The document discusses why salary schedules that define teacher pay increases based on years of experience and education levels are problematic. Such schedules historically distributed increases unfairly, favoring more senior teachers who received larger dollar and percentage raises. Younger teachers had to wait their turn for fair compensation increases under this system. The document advocates moving away from these types of schedules and toward a performance-based system where all teachers receive the same percentage increase each year rather than the increases disproportionately benefiting more experienced teachers. It provides examples from the Prospect Heights School District's salary schedules and increase data from 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 to illustrate these points.

1. PROSPECT HEIGHTS DISTRICT
23 SALARY SCHEDULE
Why salary schedules don’t make sense

2. What is a salary schedule and why is it a bad idea
• Salary schedules define a teacher’s salary over the term of a contract
• While it provides visibility into what a teacher’s salary will be over the term of the
contract, the long term salary growth for a specific teacher may not reflect what is
represented in the schedule
• Long term salary growth is mostly affected by future contract negotiations
• Historically, salary schedules have distributed increases unfairly
• More senior teachers have received the majority of increases both from a dollar and
percentage perspective
• Junior teachers had to “wait their turn” before they would receive their fair share
• Flat rate increases apply the same percentage increase to all
teachers regardless of experience
• In an environment that doesn’t incorporate performance into increases, it doesn’t
makes sense for one group to receive larger increases than another*
• This is the approach that PHEA and the Board agreed to in the 2013/2014 contract
* - Salaries beyond the salary cap ($90,000) will receive a lower increase

3. Year over year salary changes are affected by 3
components in the salary schedule
• Base salary
• Salary change from year to year
for the same lane and step
combination
Year 1
Step BA BA12 … MA30
1
2
…
20
Year 2
Step BA BA12 … MA30
1
2
…
20
• Step change
• Salary change resulting from an
additional year of experience
• Lane change
• Salary change resulting from
attaining specific education level

4. The salary change for a teacher from year to year is
composed of both a base salary change and a step change
• Base salary
• Salary change from year to year
for the same lane and step
combination
Year 1
Step BA BA12 … MA30
1
2
…
20
Year 2
Step BA BA12 … MA30
1
2
…
20
• Step change
• Salary change resulting from an
additional year of experience
• In order to get a better picture of the
salary change experienced by an
individual, it is useful to look at the
combined effect of Step and Base

5. PHSD23 Salaries for 2012/2013

6. PHSD Salaries for 2013/2014

7. PHSD23 – Step & Base change from
2012/2013 – 2013/2014
• Salary increases
are not uniform
across experience
levels
• Experienced
teachers not only
receive larger
dollar increases,
but also receive
larger percentage
increases
• Under the flat rate
approach adopted
in 2013/2014,
everyone receives
the same
percentage
increase*
* - Assumes no education level increase (e.g., attain MA)

8. Inequitable salary schedule increases favoring more experienced
teachers have been in place since 2000
21 13 155 6 87 9 11 1410 12
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
0.5
0.0
201918171643
AverageYoYStep+BaseIncrease(%)
Step
MA+15BA BA+12 BA+24 MA+30MA
Note: Average annual Step + Base percent increase from 2000/2001 – 2013/2014 for each Step and Lane combination. All
changes are within the same Lane.