What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
182 Comments
- sheasie, on 06/19/2009, -12/+72No. "non-profit" does NOT equal "selfless".
The term "non-profit" is simply an IRS-defined "business" subclass. Churches, are typically non-profits. But any business that "services the community interest" can be a non-profit. Mozilla.org (the makers of the popular "Firefox" web browser), generated USD72 million in 2008. The point is: A web browser maker is a non-profit ??! Yes.
As I said, "non-profit" does NOT equal "selfless". Non-profits are businesses, just like most others. Why should the non-profit "label" effect its CEO's pay ? - Fragger404, on 06/18/2009, -9/+63Set a 50-60k pay limit on that position and see how will the non-profit performs. I think you'll quickly see the money is well spent. Why would these organizations pay that much if it wasn't necessary?
- ntuck, on 06/19/2009, -14/+59$200K is appropriate and it's critically important that we pay people well who are doing good work in the world. These salaries are still well below for-profit exec salaries - which are sometimes outrageous (and this needs to be addressed but it's a separate issue) - and we need to get out of the mindset that people working in the nonprofit sector shouldn't make comparable salaries to those in the for-profit world, this is just backward.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 06/19/2009, -8/+30No it's not. 200k is a pretty meager salary for a ceo of a major corporation. Non profit shouldn't even come into the equation. If you want good management you should be prepared to pay for it. By paying for a good CEO you save money down the line through efficiency and good management. Now if the CEO sucks at his job that's another story.
- Kronich, on 06/19/2009, -5/+24Depends - If he/she helps them raise significant funds etc then I have no problem. If he/she was doing a great job raising say $1m then I'd rather see him/her there at $200K than some muppet being paid $50K while raising only $65K
- omgbanana, on 06/19/2009, -10/+25You're naive to think that there is an abundance of people willing to work for 1/5 of their potential paycheck. Do you donate 4/5s of your paycheck to charity? If you only want people willing to earn 60k a year, unfortunately, many of these charities will go away.
- luvbuzd, on 06/19/2009, -0/+11If you've ever worked for a large non-profit, then you know how hard it is. $200K is worth it as long as they YIELD RESULTS. These people work round-the-clock, sacrifice their family lives, and would get paid MUCH MORE to work in the private sector. When you work for a non-profit, you see some CRAZY/SAD/DISTURBING things... why would anyone think that working for a non-profit means a person deserves any less?
When kids get abused, natural disasters occur, and noble causes are promoted, it's usually non-profits and volunteers that get working first. I am insulted when people think I should be paid less just because I'm "trying to save the world" by working for a non-profit. I went to school. I paid my dues. I have bills to pay... but I chose to try to make my job do something helpful rather than trying to buy myself a nicer car. I'm good at what I do and deserve what I get for my job (which would yield me more in the private sector). If you want GOOD people to do a thankless job, then you'd better show them they're appreciated. - offrdbandit, on 06/19/2009, -2/+12They do get paid less. They get paid a very small % of what for-profit CEOs make.
If you don't like an organization's administrative scheme (executive pay, how they spend money, etc), don't give them money.
Idiots these days... - akatsuki, on 06/19/2009, -5/+13So you want someone managing potentially millions of dollars making $50K? Someone who can add a lot of value to the organization by raising more money than they are paid?
This is the typical myopic look at pass-through rates of charities. People won't donate to charities if they don't somehow pass through every single penny of their donations. Well, guess what, seeing if that money is spent effectively takes overhead. Managing those funds takes overhead. A lot of those high pass-through charities are clowns pissing money into the wind instead of getting the most for their dollar. - reckage, on 06/19/2009, -0/+8Hetman, what kind of long term plan is that for the company?
If they have a new CEO every 2-4 years because their last one moved on for more money, how would the organization ever grow and stabilize and spread its mission?
Getting talented people to stick around costs money. - DifferentAngle, on 06/19/2009, -4/+11Only entertainers and other people of no value should make lots of money.
/s - pak314, on 06/19/2009, -3/+10I think it is fine as long as there is full disclosure. For example on their donation brochure.
- brundlefly76, on 06/19/2009, -0/+7I think you guys are confusing non-profit employees with volunteers.
Non-profit employees are just like employees of profit companies - people like you and I who attended college, worked for other companies both profit and non-profit along the way, and eventually established a level of experience where someone would hire them to run a multi-million-dollar business.
