Most independent and international school have dated salary systems such as a public school, lock-step longevity base scale with options to move laterally with more graduate credits. Outside of the scale there are opportunities to earn more money by performing extra duties for extra pay/stipends. Over time, the proliferation of these jobs undermines the definition of a full-time job.

Most independent and international schools increase salaries by some percentage each year whether there is a negotiated system, a lock step system or no formal system at all.

Many schools still have a loose system of recruiting from the marketplace and then figuring out how the salaries of the new hires will fit into the current salary “system”.  In other words, can we hire someone new without undermining the existing structure or creating unfairness? Often the answer is “no”.

Teachers want more money, and they deserve it. Many have left the profession not so much because they want more money but because they cannot make ends meet on what they earn. Most teachers are care givers and cannot tell a consultant exactly what their gross annual salary is. This is not a joke, though it comes across as amusing.

We have interviewed thousands of teachers worldwide, and most not only do not know their base salary, they also do not know the value of their retirement asset or an estimate of it.  They usually respond, “If I had known you were going to ask that, I would have come prepared.” Of course, I do not want them to come prepared. I want to know what they remember and how up to date they are about their personal finances.

Schools need to focus not just on paying more money, even though now almost all schools need to do that. Schools need to focus on mission-based compensation, i.e., is your mission driving the salary system or is there no relationship between the two at all?

Recently one client teacher said, “Our School provides 80% tuition remission for teachers with children. That is tax free and there is no limit on the number of children or stepchildren eligible. We also provide a family medical plan where the School pays 50% of the premium for families and 80% for individuals. My salary of $45K is the same as what a teacher of similar experience here earns, but a teacher with dependents receives tuition remission and medical benefits that represent approximately an additional $45K.

The teacher was asking, “Should I not be paid something in compensation for that differential?” The answer is, “Well, yes and no”. No school is going to do that, but she raises any interesting point. The question is do the benefit plans of schools have any relationship to the schools’ mission, and are these benefit packages attracting, retaining, and rewarding the teachers who identify with that mission?

Not taking a close look at HOW salaries are paid is a critical mistake that boards and heads make. Independent and international school boards have only these roles: mission oversight which includes strategic planning, practicing healthy board governance, fiscal monitoring, and evaluation of the head.

Since most day schools spend up to 85% of their budget on salaries and benefits, boards should have a clear idea of what their salary system encourages and how the benefit package works to recruit and support mission-based teachers. All boards should take notice that mission-based compensation is crucial to healthy schools.  Board members and the head and administration should take serous look NOW at not just paying more, BUT paying more in ways that enhance the mission, not potentially and inadvertently undermining it.