Nothing the 86th Legislature did garnered more press and educator interest than the promise of a long-overdue pay raise. House Bill 3, the compromise school finance legislation signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott, significantly affected numerous educators. While some details of the law’s effects on educator compensation are too complex for this article, we wanted to review two primary HB 3 compensation-related effects.

Increase in the Minimum Salary Schedule

While it received far less press than the pay raise, the minimum salary schedule increase might actually have the most impact on the largest number of educators. Section 21.402 of the Texas Education Code establishes a formula-determined minimum salary based on years of service for classroom teachers, full-time librarians, full-time speech pathologists, full-time registered nurses, and full-time school counselors certified by the State Board for Educator Certification. HB 3 increases the minimum salary substantially: approximately $5,000–$9,000 per year at each minimum salary step.
 
Although the minimum salary is just that—a minimum—and most districts previously paid above the minimum salary, the increases are so significant many districts will be required to provide a raise just to meet the new higher minimum salary requirements.
 
Again, the minimum salary applies only to specific categories of educators. It does not apply to administrators, para-educators, or support staff. Additionally, because Section 21.402, which establishes the minimum salary requirement, is a part of the Education Code, a district that has opted out as a part of its District of Innovation plan would not be required to match the new salary requirements. The minimum salary requirements also would not apply to charter schools.

TEA has publicly stated districts should apply the new salary requirements to the 2019-20 school year, so educators should see the change at the beginning of the new school year.
 
Finally, HB 3 financially affects different districts in different ways. Between additional funding and a reduction in recapture, some districts will have considerable additional financial resources. Other districts might have little additional money to use for these pay increases. This might result in local pressures as school boards search for ways to balance the books.  

The 30%/75% Raise

HB 3 also requires districts to use 30% of any funding increase recognized on compensation increases—and the district to apply 75% of that 30% to the same educator groups covered by the minimum salary requirements, except speech pathologists, who appear to have inadvertently been left out. Priority is to be given to educators with five or more years of experience. The law allows the other 25% to be used for any full-time staff except administrators. Under this provision, the increase can be salary increases, but it can also take other money-related forms, such as decreasing the staff contribution to health insurance premiums.
 
The tricky part is districts do not have all the data needed at this point to determine the increase in funding they will receive. TEA has acknowledged districts will just have to make a good faith effort to estimate the funding they will ultimately have available.  
  
The legal information provided here is accurate as of the date of publication. It is provided for general purposes only. Individual legal situations vary greatly, and readers needing individual legal advice should consult directly with an attorney. Eligible ATPE members may contact the ATPE Member Legal Services Department.