@sid
You'd move to south-east or far-east Asia to fulfill your wish.
Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
I'm already in SE Asia.
But the truth is that only a handful of directors worldwide pull in those kinds of salaries. I'm not a director, and though I would consider taking such a post in my next job search, I don't have the chops or the interest to tackle one of the quarter mil schools.
But the truth is that only a handful of directors worldwide pull in those kinds of salaries. I'm not a director, and though I would consider taking such a post in my next job search, I don't have the chops or the interest to tackle one of the quarter mil schools.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
Moderator has removed this post because it violates forum rules.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
I'm not sure I asked anyone to be sorry for me. I'm quite happy, thank you. I didn't really like your easy women comment though. Rather dubious comment there, insulting both women and men simultaneously.
But if you believe all leadership posts, or even most, are paying 6 figures and up, I have a bridge to sell you.
But if you believe all leadership posts, or even most, are paying 6 figures and up, I have a bridge to sell you.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
Moderator has removed this post because it violates forum rules.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
Such a refined perspective.
Since we're assigning descriptors to groups of people, let's try a few more.
Men who seek out easy women are jerks, predators and immature, at best.
Men who take advantage of women are cads.
Men who ascribe their own base motivations to all other men are idiots.
Since we're assigning descriptors to groups of people, let's try a few more.
Men who seek out easy women are jerks, predators and immature, at best.
Men who take advantage of women are cads.
Men who ascribe their own base motivations to all other men are idiots.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
Moderator has removed this post because it violates forum rules.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
joe30 wrote:
> I do not believe there's any good reason why a school should not have its
> salary scale published. Who really cares if some random can find out what
> you're earning by checking the website? Why the hell do people get
> defensive about salaries anyway? Do you all like lying to other expats down
> at the pub you're on 100k or something? I couldn't care less if everyone
> knew what I was earning, and I've had some fairly low paying ESL jobs in my
> time.
Well that's fine for you, but certainly not for most UK teachers I know. What I earn - whether that is here or back home - is a matter for me and my employer. If a school I was at decided to do this then my resignation would be on the head's desk before the ink was dry - for me, it's a clear matter of confidentiality. I suspect too it's cultural - Americans tend to be a bit more chilled about discussing salaries, whereas we Brits keep it all much closer to our chests.
They should publish a broad scale though. Frankly, if for no other reason than to have a salary scale keeps your biggest business cost within a known level - it's the reason why most major businesses have one.
> I do not believe there's any good reason why a school should not have its
> salary scale published. Who really cares if some random can find out what
> you're earning by checking the website? Why the hell do people get
> defensive about salaries anyway? Do you all like lying to other expats down
> at the pub you're on 100k or something? I couldn't care less if everyone
> knew what I was earning, and I've had some fairly low paying ESL jobs in my
> time.
Well that's fine for you, but certainly not for most UK teachers I know. What I earn - whether that is here or back home - is a matter for me and my employer. If a school I was at decided to do this then my resignation would be on the head's desk before the ink was dry - for me, it's a clear matter of confidentiality. I suspect too it's cultural - Americans tend to be a bit more chilled about discussing salaries, whereas we Brits keep it all much closer to our chests.
They should publish a broad scale though. Frankly, if for no other reason than to have a salary scale keeps your biggest business cost within a known level - it's the reason why most major businesses have one.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
I'd argue salaries are not just a matter between you and your employer. Publishing them is vital to ensure neither yourself nor others are getting ripped off. It ensures a guy with an MA and 10 years experience isn't earning less than a BA with 3 years cos the BA had better 'negotiating' skills (read: he was more comfortable with conflict). Salaries should be published to ensure complete transparency - it's a matter of public interest really, I don't think they should be private at all.
FYI, I was born a Brit and grew up there, although I don't identify as 'British' due to feeling a complete alienation from the country and most of its people.
FYI, I was born a Brit and grew up there, although I don't identify as 'British' due to feeling a complete alienation from the country and most of its people.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
@sid
I'd probably get an EdD or an MBA to move up the ladder.
