Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coaches Pay Scale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Millersburg board hears proposal for uniform coaches pay scale, debate centers on playoff cap and sport parity
Summary
District staff presented a proposed uniform coaches pay scale that would place all varsity head coaches on a single starting column ($3,100) and assistants on a separate column; board members questioned a three-week playoff pay cap and whether a one-size approach fairly accounts for time demands across sports.
District athletic staff presented a proposed uniform pay scale for coaches, arguing it would create consistency across sports and improve retention. "The head coach starting salary would be $3,100," the presenter said, describing a two-column approach (all varsity head coaches in one column, assistants in another) and a 2.5% step increase per year.
Board members raised several detailed questions. One member asked why playoff pay is capped at three weeks; the presenter and a colleague explained the cap was originally intended to limit district liability if a team advanced deep into postseason play. The presenter also explained how seasonal roles would be handled: "If they did all three seasons, they would get $3,900; if they only did one season, they'd get $1,300," clarifying the per-season structure for cheer and strength/weight-room supervisors.
Several board members pushed back on the equity of a single starting salary across all sports, noting that some sports require more travel, nights, or year-round work. A board member noted that even if salaries are modest across the board, "not all sports take the same number of hours for the coaches." District staff said administrators could make case-by-case adjustments and that the proposed scale is based on averages from comparable nearby districts, including Newport, Greenwood, Halifax and Juniata.
The presenter said the current pay scale expires June 30 and that administration will map current placements to the new scale and present recommendations to cooperative partners (Upper Dauphin and Halifax) before seeking board approval. No final board vote on the scale occurred at the meeting; the board asked staff to provide placement mappings and to report back with any suggested refinements.