These employees are just like you and I, in that they want to work harder and take more challenging positions for greater reward to support themselves and their families.
These employees are just like you and I in that they may give to charity or volunteer also, but when they spend 40-60 hours a week at their main job, which is very challenging, they rightfully expect market compensation. They are not expected to surrender a percentage of their salary towards the goals of the non-profit as some sort of charity - ?
I ask you this, if you were to do the *exact* same job you do today, and someone offered you the exact same job at a non-profit for 20% less than your for-profit company, would you take it? Why? Also, what would you expect of the quality of the staff at that non-profit if their employees were willing to take 20% less? Basically you would be getting general government employee-level workers. - NICU, on 06/19/2009, -6/+12No that's not "too much" that's a ridiculous thought. If the CEO is good at their job they deserve to get paid what the company thinks they're worth. Any company (for profit or non profit) run by a good management team will grow and create more jobs which benefits everyone. Capping pay will run any company into the ground which will cause every employee to lose their jobs.
- doctechnical, on 06/19/2009, -4/+10Jesus, I hate this "compensation envy" *****. Pay the bastard what he's *worth*. If he's bringing in donations hand over fist, give him his due - or he'll find greener pastures. Then the non-profit can hire some schmuck for $50k a year, and he'll run the place.
Into the ground.
Unless they're employed by YOU (and that includes politicians), don't worry about what people are making. It makes no difference in your life whatsoever. - blah247, on 06/19/2009, -3/+9Guess it depends on what types of numbers he brings in.
- inactive, on 06/19/2009, -1/+7The SA is a religious charity, their compensation is "God's Grace". Religion is a very powerful motivational factor.
- ParkourRunner, on 06/19/2009, -3/+9not for the government to decide.
- geesamba, on 06/19/2009, -0/+5That's fine. As long as you never accept one red cent from a charity.
Heaven forbid if you were diagnosed for cancer. It'd be pretty difficult to find a hospital that is good at treating cancer that doesn't accept money from the American Cancer Society.
There are ways of obtaining the spending habits of charities so that you can make an informed decision instead of making blanket decisions out of complete ignorance. You're masking your laziness with a poor excuse. - Ryan32, on 06/19/2009, -0/+5Educate yourself. You have no idea what it means to be a "non-profit" corporation.
- useraccess, on 06/19/2009, -0/+5Hetman...Actually the opposite. It should be the rich CEO that has the experience and money already in the bank. We don't need to fill the non-profits with inexperienced folks to get experience.
- BullBearMS, on 06/19/2009, -2/+6How is it that the CEO of the Salvation Army makes less than 100k for both his and his wife's full time work COMBINED?
They are a *much* bigger charity than the two mentioned in the article. - ousthouse, on 06/19/2009, -4/+8I don't really care about a gap between the rich and the middle class.. we need to worry about ending poverty. And, no, you don't end poverty by taking from the rich.
- trav6, on 06/19/2009, -3/+7You know whats funny, everybody that said that "ITS TOO MUCH" would be a hypocrite; if you were getting paid that much you wouldn't have a problem with it. I'm just saying.
- diggcommentguy, on 06/19/2009, -2/+6Then who's going to run the non-profit they would be donating to?
- Hetman, on 06/19/2009, -8/+12I do not work for a non-profit. If I did I would assume I would be getting paid less. It is common sense.
- Gusbob, on 06/20/2009, -0/+4Yes...
- inactive, on 06/19/2009, -11/+15Not if he's a hard worker, or a strong leader, etc.
Why do people tend to hate those who have achieved high earnings? - methdwman3, on 06/19/2009, -0/+4199k is half of 200k? Yikes! Assuming you meant 100k, that is still a pretty small salary for NYC - You have to remember, places like NYC and Boston to a smaller degree, you cannot rent anything half decent for less than $2k a month, unless you want to live way outside the city and commute, and then you have to have a car, pay for parking and tolls etc.