For others, transparency overrides confidentiality and in some cases, publishing salary scale is even an accreditation requirement.
I'd probably get an EdD or an MBA to move up the ladder.
For others, transparency overrides confidentiality and in some cases, publishing salary scale is even an accreditation requirement.
Response
The profiles for SA and ISS are all elf report in regard to salaries. The ISs submit the information and the agency publishes it. Some ISs do a better job of keeping it updated, and some ISs just update the year if they can even be bothered to do that. At best is to think of the markers as a range to compare other ISs and their compensation, not as an indication you will get X coin regardless of where you are on the scale. In general recruiters and leadership are rarely penalized or disciplined by saving an IS coin, they can and will offer you what your worth to them.
I do agree with @sid a step and band on the scale is easy. Savings potential is meaningless and salary range isnt misleading but the utility of it can be. Many ITs dont understand that ISs have maximum caps, and longevity steps, etc..
There are already alternative agencies such as COIS and UNI, but they arent anymore useful. GRC isnt doing anything that hasnt been done before.
Publishing a salary scale only benefits an IS if its brag worthy, otherwise its typically a negative liability. Every IT thinks they are worth top dollar, and many ISs pay less than DSs. Unless youre a dream location you have very little left to entice applicants.
@sids rational is bunk. Whats not to advertise? First, ownership approves the salary scale, either parents have direct involvement as part of a board or they have access to the information through their social network of other parents. There is no secret to parents how much the ITs are being compensated.
Second, even if there was some rational and ability to keep it from parents, whats the rational for not providing it through various agencies and recruitment services, these are all behind pay walls and application systems.
We as a community have strong consensus on what the tiers are, there are disagreements about the margins, but its not an individual preference list of ISs.
While I dont disagree with @joe30, that would leave out a lot of ISs that have closed comp systems. I find that availability of salary information is more significant to British ITs who come from a system with a standard main and upper salary pay scales (and toa lessor extent American ITs from the DE system). Those with a longer history in independent and private DSs tend to be more accepting that salry is going to be one of an ISs secrets its going to try to keep.
Many recruiters have to sell their IS, if they started with salary, regardless of how you see its priority, many ITs would stop right there and walk away. Recruiters are in the business of recruiting. Like everyone they want the best for the lowest cost. If you started an interview by asking "I have X years experience, and this degree, what is your salary?". You would have a lot of very short interviews, because all the PC aside, many of them know they cant compete on metrics, and many of them are selling a lifestyle within the context of their region.
To that end however, many corporations and businesses do not publish their salary guidelines. Many ITs do feel that they want the option to keep their comp private, publishing by name what each IT earns would be offensive in many ISs and to many ITs. Publishing earning statments is vastly differnt from publishing a comp scale.
I do agree with the lame excuses in recruiting offered by recruiters and leadership. get to the coin already and then sell the position, but dancing around it just says you have something to hide.
Another red flag indicator I would add to @joe30 is the requirement of keeping your salary confidential under penalty of dismissal.
While QM comp for leadership isnt unheard of, low 6 figures in senior leadership is common. There are leadership at the executive leadership level that make QM and some make even more than that (especially chain ISs).
Schools generally have two approaches to compensation either they have a 1) Public/Open pay scale/salary ladder, etc. In which case the school determines the contributing factors (usually years of experience and degree level) and your salary is what ever that box says. There can be adjustments/supplements for extra duty assignments, etc. The point of this scale is that everyone with a certain category makes the same. Its "equal" if not fair (fair in my opinion is actually pretty subjective). This is a lot like the "no hassle" car dealership. The price is clearly published and thats just "how much it is".
In the second type 2): Negotiated/Closed (Private tends to be avoided, but still used) you negotiate or discuss a compensation package. This can take several forms in itself, the two most common are the face to face negotiation, usually over the phone or Skype where you politely try to sell your value to the head, and they try to get you as cheaply as possible. The second most common type is the "letter" type which either occurs with the head, or more often with HR, and involves a series of email exchanges. Where they make an initial offer, you counter offer, they "check with the boss" then they counteroffer, and back an forth until you stop seeing progress/change in the offers happening. This experience is a lot more like the traditional "used car" buy experience, where your essentially haggling.
