School principals in Namibia are accountable for overseeing instruction, managing staff, supervising finances, coordinating safety, communicating with communities, and responding to emergencies at any time. 

However, there is a startling discrepancy between incentives and accountability in how the system pays people. A principal on Salary Grade 5 gets N$432 601–N$517 195 per year, augmented solely by a housing allowance of N$17 424 annually and a transport allowance of N$10 512, barely enough to pay for a tyre change. 

The transport allowance is comparable to that of any other teacher, despite the principal’s significantly greater operational and leadership load. Compare this to a Medical Officer or Dentist on the same Salary Grade 5 in the Ministry of Health: they receive a fixed overtime allowance of N$231 513, a motor-vehicle capital-cost allowance of N$60 943, and a running-cost allowance of N$24 120, in total, more than N$316 000 in additional annual allowances. Whilst N$27 936 is the total allowance given to a principal. This is a structural distortion rather than a marginal gap.

The principal’s position is treated as an afterthought, despite being the only leadership position in the public service expected to self-fund critical institutional needs. No director or superintendent in any ministry is told to host bazaars, sell raffles, sell fat-cakes, or grovel for donations to keep their institution functional. Yet, principals typically do this because school finances fall short and the system subtly dumps this shortfall onto their shoulders. 

This has normalised a leadership environment in which principals are reduced to public fundraisers rather than strategic leaders, yet we expect them to perform academic miracles and ensure all learners in their school pass, irrespective of varying intellectual abilities.

Transport burdens illustrate the situation more strongly. Principals of rural schools utilise their own cars to transport feeding program supplies over rugged terrain and deep sand, often making multiple trips hauling 50 to 100 sacks of maize meal. 

There is no running-cost allowance, no refund, and no government vehicle. Parents must be encouraged to cook for free, another burden no other ministry imposes on its clientele. It makes sense that some principals use school finances as fuel to maintain operations, but instead of admitting the systemic failure, they are accused of poor management. The system penalises them for trying to keep schools viable after forcing them into unfeasible situations.

On top of this, principals have no real voice in salary negotiations. 

They are members of NANTU, yet their issues rarely reach the bargaining agenda because the union’s structure does not prioritise principal-level concerns. 

They belong to the union but remain practically invisible when decisions about their conditions of service are made. Furthermore, Circuit Inspectors, also on Salary Grade 5, have previously received vehicle allowances and still often operate official vehicles today, while supervising principals who drive personal cars, carry operational loads, and receive the lowest transport support among Grade 5 professionals. Inspectors get vehicles. Principals get responsibilities.

The reality is unavoidable; the treatment of principals is unsustainable. We ask them to run schools like CEOs while compensating them like ordinary employees. We rely on personal vehicles to move State goods. We expect them to manage large workforces without management allowances. We require them to supplement State budgets with fundraising. And we expect them to remain quiet while others negotiate the structures that determine their livelihoods.

A modernised compensation model is overdue. Principals should receive the full benefits applicable to Grade 5 civil servants, including meaningful vehicle or running-cost allowances that reflect their operational load. A tiered model should categorise principals based on the complexity of the school size, staffing, boarding responsibilities, budgets and community demands. 

Schools must be funded adequately so leaders can focus on academic outcomes rather than financial survival. And principals must be formally represented in salary negotiations as a distinct leadership group.

Namibia cannot continue expecting strong school performance while systematically undervaluing the leaders who carry the system. The country must decide whether principalship is a strategic leadership function or a ceremonial title. Right now, the numbers and the day-to-day realities tell a painful story. Principals stand as the only leaders who must beg, carry, transport, sell, and use personal resources just to keep institutions functional. If education is truly a national priority, then the professionals who run our schools must be treated accordingly.

*Salomo Ndeyamunye yaNdeshimona, Educator, Scholar, Social Activist from Oshikoto. The views expressed are my own and do not represent those of my employer.