Paying for Equity and Excellence: 6 Tips on How to Set Faculty Salaries That Support Fairness and Teaching Quality

By Dr. Harry Bloom, Founder and President, Benchmarking for Good, Inc.

Every school leader seeks the same outcome: an excellent faculty that remains with the school and trusts that it is compensated fairly. The way a school sets salaries can strengthen that trust or gradually erode it. Benchmarking for Good examined salary data from 23 Jewish day schools across the country, spanning Early Childhood through Upper School. This brief translates those findings into six practical recommendations for heads of school and boards.

Key findings

• Retaining top faculty is the shared priority. Twenty-two of 23 schools rank it as their most important salary goal. Only 5 schools give first priority to a transparent and equitable pay system.

• Most schools set pay through individual negotiation. These schools show a considerably wider spread between their lowest and highest salaries than schools with a formal pay structure–either a salary scale or band system.

• Pay inversions are common. At 17 of 23 schools, there are instances where a more experienced or more highly credentialed faculty member earns less than a less experienced colleague in a comparable role.

• These gaps are relatively inexpensive to correct. For the typical school, closing all of these gaps for classroom teachers would cost under 1% of the faculty salary budget.

• Experience is rewarded most in the Upper School. Veteran Upper School faculty earn approximately 42% more than new hires, compared with a difference of only 22% in Early Childhood.

• Compensation alone does not determine retention. No single pay measure predicted which schools experienced higher faculty turnover. Fair pay is necessary, but leadership and school culture also play decisive roles.

Six recommendations for school leaders

1. Review every salary for unexplained gaps each year

Compile all faculty salaries by division, subject, degree and years of experience. Identify any case in which a faculty member earns less than a colleague with less experience or a lower degree in the same role. Correct those gaps that cannot be justified by a documented reason. 

2. Establish salary bands in place of individual negotiation

Define a minimum, a midpoint and a maximum for each category of position. Leaders retain the flexibility to compensate an exceptional faculty member above the midpoint, provided the rationale is documented. Schools that use bands maintain far more consistent pay than those that negotiate each salary individually. The use of salary bands will not eliminate all gaps on their own, however, so the annual review in Recommendation 1 remains essential.

3. Create a separate salary structure for each division

Upper School, Middle School, Elementary and Early Childhood each pay at distinctly different levels, and a single scale cannot serve all four well. Build clear salary steps at approximately 3, 6, 9 and 12 years of service. The Upper School steps should be the steepest, as experienced Upper School faculty are the most difficult to replace.

4. Recognize degrees at hiring, then reward professional growth

Our research indicates that an advanced degree commands a higher starting salary, but after the first two years it no longer makes a measurable difference in pay. By that point, the school has a far fuller picture of each faculty member's work, and subsequent increases should reflect it. Judaic Studies faculty earn somewhat more than General Studies faculty, largely because qualified candidates are scarcer. Schools should state this rationale openly so that the difference is understood rather than perceived as arbitrary.

5. Adjust starting salaries for local living costs, not only top salaries

Schools in high-cost regions pay their veteran faculty more, yet starting salaries change very little. As a result, recruiting early-career faculty is most difficult precisely where living costs are highest. Schools should benchmark their starting salaries against local public schools each year.

6. Make the compensation system transparent

Adopt a written compensation policy approved by the board. Share the salary band structure with faculty, while keeping individual salaries confidential. Provide each faculty member with an annual letter explaining their placement within the band and what would advance them. Finally, measure faculty perceptions of pay fairness through an annual staff climate survey.

Equity is affordable

No school in the study would need more than 2% of its faculty salary budget to close every unexplained gap, and for most schools the cost could be considerably lower.

Implementation: a six-month plan

1. Months 1–2: Assess current practice. Review every salary for unexplained gaps. Compare compensation with local public schools and peer day schools. Survey faculty on their perceptions of pay fairness to establish a baseline. Benchmarking for Good offers such a survey. 

2. Months 3–4: Design salary bands. Draft bands for each division, with clear steps for experience. Estimate the cost of placing every faculty member within the new bands and closing existing gaps. Seek feedback from a small faculty advisory group.

3. Month 5: Secure approval. Present the compensation policy and its cost to the finance committee and the board, and incorporate it into the following year's budget.

4. Month 6: Communicate and implement. Explain the new bands to the full faculty. Issue each faculty member a letter with their contract describing their placement and the path to advancement. Schedule the following year's salary review.

Self-assessment checklist:

• ☐ We review every salary for unexplained gaps annually.

• ☐ Every position has a defined salary band, and placements above the midpoint are documented.

• ☐ Each division has its own salary structure, with clear steps for experience.

• ☐ Degrees are recognized at hiring, and subsequent increases reflect professional growth.

• ☐ We explain why certain roles, such as Judaic Studies, or STEM expert carry a premium.

• ☐ Our starting salaries reflect local living costs.

• ☐ Faculty can see the band structure and understand how to advance.

• ☐ We survey faculty annually on whether compensation is fair.

About this brief

This brief draws on salary data submitted to Benchmarking for Good by Jewish day schools between 2024 and 2026. Each finding was tested for statistical significance; the full analysis appears in the technical edition of this brief which is available upon request from Benchmarking for Good. 

Because every school's circumstances differ, the most useful next step is a comparison of your own salaries against peer schools. Benchmarking for Good offers research grants that include comprehensive compensation benchmarking and a staff climate survey measuring faculty satisfaction with pay. To explore the potential for your school to receive a grant, contact harrybloom@benchmarkingforgood.org