In my experience the open/public approach is the most popular, for two reasons (and different situations). The better schools are interested in fairness, equality and simplicity, its makes payroll easier (especially at bigger schools, which also tend to be the better schools). The second reason, is in schools that really dont care about the quality of their teachers, and they just want the cheapest body in the classroom they can get. They know they pay peanuts, and they dont really care, because anyone whos a decent teacher wouldnt teach there anyway, and likely has better offers.
The Closed/negotiated salary scale is usually found at 2nd tier schools all over the globe, who are usually young schools, have small enrollments, or constant turn around in faculty. For them minimizing costs is very important, as many teachers simply dont stay longer then their initial two year contract before moving on, so investing in faculty is a lost cause for them. Lastly, they just have more of a "paycheck to paycheck" mentality, they dont know what their enrollment will be in the future and with a small school it doesnt take much change in enrollment before they are over budget. For them a good teacher at less cost is better then a great teacher who is more expensive.
My advice to teachers, is that if there is nothing special about your qualifications, then you want the open/public type of compensation determination. If you have something thats special or "adds real value" (not to be confused with perceived value, like your "just a super great teacher") then your likely to benefit from a closed/negotiated compensation package, since the assumption is that you bring more "value" to the table then a comparable teacher.
Trends i see, is that when it comes to closed/negotiated packages, woman tend to get the face to face approach (typically against an assertive male), on the assumption that woman are less comfortable with conflict, and will cave to negotiation stress quickly (there are a couple heads ive met who were proven VERY incorrect in that assumption). Men tend to get the letter exchange typically with what you would infer is a younger female contact at the schools HR department. The assumption that the intermediary (the HR contact) is just the messenger, and little old them has no power to do anything, except relay your demands to the boss. men tend to be less aggressive, in those situation, as they are indoctrinated to yield ld to the female gender, and to exercise restraint when confronted with an inferior opponent.
I do agree with @sid a step and band on the scale is easy. Savings potential is meaningless and salary range isnt misleading but the utility of it can be. Many ITs dont understand that ISs have maximum caps, and longevity steps, etc..
There are already alternative agencies such as COIS and UNI, but they arent anymore useful. GRC isnt doing anything that hasnt been done before.
Publishing a salary scale only benefits an IS if its brag worthy, otherwise its typically a negative liability. Every IT thinks they are worth top dollar, and many ISs pay less than DSs. Unless youre a dream location you have very little left to entice applicants.
@sids rational is bunk. Whats not to advertise? First, ownership approves the salary scale, either parents have direct involvement as part of a board or they have access to the information through their social network of other parents. There is no secret to parents how much the ITs are being compensated.
Second, even if there was some rational and ability to keep it from parents, whats the rational for not providing it through various agencies and recruitment services, these are all behind pay walls and application systems.
We as a community have strong consensus on what the tiers are, there are disagreements about the margins, but its not an individual preference list of ISs.
While I dont disagree with @joe30, that would leave out a lot of ISs that have closed comp systems. I find that availability of salary information is more significant to British ITs who come from a system with a standard main and upper salary pay scales (and toa lessor extent American ITs from the DE system). Those with a longer history in independent and private DSs tend to be more accepting that salry is going to be one of an ISs secrets its going to try to keep.
Many recruiters have to sell their IS, if they started with salary, regardless of how you see its priority, many ITs would stop right there and walk away. Recruiters are in the business of recruiting. Like everyone they want the best for the lowest cost. If you started an interview by asking "I have X years experience, and this degree, what is your salary?". You would have a lot of very short interviews, because all the PC aside, many of them know they cant compete on metrics, and many of them are selling a lifestyle within the context of their region.
To that end however, many corporations and businesses do not publish their salary guidelines. Many ITs do feel that they want the option to keep their comp private, publishing by name what each IT earns would be offensive in many ISs and to many ITs. Publishing earning statments is vastly differnt from publishing a comp scale.
