As we reach the mid-point of the academic year, thoughts will already be turning to next year and particularly to financial planning.
The last few years have taught us that nothing can be taken for granted, but one area we can protect, nurture and develop is our staff. No amount of well-written prose, glossy websites or carefully taken photographs can make up for those who create and live out the ethos of our schools each day.
In another column this year, I challenged school leaders to consider this as their “Italian Job” year — the one where they “blow the bloody doors off” and initiate real, meaningful change.
Addressing an area that is often overlooked in our sector would be a start: that of charging tuition fees for children of staff. At present, those employed by independent schools can send their children to that school for a discounted rate. There is no agreement on the amount but it typically ranges between 25 to 75 per cent, with those earning most being given the greatest discounts.
“It is great marketing for independent schools to have children of staff present and visible.”
But the intensity of the job means the school gives with one hand and then takes it back with the other. Can we, therefore, really call it a “perk” to send your children to the school where you teach? Parents with children on bursaries may be paying less than the members of staff who are teaching their children and who also send their children to the school.
Whilst some schools have a policy that no staff member should pay more than a parent, this is not always the case. Investing in staff is investing in a school. It is great marketing for independent schools to have children of staff present and visible every day.
A huge amount of discretionary effort is put in by school staff, with both time and freedom sacrificed — particularly in boarding schools. There needs to be a tangible positive in return and unsurprisingly it is great PR: happy and secure staff equate to a happy school environment. Parents of those under three are left to balance out whether it is financially viable to return to work or stay on one income — why should this be so?
Pragmatically, schools should at least cover the costs of three days in nursery (equivalent to 30 hours) to allow a colleague to return part-time. Once a child reaches the age of full-time education, this is something that we can learn from our colleagues in the international schooling sector, who cover 100 per cent of the fees for the first two children and then 50 per cent for any others.
Once net pay arrives and typical monthly outgoings are factored in — mortgage/rent, home insurance, council tax, internet or streaming services, mobile phone contracts — the pot rapidly becomes smaller.
“Before those of a financial mind go apoplectic, this would not be a free-for-all.”
That’s before food or sundries have been bought, so where would school fees come from? Teachers don’t get paid holidays — our salaries are spread out over 12 months — nor do we get paid overtime. So any that are able to send their children to their current school are likely to be those in highly paid positions or have additional support from elsewhere — a partner with higher earning power, or family money.
Before those of a financial mind go apoplectic, this would not be a free-for-all. There are costs to meet: food should be paid for, as should school trips, residentials and other extras. I am not proposing that staff contribute nothing at all. Similarly, the number of staff children within a school will never be excessive. It is a case of looking at the value that staff bring to the school – which is difficult to quantify – and committing to a long-term investment in them and their families, which would bring about reciprocal benefits for both parties.
But what happens when staff leave a school? The most important issue is not to disrupt the children’s education. For those staying locally, the offer to continue at the school but paying an agreed percentage of the fees (33 per cent, for argument’s sake). It is time to bring this to the table: for leadership teams, bursars and governors to consider.
We want to retain the best teachers: who will go beyond paying lip service to this and will put their money where their mouth is – literally.
