Threaded Order Chronological Order
| “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said | |
| Posted by: JAllenC3 12:35 pm EDT 07/14/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Well, Public is not sole producer of Hamilton - Singapore/Fling 12:25 pm EDT 07/14/23 | |
|
|
|
| It's literally right in the story linked in the first post that he is taking a significant salary cut. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said | |
| Posted by: finally 01:20 pm EDT 07/15/23 | |
| In reply to: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - JAllenC3 12:35 pm EDT 07/14/23 | |
|
|
|
| Odd that it's not stated what that really means. There seems to have been an arms race among arts NFPs over the past decade to see how high they could push leadership pay. So, even a 50% cut is likely multiples more than most of the staff make. How about the leadership live on no more than $200K for a while and use the delta to help shore up the organization? Frankly, it's past time for many of them to go. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said | |
| Posted by: ryhog 03:58 pm EDT 07/15/23 | |
| In reply to: re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - finally 01:20 pm EDT 07/15/23 | |
|
|
|
| I feel like you are collapsing a lot of separate issues into one post. I don't think it is an "arms race." To me it is about paying senior leadership a wage that keeps them from straying, just as any entity would do for folks with the needed experience. The highest paid top persons in the large NFPs makes far less than comparable incomes of the top people on the for profit side. I can guarantee you that the differential is greater between a lead producer (who typically "manages" a relatively small operation) and their employees than that between an NFP artistic director/producer (who typically oversees a huge operation) and the NFPs rank and file. This does not mean that NFP staff are paid enough or that some AD types are not past their sell-by date, but those are separate battles. And every NFP's numbers are a matter of public record whereas no lead producer type has to open their books. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said | |
| Posted by: finally 12:53 pm EDT 07/16/23 | |
| In reply to: re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - ryhog 03:58 pm EDT 07/15/23 | |
|
|
|
| So what is his current salary? Almost $900K base salary for the 2021 tax year per the 990. Plus "other compensation" of $238K. So $1.1M cost to the organization each year. And how much is the "significant reduction" going to be? Seems like a basic question to answer. Of course, they're avoiding that because it will invite further criticism. The next highest paid person makes less than half that amount. How many staff jobs could be saved or programs not lost by resetting executive compensation? Paring low-level staff introduces that much more stress to the already-stretched staff that remains, leading to more exits of the ones they claim they want to retain. I've seen that in various situations over my career, and it has accelerated during this post-pandemic period. I don't think people quite understand the major shift that is happening within these organizations across the country with lots of very experienced people jumping ship and heading into other careers altogether, people who were deemed essential to keep in place during the pandemic, so they survived being culled during that period. I disagree with the basic premise that you *have* to pay these executives this much. The "arms race" I mention is exactly predicated on that notion: that if we don't overpay them, then someone else will. Has anyone said "no" to see what will really happen? If there are plenty of people who will take the low paying jobs for a career in the arts, why isn't it true for the leadership? Will Eustis be offered a comparable job at the same or higher salary if the board says he has to take a drastic pay cut or leave? Somehow I doubt it, considering that the organization he leads is failing. And of course you can look at their 990s and see that his increases year-to-year are substantial. In 2017, he was only a $650K cost to the organization. Somehow I also doubt that the rank and file were receiving such generous increases during the same time period. The idea that you need executives making over $1M to run these organizations is business-school talk; I would question the ones making half a million, too. There is another model that worked just fine for generations that involved administrators making generous but not egregious salaries. I believe the same thing applies to for-profit corporations as well, though that's not the subject at hand. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said | |
| Posted by: ryhog 05:26 pm EDT 07/16/23 | |
| In reply to: re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - finally 12:53 pm EDT 07/16/23 | |
|
|
|
| Obviously we disagree about some things, most of which cannot be proven in the short run. We have different philosophies and that's fine of course. I do wonder a few things about what we know and what we don't. Do we know specifically who has been cut? You say "already-stretched staff" but if they are significantly reducing programming, is that true? And do you know that any important-to-retain positions are being cut? Ironically, you talk of very experienced people jumping ship but you seem to leave the head guy out of the equation. I am not a big fan of Oskar, but he is the right fit for the Public; he gets it. And you also say they are "failing" which feels like a pot shot. They are doing something they don't want to do to avoid failure. And as much as I love George Wolfe, the place Oskar walked into when he took over was a sad mess. The Public has been transformed in many ways, and all for the better. You talk of another model by which I assume you mean the old one. The world of NY theatre is not the same as it was when I was a young lad. Finally, the idea Oskar can't make more money with a LOT less time, energy and aggravation is just not correct. The Public and Oskar does not equate with experiences "across the country." In his entire tenure at the Public he has not made as much as a bunch of directors of successful shows with long Broadway runs have made from a single show. As I said, you are entitled to your approach and I don't mean to suggest otherwise. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: You’re Right, I Misjudged Him | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 10:00 pm EDT 07/14/23 | |
| In reply to: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - JAllenC3 12:35 pm EDT 07/14/23 | |
|
|
|
| That’s actually a very decent thing for him to do, and it’s a difficult time, so I shouldn’t have been catty. Thank you for calling me out. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.041834 seconds.