I do agree with the lame excuses in recruiting offered by recruiters and leadership. get to the coin already and then sell the position, but dancing around it just says you have something to hide.
Another red flag indicator I would add to @joe30 is the requirement of keeping your salary confidential under penalty of dismissal.
While QM comp for leadership isnt unheard of, low 6 figures in senior leadership is common. There are leadership at the executive leadership level that make QM and some make even more than that (especially chain ISs).
Schools generally have two approaches to compensation either they have a 1) Public/Open pay scale/salary ladder, etc. In which case the school determines the contributing factors (usually years of experience and degree level) and your salary is what ever that box says. There can be adjustments/supplements for extra duty assignments, etc. The point of this scale is that everyone with a certain category makes the same. Its "equal" if not fair (fair in my opinion is actually pretty subjective). This is a lot like the "no hassle" car dealership. The price is clearly published and thats just "how much it is".
In the second type 2): Negotiated/Closed (Private tends to be avoided, but still used) you negotiate or discuss a compensation package. This can take several forms in itself, the two most common are the face to face negotiation, usually over the phone or Skype where you politely try to sell your value to the head, and they try to get you as cheaply as possible. The second most common type is the "letter" type which either occurs with the head, or more often with HR, and involves a series of email exchanges. Where they make an initial offer, you counter offer, they "check with the boss" then they counteroffer, and back an forth until you stop seeing progress/change in the offers happening. This experience is a lot more like the traditional "used car" buy experience, where your essentially haggling.
In my experience the open/public approach is the most popular, for two reasons (and different situations). The better schools are interested in fairness, equality and simplicity, its makes payroll easier (especially at bigger schools, which also tend to be the better schools). The second reason, is in schools that really dont care about the quality of their teachers, and they just want the cheapest body in the classroom they can get. They know they pay peanuts, and they dont really care, because anyone whos a decent teacher wouldnt teach there anyway, and likely has better offers.
The Closed/negotiated salary scale is usually found at 2nd tier schools all over the globe, who are usually young schools, have small enrollments, or constant turn around in faculty. For them minimizing costs is very important, as many teachers simply dont stay longer then their initial two year contract before moving on, so investing in faculty is a lost cause for them. Lastly, they just have more of a "paycheck to paycheck" mentality, they dont know what their enrollment will be in the future and with a small school it doesnt take much change in enrollment before they are over budget. For them a good teacher at less cost is better then a great teacher who is more expensive.
My advice to teachers, is that if there is nothing special about your qualifications, then you want the open/public type of compensation determination. If you have something thats special or "adds real value" (not to be confused with perceived value, like your "just a super great teacher") then your likely to benefit from a closed/negotiated compensation package, since the assumption is that you bring more "value" to the table then a comparable teacher.
Trends i see, is that when it comes to closed/negotiated packages, woman tend to get the face to face approach (typically against an assertive male), on the assumption that woman are less comfortable with conflict, and will cave to negotiation stress quickly (there are a couple heads ive met who were proven VERY incorrect in that assumption). Men tend to get the letter exchange typically with what you would infer is a younger female contact at the schools HR department. The assumption that the intermediary (the HR contact) is just the messenger, and little old them has no power to do anything, except relay your demands to the boss. men tend to be less aggressive, in those situation, as they are indoctrinated to yield ld to the female gender, and to exercise restraint when confronted with an inferior opponent.
Re: Search Associates Recruitment Package Information
PsyGuy wrote:
> Many recruiters have to sell their IS, if they started with salary, regardless of
> how you see its priority, many ITs would stop right there and walk away.
I'd say most of us will be able to weigh up salary information while also considering the benefits of living in the region. I'd never work in Saudi Arabia for $35k, but in Thailand that would be a very desirable job. If the comp is low for the region then yes many IT's will walk away as soon as they hear it, but they'll also walk away after interview once they find out. Might as well just save everyone the time and get it out in the open right away.
One thing I will say: I find it more acceptable to not have the salary scale published openly if the IS is in a nice location. There should still be a scale, but hearing it after interview, while still bad, is perhaps not the end of the world.
