Long gone are the days when teachers were those who could find no other employment.
Thank G-d our schools have many talented teachers who could be successful in a host of
other professions which offer higher salaries. Yet the CJN (January 17) reported that
suggestions have been made that “options for lowering the cost of education include
decreasing teacher salaries”. Emotions aside it behooves us to examine the perspective of
Jewish law on this issue.
Jewish law prohibits receiving compensation for the performance of mitzvoth. Torah
observance links man to the Divine; “the same way I [G-d] (taught Torah) for free so to
you (are to teach for) free”. Interestingly a similar issue exists regarding doctors
who perform the vital tasks of tending to our physical health
While such a volunteer system may have been viable when parents were the main
teachers of Torah, (and as a result sadly most Jews remained ignorant), clearly it is
impossible to expect those who dedicate their lives to teaching (or healing) to do so
gratis. The Talmud (Ketuvot 105a) records that judges were to be compensated from
public funds. Noting that the a judge who accepts payment for his judgments renders
those judgments null and void, the Talmud asserts that payment is not actually given for
rendering judgment but as shechar batala, what we would call today opportunity cost. By
eschewing other forms of employment, making themselves available to serve the public,
they are to be compensated from the public treasury, much a like civil servants of today.
That the public and not the litigants themselves compensate the judges has the added
benefit of justice having no correlation to income, something which sadly is not always
the case today. By paying public servants from public and thus charitable funds, they
would be paid, the Talmud notes, according to need. Those with larger families would
receive greater levels of compensation (a big baby bonus).
The concept of paying public servants according to a charity scale does not resonate in
our egalitarian culture (and I imagine might very well be illegal in Canada) in which we
live. Equal pay for equal work irrespective of personal circumstances is the way the
marketplace operates (in theory). In any event such a payment scale only applies to those
who are permanently on call for public service and thus have no opportunity for other
employment.
Whether such needs based salaries would apply even in theory to modern day full time
teachers is quite debatable. For better or worse teachers are often expected to seek other
employment to make ends meet, yet no doubt a teaching schedule severely limits one’s
options. (It is worth noting that Jewish law generally prohibits moonlighting recognizing
that it would impair ones ability to properly perform one’s regular job). Nonetheless all
who engage in teaching Torah whether part time of full time are entitled to payment in
lieu of wages they could have earned elsewhere. Calculating such an amount is no simple
manner. Does it mean what they could actually earn in practice which might be very
little, or what they theoretically could have earned which could mean six or seven figure
salaries. Does it make sense to pay more to one who gave up a lucrative job rather than
one who enters the fields of education straight out of school?
It is understood that public service salaries cannot and perhaps should not be able to
compete with those in the private sector. Yet by not offering salaries that are at least in
the same ball park we are unable to attract many who would contribute greatly to the
Jewish people. And for that we are all poorer.
