Richard this is from SS page:


                                     Question

                                     How are my retirement benefits calculated?


                                     Answer

                                     Social Security benefits are based on
earnings averaged over most of
                                     a worker's lifetime. Your actual earnings are
first adjusted or
                                     "indexed" to account for changes in average
wages since the year
                                     the earnings were received. Then we calculate
your average monthly
                                     indexed earnings during the 35 years in which
you earned the most.
                                     We apply a formula to these earnings and
arrive at your basic
                                     benefit, or "primary insurance amount" (PIA).
This is the amount you
                                     would receive at your full retirement age,
for most people, age 65.
                                     However, beginning with people born in 1938
or later, that age will
                                     gradually increase until it reaches 67 for
people born after 1959. For
                                     more information, see
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/ageincrease.htm

Richard Rice wrote:

> Dear Curtis:
>
> I used that because that is what I have been told (or at least think I have
> been told) over the years. I do know that a former department member who is
> now retired was very much interested in maxing out his last five years.
> This is only for the state program retirement program , not TIAA-CREF or
> social security. Kathy Bonham or another specialist in the Personnel Office
> should more accurate and up-to-date information. Or perhaps someone will
> correct me on Raven.
>
> Let me (or all of us) know what you find out.
>
> Richard
>
> At 11:36 AM 8/29/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >How do you come up with based on five highest years of remuneration? Social
> >Security use indexed earnings during 35 years that we earn the most, and I
> >don't see that TIAA would base it on the 5 year bit.
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >Curtis Gossett
> >
> >
> >Richard Rice wrote:
> >
> >> George Orwell may have got his timing off by two decades, but his narrative
> >> on language and truth in his "1984" seems very appropriate these days.
> >>
> >> We have been told in various public forums that UTC gets better faculty
> >> than it deserves, because we keep performing, in spite of our low pay
> >> compared to comparable institutions and long-term (even before 1984!)
> >> decline in actual buying power. There have been very few years when our pay
> >> adjustment has equalled inflation, let alone exceeded it. A "raise" is not
> >> a raise. This is a good deal for the reluctant taxpayers of this state and
> >> their feckless representatives.
> >>
> >> Furthermore, Tennessee does recognize loyalty and performance in part by
> >> the longevity pay formula, which guarantees us a hundred bucks a year up to
> >> 25 years, even in the hard times. Come to think of it, since "good times"
> >> are difficult to recall, perhaps we should think in terms of "hard" and
> >> "harder" times, like right now. But I digress. Since longevity pay ceases
> >> after 25 years, is anything beyond that stupidity pay? It is beginning to
> >> look that way.
> >>
> >> Last week news filtered down through the administrative structure that
> >> Summer School was again facing a budget crisis. Over the years there have
> >> been conflicting arguments about whether or not Summer School pays for
> >> itself or is a burden. In any case, department heads have now been told to
> >> expect cuts and heavy reliance on lower cost new faculty or adjuncts to
> >> staff courses.
> >>
> >> If long-term faculty are to be avoided because of their higher cost, this
> >> in effect is a negative longevity policy, more than cancelling out the one
> >> mentioned above. It can only add to the salary compression we already have
> >> at UTC. It will also have a dramatic long-term effect on retirement pay,
> >> which is based on the five highest years of remuneration.
> >>
> >> We all realize that the university is facing drastic cuts in funding year
> >> after year, but I am sure that, after exploring fully all the other
> >> alternatives, a fair policy will be adopted. One that is longevity-neutral.
> >> We should not shut out those with decades of service to UTC. The pie may be
> >> shrinking, but let's divide it without punishing loyalty to the
> >> institution. If we do not share the shrinking moola around here, longevity
> >> will indeed look a lot like stupidity.
> >>
> >> Richard Rice
> >>
> >> P.S. The Theatre Department's timely presentation of "Death of a Salesman"
> >> this year whould not be missed by any Willy Loman wannabees. It is a
> >> must-see for the longevity-challenged.
> >
> >