In preliminary provisions, providing for minimum hourly wage or living wage for education support professionals; in duties and powers of boards of school directors, further providing for majority vote required and recording; and imposing duties on the Department of Labor and Industry.
Summary
HB777 would amend the Pennsylvania Public School Code to establish a wage floor for “education support professionals” beginning in the 2025-2026 school year. Covered employees would have to be paid at least $20 per hour or a regionally determined living wage, whichever is higher, with overtime paid at one and one-half times that rate. The bill also requires that salaried support staff be evaluated over two-week periods to ensure they meet the minimum compensation standard.
The bill is structured to avoid immediately reopening existing contracts, but it requires public school entities to make supplemental wage payments when current agreements pay below the new floor. Those supplemental payments would continue through the 2029-2030 school year, and school entities could receive reimbursement or special payments from the Department of Education. The Department of Labor and Industry would be tasked with calculating and annually updating regional living wages based on CPI-U changes, and the Department of Education would issue implementation guidelines. The bill also amends school board voting rules to prohibit boards from entering into service contracts for education support professionals that pay less than the new minimum wage standard.
Impact
HB777 would add a new Section 135 to the Public School Code and modify Section 508 governing school board actions. It would directly affect school districts, intermediate units, and area career and technical schools, as well as education support professionals who are not professional employees, substitutes, or temporary professional employees. The bill would also create new duties for the Department of Labor and Industry and the Department of Education, including wage calculation, publication, reimbursement administration, and implementation guidance. Existing contracts are largely preserved, but future or renewed agreements would have to comply with the wage floor, and noncompliant board actions could be unenforceable.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be supported by sponsors who are prioritizing higher pay for school support staff and aligning compensation with a living-wage standard. There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal opposition or bipartisan sentiment can be identified from the record here. The overall tone of the proposal is worker-protective and aimed at improving compensation in public schools.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are cost, labor-contract effects, and implementation. School entities may face increased payroll obligations, even though the bill provides for supplemental reimbursements and special payments. Another likely issue is the interaction with existing collective bargaining agreements and employment contracts: the bill avoids reopening them, but still requires supplemental payments and bars lower wages in new or renewed agreements. A further point of concern is the forfeiture penalty tied to contracting out noninstructional services under section 528, which could reduce state aid if a district replaces positions with third-party contractors. These issues would likely be of greatest concern to school districts, school boards, and potentially employee organizations negotiating future contracts.