The National Governor’s Association has suggested that there is a “strong argument” for paying heads of school governing bodies £10,000 a year, to better reflect the time commitment involved.
The NGA’s Chief Executive Phil Revell was quoted in a Financial Times interview as saying:
“I think they [governors] would recognise that the chair’s job on most governing bodies is a job, it’s not a volunteering role.”
“You simply cannot do it properly unless you devote a considerable amount of time to it … at least two days a week.”
The argument is that keeping the role purely voluntary, and unpaid, restricts the pool of talent available. Conversely, a paid post would encourage more working people to become involved and enable chairs of governors to invest more time into becoming “better informed” about their duties.
Of course, the money (likely £200 million nationwide) would have to come from somewhere (i.e. existing school budgets) and it’s worth noting that the suggestion is not official NGA policy.
Fair Compensation or an Unnecessary Expense?
I’d imagine that anyone reading this would agree that school governors play a vital role – one which is often undervalued.
But is paying heads of governors the right answer?
The UK has a good tradition of public service and introducing payment may attract those who put salary before service. Keep it voluntary.
A better approach would be to reduce the time and money spent on outlandish amounts of paperwork and policies that Governors have to chew through at each meeting. Rather than tackle the main issues an problems, Governors are, for the most part, going through the motions of signing off dull, over-written, cliche-ridden documents.