1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

How do Teachers Pensions use the inflation multipliers to revise salaries?

Discussion in 'Retirement' started by TVV489, Jan 30, 2020.

  1. TVV489

    TVV489 New commenter

    I have recently retired (end of December). My best 3 years salary (after inflation has been taken into account), as with many teachers who have not changed posts in the last ten years, was 2010-2012 .
    I calculated my expected pension by multiplying each months salary by the multiplier for that month and totalling for each of the three years before averaging. This seemed logical to me as the government produce different multiplier figures for each month.
    However, TPS seem, from my interpretation of the data they sent me, to use the multiplier at the last date you were on a particular salary- this means they use the lowest possible multiplier for a period of that salary. In fact the multiplier used for my final salary level was the one 8 months after the taken 3 years when my salary finally increased.
    Is this correct? I know, on another thread, Diddy Dave was looking into this in December, but I cannot find if anyone found the answer.
  2. makras

    makras Occasional commenter

    This confusion is deliberate me thinks.

    If you think TPS, SPPA or the government are on your side in giving you what you're owed for pension forget it. These are the people who claimed for tooth brushes, duck ponds and elastic bands to hold their over inflated bellies.

    Please don't hold you breath. Hold on to your pension rights and speak up. You deserve better than these baaaaaaaaaaastards.
  3. diddydave

    diddydave Established commenter

    I'm away from my computer for a few days so no detail at the moment but from my online chat and my reading of the regulations I believe they should be using the average index figure from across the period where the salary didn't change.

    I did ask for more clarification but have had no response yet as I can see that this makes no difference IF the whole period where the salary doesn't change is within the calculation but it can do if only part of the period is used in the 1095 days etc
  4. catmother

    catmother Star commenter

    I've noticed that you seem to have a hell of a grudge,@makras since you've started posting on here . What on earth is the problem?
  5. makras

    makras Occasional commenter

  6. Dorsetdreams

    Dorsetdreams Occasional commenter

    Indeed, this is the way the calculation appears to be performed on our in-service benefit statements. I was hoping that this calculation was just a simplified estimate and that a real pension would be calculated with inflation applied month by month. It seems that my hope was in vain. Please let us know for sure when you have your final pension confirmed.
  7. catmother

    catmother Star commenter

    @makras Maybe you should consider becoming an MP?
  8. diddydave

    diddydave Established commenter

    The regulation that covers revaluation is here:

    Particularly paragraph 9.

    It does refer to the revaluation taking place at the time when the salary changes but in the later parts does refer to the average increase. It also refers to the increase applying to the salary being increased as if it were the same method as applied to the public pension increase...to my mind this would mean that they'd do the average but it could be interpreted as having each month being calculated separately.
    Dorsetdreams likes this.
  9. makras

    makras Occasional commenter

  10. catmother

    catmother Star commenter

    Last edited: Jan 31, 2020
  11. makras

    makras Occasional commenter

  12. catmother

    catmother Star commenter

  13. makras

    makras Occasional commenter

  14. HannahD16

    HannahD16 New commenter

    What on earth is your problem Makras? Get a grip for God’s sake. I’ve only ever encountered good, decent people on this forum who are trying to help and support one another.I feel sorry for you to be honest.
    Dorsetdreams and catmother like this.
  15. TVV489

    TVV489 New commenter

    Having looked at paragraphs 9 and 12 it is the clause- 'same day as the best salary period ended that might be the problem. Using the breakdown of figures for my pension they seem to work in blocks from April to end of August and September to the end of March (which makes sense as that is when most teaching salaries change). As I finished at the end of December, they start my best 3 years with Jan. to March and finish with September to December. They do not seem to average out the multipliers, but use the multiplier designated at the time when a salary changes. This seems reasonably fair if salaries increase each April and September, but not so fair if salaries are static. I will be checking with TPS to see if my calculations are correct.
    My breakdown seems to be like this- (I will get it checked)
    2010 Jan to March salary multiplied by inflation multiplier figure for March-April 2010
    2010 March to Aug. x by inflation multiplier for Aug-Sept. 2010
    2010 Sept- 2011 March x by inflation multiplier for March April 2011
    2011 April - Aug x inflation multiplier for August September 2011
    This is when it became less helpful as my salary was more static and did not change in April.
    2011 Sept. to March 2012 x inflation multiplier for August-September 2012
    2012 April to August x inflation multiplier for August/September 2012
    2012 Sept. to December x inflation multiplier for August/September 2013

    This may not make a huge difference to my pension, but if I had had to use subsequent years when there were fewer increases it does make a much bigger difference. It might be worth teachers considering when planning when to retire.
    Does this fit with your understanding of the regulations Diddy Dave?
  16. diddydave

    diddydave Established commenter

    This is the point which is manifestly unfair if that is the way it is being done. If someone had no pay change over 10 years (extreme example I know) then, if they take the line of multiplying by the salary by the latest date's factor then 90% of the salary has not been updated to account for inflation.

    My understanding, and I did have one conversation where they did tell me this, is that they use the average of the factors. When I pushed to see what happened if the constant salary crossed over the 3 years used for method B I didn't get a response.

    The part that I believe indicates that they need to be doing it on at least this basis is the part where it states that it would have been increased if it had been an official pension, now this table of increases does it on a month-by-month factor that depends on WHEN the pension figure was paid...so it makes sense (to me) that they should be applying the increase to the salary figures on the day they were PAID...all of which comes out to be virtually the same as multiplying the salary by the AVERAGE pension factor increase for the period of time.

Share This Page