n this segment General Conference president Jan Paulsen talks with William Johnsson about remuneration of church employees. Next time he will discuss the role of the pastor.

WGJ: At last year's Annual Council the church voted a new remuneration plan for its employees. Give us the background of this action.
JP: In the past the General Conference set the remuneration parameters for workers everywhere, specifying the salary for each category of church worker around the world. With a rapidly growing church, however, it has become impossible to establish from one center a set of detailed guidelines or parameters that apply to everybody in every culture and in every country. So the Annual Council authorized the transfer of ownership of the remuneration policy to each division of the world field. But in doing so, we wanted to set these parameters within a commonly agreed statement of philosophy that would apply to the whole world church.

What are the principles on which the philosophy of remuneration is based?
The philosophy expresses biblical principles plus principles articulated by Ellen White. It also acknowledges that there are some areas in which you have to look at the community and salary factors that apply to certain specialized professions. In addition, the philosophy seeks to capture the idea of sacrifice, which has always been part of the mission of the church. We will never be able to match, nor do we think we should try to match, salaries that are offered in the secular workplace. To the concept of sacrifice is added the concept of fairness.

What forms the basis, or starting point, for remuneration under the new plan?
The salary for an ordained minister. This is the 100 percent base from which all other categories are calculated.

Is there an upper limit, a cap on salaries?
Yes. The policy sets the upper parameters with an eye to institutions or agencies within the church. Institutions of higher learning and a small number of other units have the boundary set at approximately 150 percent of that which is available to the minister. There is another benchmark built in, namely the median factor of what applies in the secular society, because in some countries the median in society is less than the 150 percent figure. We need the salary range in order to operate services such as centers of higher learning, where we are dependent on finding the finest men and women as professors and administrators. But we also need to have men and women who understand and accept the notion of sacrifice. We can never offer them what they could get at a secular place.

Will institutions and boards take these guidelines seriously?
I sincerely pray they will. Frankly, at times we have played games with what the actual remuneration is. I hope that we can be open and transparent so that it can be clear to the boards, auditors, and everyone who has just cause to look at these things just what the reality is. I have a strong desire to see to it that this one works.

What about entities such as hospitals and health-care institutions that depend on revenue from the general public? Do these policies apply to them?
We have an exclusion clause in this policy that recognizes entities owned and operated by our church that receive no financial support from the church. I think particularly of a number of our hospital systems (such as those that you find in North America) but also of some of our food factories that derive their finances from the general society. We recognize that they need to be defined differently. The remuneration policy that we voted at Annual Council therefore does not apply to them.

Was this a difficult item?
Yes. But it was long overdue.