efore getting into the report itself, it will be important to give the delegates to this council some background information and history regarding the process and development of the report that we are presenting today. Without this background and context, some of you may wonder what we have been doing for the past 18 months.
First let me pay tribute to the members of the Commission. Not all are able to be here today, but I would like for those who are present to stand and be recognized. They come from Southern Asia Pacific Division, the South Pacific Division, the Africa Indian Ocean Division and from the North American Division. The majority of the commission members are laypersons who come from professional backgrounds in business, education, and financial management. They have given generously of their time and talents and I thank you for giving us a productive group with which to work.
The reasons for the establishment of this commission are several. As the church continues to grow, and the world in which we live becomes more complex, changes occur that impact the way we have traditionally compensated our employees. We have cherished the notion that as a worldwide church we have operated on the basis of a single system of remuneration. This system has been in place now for approximately 40 years, and has served the church well. When something so important and close to each one of us has this long a history, it is easy to some to begin to think of the wage scale as something sacred. It takes on an element of sanctity and to tamper with it is tantamount to giving up the faith.
The fact is that we don't have a single system. As we look around the world and in the various branches, institutions and structural units of the church, there are many and varied ways that remuneration is decided. While most organizations attempt to use the common wage scale with percentages of a wage factor, in reality some creative mutations have developed. For example, in some parts of the world, pastors may be paid on the basis of 2 or 3 different wage factors. The pastor who has come into the ministry with limited educational qualifications is paid one wage factor. Another pastor who has had a two year associate degree is paid on a higher wage factor. And still a third with a college or post-graduate degree may be paid on a still higher wage factor. At first glace all will appear to be receiving the same percentage, but the end result is quite different.
In other places we have found employees wages set at what appears to be the correct percentage on the wage scale, and the wage factor appears reasonable as well. The only difference is that instead of being paid for 12 months each calendar year, they are paid for 15 months each year, in addition to a car and driver. In one instance 18 months of salary was paid in a single calendar year. So you can see that with bonuses, incentives, and creative methods of remuneration the single wage scale we think we have is in reality many wage scales.
Several issues have driven the need to look into the matter of remuneration again. Among these issues is the matter I have just mentioned with regard to many different ways of arriving at compensation for workers. Another is the widening gap in upper level salaries of some entities that in 1993 were authorized by the General Conference Executive Committee at the Annual Council in Bangalore, India to establish remuneration packages that more closely resemble community rates. The Annual Council of 1993 granted authorization for institutions whose viability rests on their success in the commercial environment, and who do not receive appropriations from the General Conference, to move closer to community rates. This has resulted in the increase in the compensation packages of these institutions when compared to other upper level denominational employees. There is a concern about the need for workers to be able to transfer from one branch of the work to another without the incentive of financial gain or the disincentive of financial loss.
Still another issue focuses on the remuneration of the local pastor. Philosophically, the pastor is viewed as the most important leader in the structure of the organization. Without pastors, none of us would be here. We depend on their leadership of the congregations to keep this church healthy and growing. However, at least in North America, if the spouse of the pastor does not work, it is almost impossible for a family with children in school to survive on the current pastor's salary. Yet Ellen White, when speaking of pastors, admonishes that "Those who are willing to labor for the Master should not be allowed to lack for the necessities of life. They should be enabled to live comfortably, and also to have enough so that they can make donations to the cause of God; for it frequently happens that they are expected to take the lead in making offerings." 2SM 187
If we value families, are we being fair to our pastors if their remuneration is insufficient to allow for the mother to fulfill her important role as a mother and homemaker. Instead she is forced to find work outside the home to supplement the family income
Remuneration, or compensation is a complex topic and we have spent days discussing various aspects of this crucial issue. We have argued the merits of repairing and maintaining the system we currently have. We have argued the merits of fixed wages for each position as compared to a remuneration scale with percentages. We have become familiar with using the terms "compression" of the wage scale, and "decompression" of the wage scale. We have talked about sacrifice and what that means. What is equal sacrifice for people whose earning potential is vastly different? We have discussed the meaning of a living wage. We have discussed what it means for wages to be ample, fair and just. We have spent hours on the concept of the unity of the church, and how remuneration is an important factor in that unity. We have discussed the need to be transparent and have everything fully disclosed in order to maintain leadership credibility with our constituents.
We have talked about how our schools, our colleges and universities fit into all this, and the importance of these professionals to our educational institutions.
Today we are coming to you with a report. Within the Commission there have been differing opinions, sincerely held on the basis of deep personal conviction. The report attempts to establish a philosophy of remuneration that is grounded in scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy writings of Ellen White. It endeavors to provide broad guidelines for our Divisions so that they are able to apply the philosophy in the context of their unique challenges. Dr. Angel Rodriguez of the Biblical Research Institute was commissioned to write a paper on the Philosophy Remuneration from the Scriptures. Two additional Biblical scholars later reviewed the paper and concurred with the conclusions, but also added a couple of helpful suggestions. Frankly there is not a lot of material in the Scriptures that speaks directly to this subject. The Ellen G White Estate was also commissioned to prepare a paper on the principles of remuneration from the Spirit of Prophecy. Dr. Herbert Douglass was requested to write the paper. Two additional E.G. White specialists also reviewed this paper and made a few minor comments. These documents provided the foundation from which we extracted the principles of remuneration you find in the document before you today.
_________________________
Gerry Karst is a General Conference vice president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Exclude PDF Files