However, an IS in a hardship region should ALWAYS publish the scale on their website. The reason is simple: no one will come to work in that location for any reason other than money. So you'd better be offering decent cash and have such information readily avaliable to applicants. When I see some school in the Middle East say 'competetive' salary I just laugh - given the package/school/lifestyle combo will have no reedeeming features other than the cash, if you're not publishing it then good luck getting anyone to apply. Schools in Bangkok, Tokyo or Paris can afford to get away with it since people go to those places for reasons other than money. A school in Kuwait should have the salary posted front and centre on their website.
> Many recruiters have to sell their IS, if they started with salary, regardless of
> how you see its priority, many ITs would stop right there and walk away.
I'd say most of us will be able to weigh up salary information while also considering the benefits of living in the region. I'd never work in Saudi Arabia for $35k, but in Thailand that would be a very desirable job. If the comp is low for the region then yes many IT's will walk away as soon as they hear it, but they'll also walk away after interview once they find out. Might as well just save everyone the time and get it out in the open right away.
One thing I will say: I find it more acceptable to not have the salary scale published openly if the IS is in a nice location. There should still be a scale, but hearing it after interview, while still bad, is perhaps not the end of the world.
However, an IS in a hardship region should ALWAYS publish the scale on their website. The reason is simple: no one will come to work in that location for any reason other than money. So you'd better be offering decent cash and have such information readily avaliable to applicants. When I see some school in the Middle East say 'competetive' salary I just laugh - given the package/school/lifestyle combo will have no reedeeming features other than the cash, if you're not publishing it then good luck getting anyone to apply. Schools in Bangkok, Tokyo or Paris can afford to get away with it since people go to those places for reasons other than money. A school in Kuwait should have the salary posted front and centre on their website.
Reply
@joe30
Actually no, there is this principal called commitment and consistency, that people adopt their internal schema to to be congruent with their behavior or perceived behavior. The recruiter gets you to agreeing with them, and saying yes on other factors of the position and offer and then by the time you get to salary the threshold of acceptance has been lowered with the IT, because the recruiter has been successful in assigning compensatory value to non-monetized factors. That creative expression and planing freedom becomes worth something. Those pictures of large windowed classrooms overlooking the ocean, or mountains or nature become worth something. Those smiling bright eyed eager to learn children become worth something.
From the perspective of transparency and convenience to you getting the comp out front is beneficial and desirable to you, its not to the recruiter. They want to give you a bunch of small reasons to say yes, compared to the big salary reason of saying no (compensatory negotiations).
I rarely if ever find a recruiter or leadership readily admit their location is a hardship, they also all believe they are a top tier IS as well.
Your approach though would never work, it wouldnt be in the ISs interest as an recruiting environment where only one factor (salary) is irreverent by publishing ISs would be constantly competing against one another on comp. These ISs have gentlemans agreements not to do that in their mutual best interests.
Actually no, there is this principal called commitment and consistency, that people adopt their internal schema to to be congruent with their behavior or perceived behavior. The recruiter gets you to agreeing with them, and saying yes on other factors of the position and offer and then by the time you get to salary the threshold of acceptance has been lowered with the IT, because the recruiter has been successful in assigning compensatory value to non-monetized factors. That creative expression and planing freedom becomes worth something. Those pictures of large windowed classrooms overlooking the ocean, or mountains or nature become worth something. Those smiling bright eyed eager to learn children become worth something.
From the perspective of transparency and convenience to you getting the comp out front is beneficial and desirable to you, its not to the recruiter. They want to give you a bunch of small reasons to say yes, compared to the big salary reason of saying no (compensatory negotiations).
I rarely if ever find a recruiter or leadership readily admit their location is a hardship, they also all believe they are a top tier IS as well.
Your approach though would never work, it wouldnt be in the ISs interest as an recruiting environment where only one factor (salary) is irreverent by publishing ISs would be constantly competing against one another on comp. These ISs have gentlemans agreements not to do that in their mutual best interests.