| 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 | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - ryhog 03:58 pm EDT 07/15/23 |
| Next: | re: “I will be taking a significant reduction in salary,” he said - ryhog 05:26 pm EDT 07/16/23 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.011711 seconds.