They don't do it for the money but...

[Cookiebix]

I work for a charity that provides services to schools. Leadership is made up of experienced HTs towards the end of their careers We're in a London borough where primary school HTs are on £100k+, secondaries much higher.

Anyway we've recently advertised for a new chief executive on a salary of £125k and had few applications. Feedback is the salary isn't enough.

I understand they'd be giving up better paid jobs, but this would be to manage an organisation of 6 staff with vastly reduced responsibilities, compared to running a school, at the same time as doing rewarding work and being able to pass on knowledge and experience for the benefit of children.

Of course at certain stages of your career stepping out of school for a pay cut won't be attractive, but as part of a wind down to retirement, why isn't this more attractive?

We've been approached by 3 people who've said they'd be very interested if we could move on salary, so it's not that the role itself is unattractive.

Surely it depends what other similar charities are paying?

Being a head teacher is also rewarding work in a much more immediate way.

and as you say, they’d be taking a pay cut.

in my experience (admittedly limited) head teachers leave education when they are made to by illness or other issues and aren’t the kind of people that really do “winding down” to retirement.

Are they on a final salary pension or career average in their current HT roles? That could make a difference to their decision to step down.

It's a different pension scheme anyway.

Yes, I realise stepping away won't be for everyone, but these are people who are saying they're attracted to the role.

Presumably switching from a defined benefits scheme to a defined contribution scheme? Perhaps not an attractive option for someone nearing the end of their career path.

Yeah, but a teacher's pension is a very valuable asset, and offsets the reduction in salary that people who are headteachers would expect to acquire if they were in the private sector. So though they may currently be paid 100K, if they are also in TPS, they are accruing a valuable asset that reflects that in the private sector, an equivalent role would be commanding upwards of 150K.

If you want the experience, knowledge and skills of a person who's at an equivalent level to a London headteacher, you're going to have to pay more. Or settle for a less preferred candidate...

No, it's still a very good scheme - one of the ones that people are jealous of non here 😆

Because of the security of a school role & the fact when the salary goes up each year if you are 100k it's quite significant & that's before any progression increments.

what's your sick pay policy?

Yes, absolutely, the sensible financial decision is to stay in school, but these are people who don't do it for the money, who are attracted to the role and who have already built up good pensions.

Sick pay is based on local authority schemes, so not quite as good as teaching but about as good as it gets beyond that.

Maybe they do actually like the money though 😆

But as a HT they have school holidays. Does your role offer as much leave?

You have candidates applying so hire one of them. If you aren't attracting the right calibre of candidate and the feedback is the pay then it is the pay that is the issue.

Hire a less suitable candidate or pay an appropriate candidate what they are worth.

Yes, we work with schools. It's paid as a 52 week year, but the executive take holidays off as there's little to do when schools are closed and they take back time in lieu. They don't work as many extra hours as HTs in schools do but there's an informal agreement that there's no expectation to work in the holidays as they will have attended evening meetings and conferences.

Plus all HTs will tell you they don't really get school holidays off , in fact leadership contracts don't even pretend that they do.

And the issue with the pay not attracting candidates you consider appropriate?

The thing is, you can question their motives as much as you like. But ultimately, you've had expressions of interest from people of the calibre you're looking for to fill the role. They've told you that the reason they aren't taking an application forward is the money.

So you either increase the money or lower your expectations......

Of course, I'm not questioning it, so much as pondering.

It seems a huge amount of money for a small charity to be paying as it is.

Have you tried advertising it as flexible or negotiable hours rather than part time? On a public sector pension, which can start at 55, it becomes pointless earning too much because of the tax burden (and they probably are not as desperate for the money as when they were younger).

That's what those people cost....

Like any situation where there is a cost involved, it comes down to the simple question - are there people willing to pay what you are offering / are there people willing to accept the pay you are offering? And if the answer is no, then the pay/cost ratio is out of whack.

Frankly, with COL crisis, I think even on a high salary, it's harder and harder for people to consider taking a pay cut. Sure, 100k+ might be a very large salary, but if you've been on that for 10 years or so as a Head Teacher (with, let's face it, few meaningful increases over that time period), your lifestyle has evolved to require that but cost of living has probably meant you're already tightening their belts.

ETA: also, I think the holiday/leave/hours thing could be made a lot clearer and more definitive.

Maybe they think that they can get that much money with better pension, better sick pay with greater security and not have to take a risk when consultancy fees are very poorly looked upon without having to learn a new role, get used to a completely different set of trustees and statutory instruments and have to try and manage a bunch of headteachers who don't really need the money but have already left schools for various reasons?

Or perhaps they have been burned by far too many 'I used to be a headteacher' consultants costing thousands and thousands, upsetting all their staff and demanding completely tearing apart systems in favour of something that was in vogue whenever it was that head was last actually dealing with students?

Some can be brilliant - others, though, well; there were obvious reasons why they weren't still at the coal face.