The Blade takes a look at the paychecks of leaders in the LGBT movement

What do the staffers make?

I have to give credit where credit is due - legally, these folks didn't have to reveal their 2008 salaries for a couple of years, and I do appreciate the transparency.

Also, it's nice to know that these leaders are being paid salaries that are relatively aligned with non-LGBT organizations, based on their annual revenue, etc.  (... to a point - in a way, I'd like us to be better than all those other organizations, and then I float back down to earth).

But I'd be more interested, quite frankly, in what the professional staff with the lowest salaries are getting paid at these organizations.  One of the real differences between America today and America 50 years ago isn't just that top executives are paid more, but they're paid astronomically more when compared to the salaries of their lowest-paid staff.  Obviously, executives can expect to be paid more than lower-level staffers, but not 20 or 30 times more (imho).

"There are two kinds of people in this world -- the kind who separate the world into two kinds of people, and those who don't."  -- Gloria Steinem

---

by: red7eric @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:43:40 AM CDT

BY JOVE, I THINK HE'S GOT IT !

Yes, that is the rub times twenty or thirty isn't it?

How much is the lobbying effort? What is the cost of walking from headquarters to Capitol Hill and shoe leather the solons? What results per dollar do you receive since Cheryl Jacques left HRC, and civil marriage became only one of the many "goals" of the agency?

Good question, red 7, but you really don't think a real answer is forthcoming do you? They are too busy chatting up our enemies and friends over a cocktail.

---

by: BISHOPRAYMOND @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:55:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree on that point as well

Staffers are the unsung heroes of any organization. Few get the face time of the CEO/ED in order to be known or receive credit, and they are the ones who have to deal with the grief, research, paperwork and cleanup behind the boss's boo-boos and PR disasters. And they aren't rewarded for excellence in performance in non-profits the way one is in the private sector. And as we've seen on that front, some of them receive bonuses for doing an ass-class job.  

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:10:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

SIX FIGURE GENTRIFICATION AND COCKTAIL PARTIES....

Let me begin by saying that the old idiom " it is not how much you EARN but how much you SAVE" speaks to the fact that the standard of living in many different parts of the United States differ dramatically.

Having therefore admitted that life in major urban centers or the nation's capital is very expensive, you have to admit that the gentrified leaders of the LBGT "activist" community are more than appropriately compensated for their "efforts".

Do we support any of the organizations mentioned? YES, and in the case of HRC and everyone but GLSEN whom we do support, HELL NO. We believe that GLSEN, as gay parents, have done much to thwart the Dobson programmes in our schools. Our four-figure donations to GLAD top our list. Besides supporting GLAD financially, we support, we three, with our shoe leather and our volunteer time.

Let us reflect upon another tangent often not discussed.
In the black heterosexual civil rights movement, the main organization was - from 1909 - the National Association for the Advancement of COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP). In fairness, this organization made peace with Plessy and Jim Crow, and in passive protest, allowed 1954 with Brown to wait for the civil rights act of 1964-5 a decade later, and 1967 for interracial marriage rights (not too important for many).

The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, started by Martin Luther King, Jr., PhD and Joseph Lowery, PhD was in Lowery's own words, an attempt to form an association of professional and accredited academics and clergy to gain respect not gained by "jackboot preachers" in the country.
Lowery and others in NAACP opposed the SCLN initially, as "uppity nwords" who wanted to control the movement.

The LGBT community have many voices, but not one spokesman. The Native Americans had Sitting Bull and the Blacks our revered Dr. King.  My point is made....maybe it would take a twofer....one lesbian and one gay leader acting together. If it takes just one, give me a lesbian.

---

by: BISHOPRAYMOND @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:47:20 AM CDT

ERRATUM

 Lowery was Southern Christian Leadership Conference and NOT an NAACP leader. Sorry for that error in the last sentence in the fifth paragraph.

---

by: BISHOPRAYMOND @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:51:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Part of me has a hard time...

With the fact that ONE PERSON gets 5% of the revenue to themselves. I work for a large NGO and tehy specifically control spending so that our TOTAL administrative budget is less than 10% of the revenue. Granted it works with larger sums, but it also has at lot more staff. Some organizations manage to get their admin costs even lower than that.

Personally I think that its somewhat indicative of the fact that executives are overpaid in most organizations. You can bet that if almost 5% of an organizations revenue is going to one person, The other 49 people (let alone the part timer) are not making much at all.

---

by: SciFi Geek @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:54:50 AM CDT

DITTO

DITTO

---

by: BISHOPRAYMOND @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:00:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What IS the deal with Shniderman?

$122K non-salary compensation on top of the $260K salary?  There's no profit sharing at a non-profit.  What kind of incentive bonus or benefits package is this?  It seems high, particularly relative to most of the other entries on the list.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:58:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, I donate my $25 a month to NCTE...

