Guiding Questions & Principles
LanguagesA-Z IndexPrinter Friendly Image
Search
 

 

Compensation Technical Working Group

Guiding Questions and Principles
DRAFT - SUBJECT TO CHANGE


Guiding Questions

Deliberation and Input:

  1. How do we deliberate with teachers, administrators, and classified staff to be sure that the model is collaboratively designed?
  2. How will the group get public input from a wide variety of interested stakeholders?
  3. How do we ensure that our work is transparent and include collaborative conversations?
  4. What work can be accomplished in subgroups?
How will the group get public input from a wide variety of interested stakeholders?

Certificated Instructional Staff:

  1. Who are “world class” and “high quality” educators? What are the characteristics of an effective educator?
  2. How will the salary allocation model be aligned with state expectations for educator development and certification?
  3. Is there a performance element to the compensation system?
  4. How will the salary allocation model be structured so that allocations are sufficient to attract and retain high quality educators?
  5. What adjustments, if any, to the teacher schedule are necessary to fairly reflect the unique aspects of duties, education level, and responsibilities of different certificated staff positions?
  6. Should salary allocations be made for a single category of staff or differentially for categories listed in the prototype?

Classified Staff:

  1. Should salary allocations be made for a single category of staff or differentially for categories listed in the prototype?
  2. How should the state determine the appropriate allocations for each classified staff group?
  3. Is there a performance element to the compensation system?
  4. How will the salary allocation model be aligned with state expectations for classified staff?
  5. How will the salary allocation model be structured so that allocations are sufficient to attract and retain high quality classified staff?

Administrators:

  1. Should administrative salary allocations be made for a single category of administrators or differentially for categories listed in the prototype?
  2. How should the state determine the amount to allocate for school level administrative staff?
  3. Is there a performance element to the compensation system?
  4. How will the the salary allocation model be aligned with state expectations for administrative staff?
  5. How will the salary allocation model be structured so that allocations are sufficient to attract and retain high quality administrators?

Labor Market Analysis:

  1. What is compensation? What is included in the compensation package for educators? How do those elements impact career progression? How do other parts of the compensation package interact with the salary allocation model?
  2. What are the comparable occupations for each staffing category?
  3. What adjustments should be made given different number of work days in the year?
  4. What is the geographic unit for regional labor market adjustment?
  5. What is adequate compensation in light of the Doran decision and the definition of basic education?
  6. What positions and schools are difficult to fill within K-12? Should there be an adjustment to the salary allocation model to address the issue?
  7. How will the market analysis be utilized and prioritized to inform the discussion on compensation adequacy?
  8. Are there unattended consequences of a regional labor market adjustment?
  9. What adjustments are necessary? (Regional cost, comparative wage, hedonic wage, etc)? Future adjustments (e.g.COLAs)?
  10. What would be the mechanism for making labor market adjustments in the salary allocation model?
  11. How will the salary allocation model address “salaries and other compensation” identified in appropriate labor markets?

Salary Allocation Model:

  1. What is the purpose of a salary allocation model? What practices and policies should it advance?
  2. What does the group consider to be an “enhanced” salary allocation model?
  3. What do the tiers represent and how will the number of tiers within the existing salary allocation model be reduced?
  4. What are the implications for the time, responsibility and incentives (TRI) model and stipends?
  5. What is the role of and types of “bonuses” available? Is the size of the incentives large enough to make a difference? Are they ongoing or one-time payments (bonuses)? What requirements are necessary to receive and maintain the bonus? Is it due to a role or attainment of a certification?
  6. How will differentiated compensation allocation models be structured for teachers? Other certificated staff? Classified Staff? Administrative Staff? Central Administrative staff?
  7. How does the new SAM streamline efficiency, increase predictability and transparency?

Implementation:

  1. How should salaries be equalized? Over what period of time? To what level?
  2. How will the system deal with staff that chose to grandfather permanently into the existing salary allocation model? How will multiple salary schedules (grandfathered and new) impact the state’s allocation funding model?
  3. How will the new salary allocation model be implemented? Incrementally? What training is necessary?
  4. What are the financial implications of transitioning to a new salary allocation model? Fiscal estimates for recommendations, including recognition that staff on the existing salary allocation model would have the option to grandfather in permanently to the existing schedule.
  5. Should there be a periodic assessment of the salary allocation model and market analysis?
  6. What are the bargaining implications of the new model?
  7. What are recommended statutory changes as a result of the recommended salary allocation model?

 

Guiding Principles

The educator compensation system should:

  • Support and enhance educational environments that value student learning
  • Support continuous professional growth of staff in context of their work
  • Be predictable and reliable for staff
  • Accommodate local needs and differences (flexibility to address student needs)
  • Be transparent and understandable
  • Align with state expectations for performance and evidence based educator development and certification
  • Provide competitive compensation to attract and retain a highly qualified and diverse workforce
  • Be implementable by the Legislature and consistent with the State’s responsibility to meet its constitutional obligation
  • Be supported by research and consistent with best practices
  • Be flexible enough to accommodate future changes in best practices
  • Support equitable distribution of a highly qualified workforce
  • Remove current incentives that are not consistent with best practices
  • Utilize existing data and research – don’t reinvent the wheel

Old Capitol Building, PO Box 47200, 600 Washington St. S.E., Olympia, WA  98504-7200  (360) 725-6000  TTY (360) 664-3631
Contact Us    |    A-Z Index    |    Site Info    |    Staff Only    |    Education Data System (EDS)