Social Security Fairness Act impact on widow benefits with GPO - husband's non-teaching work ignored?

The Social Security Fairness Act is currently still pending - it hasn't passed yet. If it does pass, it would eliminate both the GPO (Government Pension Offset) and WEP (Windfall Elimination Provision). This would definitely benefit you as a widow receiving a teacher's pension. Regarding your husband's work history, there seems to be some confusion. If your husband worked 20 years in manufacturing paying into Social Security, those earnings should have been included in his Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) calculation, which determines survivor benefits. The GPO reduction applies to YOUR benefits based on YOUR pension, but his work history should still count regardless of whether he later became a teacher. I'd recommend scheduling an appointment with SSA to review his complete earnings record and have them explain exactly how his benefit was calculated. Sometimes there are gaps in earnings records that need to be corrected.

my MOM had the EXACT same problem!!!! she taught for 35 yrs and dad worked construction for most of his life, when he died her benefits were slashed to almost nothing... its so unfair how they treat teachers. she could barely pay her bills. hoping this new law passes so people dont have to suffer with these stupid offsets anymore

The confusion here might be about how your husband's benefits were calculated. The WEP (Windfall Elimination Provision) likely reduced HIS Social Security benefit if he didn't have 30+ years of substantial earnings under Social Security before becoming a teacher. The GPO then further reduced YOUR survivor benefits based on your teacher's pension. If the Social Security Fairness Act passes, both WEP and GPO would be eliminated, potentially increasing your benefit significantly. But as the previous commenter mentioned, it's still pending legislation. Regarding his manufacturing work, all those years should still count toward his benefit calculation, though they may have been reduced by WEP. I'd recommend requesting a detailed benefit calculation statement from SSA to see exactly how they arrived at your current amount.

Have you tried calling your Representative in Congress? This is exactly why we need the Social Security Fairness Act to pass - the current system is punishing public servants. My sister-in-law lost almost $900/month due to GPO after her husband died. It's robbery, plain and simple. We paid into the system!

I've been trying to get through to Social Security for weeks about a similar issue with my WEP calculation. It's nearly impossible to reach anyone. I finally used a service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that got me through to an agent in under 10 minutes. They have a video showing how it works at https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU. Saved me hours of frustration and redials. The agent I spoke with was able to explain exactly how my benefits were calculated and helped correct an error in my record.

The whole GPO/WEP situation is absolutely maddening! I worked as a nurse for 22 years, then switched to teaching for 15 years at a school that didn't pay into SS. Now my SS benefits are a joke despite decades of contributions. The new Fairness Act would be life-changing for so many of us. About your husband's work history - it sounds like something might be wrong with how they calculated his benefit. All of his covered employment (the manufacturing years) should count toward his benefit calculation, even if he later worked in non-covered employment. Did you request his earnings record from SSA? Sometimes they're missing years that need to be added manually.

To clarify something important: If your husband had 20+ years of substantial earnings under Social Security before becoming a teacher, the WEP reduction to his benefit should have been minimal or possibly eliminated entirely. WEP has a provision that reduces its impact for workers with 20+ years of substantial earnings, and eliminates it at 30+ years. I recommend specifically asking SSA for: 1. Your husband's complete earnings record 2. How the WEP was applied to his benefit calculation 3. How the GPO was then applied to your survivor benefit Once you have those details, you'll know exactly how much the Social Security Fairness Act would potentially increase your benefits if passed. The Act would eliminate both provisions completely.

Here's a key detail that often gets overlooked: The way the GPO is applied can sometimes seem like they're ignoring your spouse's work history, when that's not exactly what's happening. Your survivor benefit is first calculated based on your husband's full earning record (including all those manufacturing years). Then, that amount is reduced by 2/3 of your teacher's pension. If your pension is large enough, this can reduce your survivor benefit to zero, making it appear as if his work history wasn't counted at all. For example, if your calculated survivor benefit was $1,800/month based on his full history, but your teacher pension is $3,000/month, the GPO reduction would be $2,000 (2/3 of $3,000), reducing your survivor benefit to $0. This makes it seem like his work history didn't count, when it was actually used in the initial calculation.

I used to work for SSA, and I can tell you that mixed employment cases like yours are among the most complex. Here's what might have happened: 1. Your husband's Social Security benefit was calculated based on ALL his covered employment (manufacturing years) 2. If he had fewer than 30 years of substantial earnings under Social Security, the WEP reduced his benefit 3. When you applied for survivor benefits, you received a percentage of his already-reduced benefit 4. The GPO then further reduced that amount based on 2/3 of your teacher's pension If the Social Security Fairness Act passes, both reductions would be eliminated, potentially increasing your benefit significantly. Until then, I strongly recommend requesting a detailed breakdown of your benefit calculation to ensure no errors were made. Sometimes earnings years are missing from the record or calculations are applied incorrectly.