NA TURE 



333 



THURSDAY, NOVEMBER ii, 1920. 



Editorial and Publishing Offices: 



MACMILLAN fc- CO.. LTD.. 



ST. MARTIN'S STREET. LONDON, W.C.2. 



Advertisements uxl business letters should be 

 addressed to the Publishers. 



Editorial communications to the Editor. 



Telegraphic Address : PHUSIS. LONDON. 

 Telephone Number: GERRARD 8830. 



Superannuation of University Teachers. 



AN inquiry is beinjf made by the Council of the 

 Federated Superannuation System for L'ni- 

 versities as to "what capital sums would be in- 

 volved to place senior members of the staffs of 

 university institutions in receipt of Treasury 

 grants in a position comparable with that they 

 would have enjoyed had the federated scheme 

 been in operation during the tenure of their uni- 

 versity appointments." This inquiry has been 

 authorised by the Treasury through the Univer- 

 sity Grants Committee. It may not be generally 

 known, however, that the suggestion arose in the 

 Council of the Federated Superannuation System, 

 and the airthortsation simply means that the 

 Treasury is paying the expenses involved in the 

 itir)uiry. Xo doubt by this time the staffs of the 

 t various university institutions have received copies 

 of the rel.-itive form of inquiry with a request to 

 fill in certain particulars, and most of them will 

 not require to be told that the simplicity of the 

 questions has no obvious relation to the difTinilty 

 of answering them. 



We fear that the services of the psycho-analyst 

 will have to be requisitioned if retrospective par- 

 tii 111. II-, regarding salaries are to be given with 

 N'>. 2663, VOL. 106] 



any degree of accuracy. In point of fact, we 

 seriously doubt whether these particulars can be 

 given with the necessary degree of accuracy ; rf 

 some other principle is not adopted, the inquiry 

 might easily develop into a farce. Apart from 

 this, however, two facts emerge— (i) the am- 

 biguity in the use of the term senior, and (2) the 

 restricted use of the term service. If we are to 

 suppose that one section of university teachers is 

 to be considered in respect of retrospective 

 benefits, and another not, it is perfectly clear to 

 anyone who really understands the temper of uni- 

 versity teachers that the University Grants Com- 

 mittee and the Treasury are asking for trouble. 

 Where is the line to be drawn? Why, indeed, 

 should it be drawn? If retrospective benefits are 

 to be given to one, they should be given to 

 another. The School Teachers (Superannuation) 

 Act makes no such distinction in respect of its 

 beneficiaries. The framers of that Act had no 

 desire to bring a hornet's nest about their ears ! 

 To draw any such line between one set of uni- 

 versity teachers and another, or to limit the retro- 

 spective benefits to a certain number of years 

 or to those in receipt of salaries above a 

 certain figure, would be manifestly unjust, and will 

 inevitably lead to criticism and provoke discontent. 

 Serious as this point is, however, it is not so 

 serious as the question of service. The inquiry is 

 being directed to ascertain the amount of service 

 in universities, constituent colleges of universities, 

 and university colleges, the implication being that 

 no service outside such institutions is to count for 

 retrospective benefits. If this is what is meant, 

 and it is diflicult to interpret the inquiry in any 

 other sense, a grave injustice will be done to a 

 not inconsiderable number of university teachers 

 at the present moment, and a distinct injury will 

 be inflicted upon the universities in the future. 

 According to this interpretation, a university 

 teacher who has at some time or other of his 

 career seen service in a school — elementary or 

 secondary — or in a college of non-university rank, 

 will not be allowed to calculate such service as 

 pensionable in respect of retrospective benefits. 

 Surely this is a very absurd position of affairs. 

 As for the future, if the same principle operates, 

 one of the bridges, and a very important one, con- 

 necting the schools with the universities will be 

 broken down. If, for example, a teacher spends 

 the whole of his career in a school, or the whole 

 of it in a university, he will receive full pension 

 benefits; but if he i^ so vinfortunatc as to spend 



N 



