How about asking parents to beat teachers and deduct one year of performance pay?

What is the original intention of performance pay? There is nothing to question, it’s just that the more you work, the more you get. In order to encourage basic teachers to work actively, the state has implemented a performance-based salary system. If it is really consistent with the ideal, then this is definitely a truly fair and reasonable salary system. But what about reality?

The reality is that in a very small rural school, a principal who is not even a sesame seed can use performance pay as a bureaucratic stick and a symbol of power. As a principal, you can formulate a lot of inhumane systems without asking anyone's opinions, and then use these systems to deduct those who are busy teaching and correcting homework all day long. The performance-based pay of grassroots teachers who work many times harder than the principal himself.

In this way, a lot of hard work really becomes a piece of paper. The human touch has long been lost, and the weakest teachers are the losers. However, the principals have assigned all the work to the teachers below, and they have become people who sit in the office and calculate salaries. It is really unimaginable that the principal does not teach classes, the principal does not clean, the principal does not correct homework, and there are many, many other tasks that the principal does not do. But these jobs are all for teachers who don't even receive full wages. In this way, the performance salary of the principal is higher than that of other ordinary teachers. Is it reasonable? Is this the original intention of the performance pay system?