The actually money is irrelevant. Like most businesses, you are looking for the best person for the job, not necessarily Mother Theresa. People get into nonprofit work sometimes because of a desire to help people, but often that is just their niche - they started working at nonprofits early on and it is their area of expertise so to speak. In general, nonprofits are short on cash, so if you are in the field, you should expect a lower salary, wherever you are on the food chain. Getting the right person in for a large nonprofit, in a high position like CEO, can mean the difference between millions of dollars in donations, so if they do their job well, they will make their money for the place. If not, charities' books are free for us all to see, and donate your money accordingly. - offrdbandit, on 06/19/2009, -5/+9I guess you don't understand the difference between "non-profit" and "we don't pay our workers"...
- fujiubear, on 06/19/2009, -0/+4congrats, you've authored the dumbest comment i've read this week.
- sfackler, on 06/19/2009, -0/+3Then what's that guy going to get paid? Learn some critical thinking skills, pak314.
- pathouston22, on 06/19/2009, -6/+9Sounds like a poor person whining.
- ATL, on 06/20/2009, -0/+3so you think non-profit organizations should be run completely by volunteers
yeah ok - cleveruser, on 06/19/2009, -4/+7Although if they want the best talent... they will have to pay for it, experience/expertise is valuable. Anyway 200k is a pittance in the grand scale of CEO pay...
- LordVance, on 06/19/2009, -0/+3I think omg was trying to reply to Hetman and failing at it.
- thebigredcat, on 06/19/2009, -6/+9Because those people tend to outsource the rest of us into unemployment, gouge us on health insurance premiums when we are still employed, loot our retirement accounts, and as often as not screw over the small investors who hold stock or bonds to maintain those high earnings.
In non- profits they also have the option to cut services to the very people that they are supposed to be serving in order keep the fat rolling in. - reckage, on 06/19/2009, -2/+5You missed Fragger's point. He was illustrating that these salaries are warranted.
- AZSanMan, on 06/19/2009, -0/+3Interesting how many down votes you got. Lots of crap defending themselves.
- methdwman3, on 06/19/2009, -0/+3Depends where you are, hetman - 50k in these parts wouldn't get you much of anything.
- sgroach, on 06/19/2009, -0/+3How so? Hes the head of the company. Other for profit CEOs are out making millions a year.
- publiclurker, on 06/19/2009, -1/+4You seem to have a rather warped idea of what it means to "work your ass off". Perhaps you should try it some day.
- JustinNoland, on 06/19/2009, -2/+5Envy.
- zomgflamer, on 06/19/2009, -1/+3Why call it a non-profit, its a damn shame. Call it fund raising company. Oh wait if the donators found out that their charity money is gone to paying salary then they wouldn't get any would they.
Man what a scam. I should start my non-profit for breast cancer. Better than going through pain in the arse college, then going to super demanding, high pressure, underpaying, overworked and politics played job.
***** you corporate and government crooks. - publiclurker, on 06/19/2009, -1/+3Worst misspelling of ethics I've seen in a long time.
- silverchrysalis, on 06/20/2009, -0/+2dugg for the visual of muppets doing fundraising.
oh, and for the good point, as well. - thegreatgazoo, on 06/19/2009, -1/+3Most of the people in local bands that play at bars are moonlighting.
If you are putting in 50 or 60 hours/week leading a non-profit that helps people and you are effective at fund raising, cost controls, and so forth $200k/year isn't unreasonable. - Ghostalker, on 06/19/2009, -4/+6If what they're doing is worth a $200k salary, then he/she should be paid the $200k salary. It's a very easy equation; get paid what you're worth.
- EtherGnat, on 06/19/2009, -0/+2You're missing the point. I work for a non-profit organization. My boss probably makes $200k a year or close to it, and it's worth every penny. For-profit organizations try and steal him away all the time for 3x the salary, but fortunately he's passionate about what he does. Without his dedication and skills I doubt we'd still exist.
People used to make fun of him for his penny pinching and belt tightening. Now other organizations around us are going under or facing huge cutbacks, and we're still going strong. Exactly how little do you expect a PhD with lots of management experience, a history of success, and priceless contacts throughout academia, the private sector, and government to work for? - DifferentAngle, on 06/19/2009, -0/+2I dont see why you cant have BOTH - do something you love and make money doing it. Or do something valuable to society and make money doing it. It's like if you love your job you should do it for free or low pay. WTF
You call people trying to earn money doing something meaningful a bunch of *****? YOU'RE the *****. People like YOU are the reason why good people are undercompensated and worthless people make lots of money. YOU'RE the one that creates this ridiculous stigma. -
Show 51 - 100 of 185 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is