...And of course noticed that Mara Keisling is number 28 on the list -- at $75 thousand.

She lives is D.C. In my mind, she's severerly underpaid, considering what the cost of housing in the D.C. metro area.

Plus too, I know she worked the first two years as the full time executive director of NCTE without recieiving a paycheck.

Like or dislike her, Mara is an extremely important voice in the nation's capital for transgender civil rights and protections. And, knowing how (using a baseball metaphor) how shallow the bench is in the transgender subcommunity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, I'm not sure she's replaceable at this point. Again, that speaks to how really underpaid she actually is.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:13:19 AM CDT

Agreed

Agreed. I've met Mara, she's funny and smart and has a very tough job to do on a tight budget.

---

by: CarbonGirl @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 13:28:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not enough to issue death threats about.

 As was mentioned above. pay rates for top executives being 20% to 30% more than the staff members is a bit sickening, but we don't know.  But when we see that the people who pump the gas or work the cash register at an Exxon gas staion vs some of the top executices there 1,000% plus, and then the profits are record setting as we all where fleeced at the gas pumps last year it makes me sick.

After 8 years of Bush Co. it is sickening how the split between the classes grew. And now we see unemployment numbers going up and up.  I can understand the anger in this country.

 But if you look at it, people are angry over money, and the rate of pay being so unequal, (IE AIG Bonuses)  But many have no problem when equal right towards other citizen are OK with them.

 PS, I hope Kate is able to find employment soon.  One good thing is you both know it is coming.  I showed up to go to work, and BOOM, HappyCat, sorry, you are laid-off.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:15:11 AM CDT

Not percentage points

In many organizations, the CEO's salary isn't 20% higher than the lowest paid employee, but twenty times that amount:  two thousand percent higher.

A 20% difference is probably too low, actually - but prefereable, in my mind, to the reality of the situation.

"There are two kinds of people in this world -- the kind who separate the world into two kinds of people, and those who don't."  -- Gloria Steinem

---

by: red7eric @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 10:44:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oops, The % was supposed to be times.

The pay execs get  is 20 to 30 times,  

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 23:55:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What else this data tells us

While the story directs our attention to executive pay, I'm equally interested in the total revenue column. The organizations with the 5 highest paid executives have a combined annual budget of about $130 million; but this is just the tip of the iceberg.  The combined annual budget of the top 15 organizations on the list is about $240 million.

That's a lot of money. A whole lot.

Especially when there is simply no evidence to suggest that these funds are being spent in the most effective way possible to achieve the movement's national goals. Many of these organizations are quite effective and good at what they do, but the fact remains that the LGBT non-profit sector has grown organically rather than strategically. With these kinds of resources on the table, should we really have lost anti-marriage amendments in 30 states over the last five+ years? Should there really be such disparity between the resources and services available to LGBT folks in, say, Mississippi and western Massachusetts?

I also wish we could see this data mapped geographically. As Pam observes, the movement's resources are disproportionately centralized in the nation's most progressive cities (Boston, New York, DC, San Francisco, LA), while we see a notable lack of resources in those regions of the country where persecution and discrimination are most acute. Again, this is a function not of strategy but of circumstance; it doesn't need to be this way, and I would argue that it shouldn't.

Such distribution patterns are roughly the inverse of what one would expect of a national movement that is focused on ending persecution and achieving equality. In the Civil Rights Movement, for example, resources (in the form of dollars and volunteers) were directed from the country to the South, not the other way around.

I'm not interested in critiquing individual Executive Directors for their salaries. But data like this presents an opportunity to ask important, hard questions about the efficacy and structure of the national movement and, as importantly, to propose innovations and alternative strategies and structures. We ought to seize this opportunity.

http://jbf.typepad.com/jasmine...

---

by: jbeachferrara @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:21:07 AM CDT

We should make a distinction between advocacy and service orgs

I agree that it's instructive to look at the budgets, number of staff members, and geographic distribution, but I don't think it's helpful to conflate advocacy/educational orgs with service orgs in that analysis.  The local LGBT centers are tricky, since some of them do policy/educational as well as direct service work.  If we're going to compare spending on services, I think we need to include a lot of HIV/AIDS prevention and service orgs that aren't necessarily listed as specifically LGBT, since places like Whitman-Walker serve everyone in DC, not just queer folks. Also, I think it would make sense to consider national orgs separately, rather than treating them as serving the areas in which they're located (since they don't really do that).  

But yes, it would be interesting to see the comparative budgets of the various equality orgs by state population and region, and to compare total national spending to total local spending.

