's news conference inside Queen's Park. The skepticism from many First Nations leaders is palpable. The Chiefs of Ontario invited Ford to attend their annual assembly June 17 to 19 and sent Ford a message that his attendance would mark the start of consultations on Bill 5. "This legislation, introduced without prior consultation with First Nations rights holders, raises serious concerns due to its far-reaching implications on inherent Treaty rights and community obligations to the land, waters, and wildlife," says the invitation letter from Ontario Regional Chief Abram Benedict. The Chiefs of Ontario, the umbrella group representing more than 130 First Nations across the province, are warning of "resistance, on the ground, and in the courts" against Bill 5. WATCH | What the 'duty to consult' First Nations means for governments: One thing to watch for in the months to come is whether the provincial government's push to fast-track the Ring of Fire is replicated by the federal government. Ford put the Ring of Fire at the top of his list presented to Prime Minister Mark Carney for consideration as a potential nation-building project. Ford calls Carney 'Santa Claus' Carney asked all the premiers to come to last Monday's First Ministers Meeting in Saskatoon with their ideas of projects that would be "in the national interest," either by helping to diversify the Canadian economy or to reach new export markets. It's now up to Carney to decide which projects merit federal backing, whether through fast-track approvals or funding. Ford described Carney as Santa Claus for this approach. But to make the metaphor accurate, it means Ford and his fellow premiers have merely written their letters to Santa Claus, and they now have to wait until Christmas comes to find out whether Santa brings them what they asked for. The other items on Ford's list are also projects that could be designated special economic zones: new nuclear power plants, a new deep-sea port on James Bay, Ford's vision of a tunnel under Highway 401 through Toronto, and an expansion of the GO Transit network. If Carney endorses any of these, you can expect the Ford government will use its Bill 5 powers to speed up the process of moving that project from endorsement to reality. On Friday, Carney's Liberals tabled a bill in the House of Commons called the One Canadian Economy Act, designed in part to speed up the approval process of major infrastructure projects, a goal similar to Ontario's Bill 5. One line in the text of Bill 5 says its purpose is making Ontario "the best place in the G7 to invest, create jobs and do business." Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade Minister Vic Fedeli, whose chief role is attracting companies to the province, says investors around the world are hoarding capital in hopes of some economic certainty. Will Bill 5 attract investment? "That capital that's building up needs to unleash, and we want them to know that when they come to Ontario, it can be unleashed very quickly here," Fedeli said at the news conference alongside Ford and Lecce. Having Bill 5 powers on the books means Ontario could try to entice investors to set up shop in a special economic zone, but officials won't say whether that incentive is now being dangled at any particular companies. More questions remain on how exactly the government will use other powers it obtained through Bill 5, such as the power to ignore the independent scientific committee that determines whether a species is endangered or threatened in Ontario. You can expect a backlash from conservation groups whenever the government uses that power, for instance by scrapping measures that would protect the habitat of a species at risk. What's unknown is when, where and with what species the government will take such a step. Another 'watch this space' related to Bill 5: what happens with the expansion of a landfill on the edge of the southwestern Ontario town of Dresden, which the legislation exempts from having to go through a comprehensive environmental assessment. Local residents say they're not giving up their efforts to halt the project, while the company behind is welcoming the opportunity of "moving forward with our plan."