---

by: LauraG @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 13:21:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Salaries and giving

I work in a non-profit LGBT org. I have no problems with exec's making high wages. The level of responsibility, long hours and inherent pressure more than equals a good salary. We have a mindset in this country that non-profit should mean everyone who works there. Turn over for E.Ds and staff is usually high. A 3 year life span due to low wages. When someone with a masters can expect to make only 35k there is something wrong.

I do agree there should be some percentage parity from top down in salaries, but we as a community give so little to LGBT orgs in comparison to the money we spend on coffee or vacation. If we want direct staff of non profits to make more we need to give more. We need to ask for the transparency of activity and financial statements. The public should go to board meetings.

Someone who gives to my workplace once said he was considering not giving anymore to the Center because we didn't have someone hired to answer the phone. I snarked back that perhaps if he gave more we could then hire someone. Or he could volunteer to help out.

We need to give and for those who do, think seriously about giving more.

We have done so much for so little for so long we are expected to do everything with nothing. Is that how important the work is anymore?

---

by: mikamaj @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:29:13 AM CDT

Here's How I Always Look at It

Although not perfect, I've always used the following system when determining if a company overpays it's executives...

Executive Pay        Should not exceed % of Revenue
-------------        ------------------------------
Below 100k            9%
100k - 200k           6%
200k - 300k           3%
Above 300k            1%

Obviously arguments can be made about how much workload a person has, parity with others in similar positions at other organizations, and parity with employees at the same company (very important).  But these guidelines raise the flags for me to do more checking.

I just have the attitude that you have to be effective at raising money to justify your salary--number of employees, total expenses are also good things to look at.

---

by: Will St. James @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 10:07:08 AM CDT

I don't think those numbers work.

I agree with the principle that executive pay salaries should be reflective of budget size, but I'm not sure those numbers work.  Less that 9% of $100k translates to less than $9k.  We don't actually expect the executive director of an organization to be making less than $9,000, do we?  Similarly, 1% of $300k is only $30,000--that's not enough to support a family on in the DC area, even living modestly.  Also, it would be hard to retain talented people at that pay rate--starting salaries right out of undergrad are higher than that, at least in DC.

I think when we're talking about smaller organizations, we have to remember that often the executive director is doing much of the "substantive" work of the organization themselves.  In other words, it might make sense for an ED of an organization with a $100k budget to make 50% of that budget ($50k/year) in a salary if they're doing the bulk of the work of the organization.

---

by: LauraG @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 12:58:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Check again

Less that 9% of $100k translates to less than $9k.  We don't actually expect the executive director of an organization to be making less than $9,000, do we?

The minimum compensation bracket here is less than $100k, and that would be based on a maximum of 9% of revenue.  So in order to earn compensation of $99,999, the organization would have to have (net or gross?) revenue of $1,111,100.

---

by: Pollyanna @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 18:00:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

How many in these groups are volunteers?

And don't get paid but the profits go to the top?

---

by: Wes @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 10:10:38 AM CDT

One of these things is not like the other...

I am not one of the people who wants to drag everyone down to poverty--I get enough of that myself working for the government. These people could be making far more at almost any other venture of similar size.

Except for one.

$382,000 for the CEO of any venture with an under 8 million dollar budget is way out of line.

---

by: kathygnome @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:31:06 AM CDT

That's why I don't donate to Food and Friends anymore

For Craig Shniderman to be earning that kind of compensation when F&F is unable to provide all of the services asked of it is just insane.  The fact that Food and Friends is a local and not a national organization makes it even crazier.  My gay dollars go to other gay organizations whose directors make more realistic salaries.

---

by: Sikes @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42:11 AM CDT

I Would Rather See...

A chart showing how much money are paid to anti-lgbtq and anti-equality organizations and their leaders like James Dobson's Focus on the Family and all the others.

I believe such a side-by-side comparison would go a long way in showing the true disparity between our side and the anti-equality side.

"Every time an ambulance passes it is either someone who opposes gay rights dying or someone who supports them being born."
~ Christopher Hayes

---

by: Eddie89 @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:49:54 AM CDT

Unfortunately, this is a progressive problem

The other side throws millions at their chosen "leaders" while our side grumbles if someone with skills, knowledge, education and the hard-work gene makes a comfortable salary. I don't see that most of these are out of line.

---

by: anastasia P @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 13:04:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We're not asking the right question

The proper question is why do we refuse sufficient income for a decent life to lower wage workers?

We have a problem in this country: Those at the top do very well while those at the bottom don't even have access to basic necessities like health-care.

That's what needs to be fixed - across the board in government, for-profit, and non-profit organizations.

After the lowest paid workers have access to a decent life on the wages they receive, then we can talk about how much high-level executives should make.

As for lgbt non-profits, I'd like to know what the executives make at similar organizations serving other communities and what the best-practice guidelines suggest. I note that someone mentioned these salaries are in line with the non-lgbt organizations.

As for the specific people and organizations mentioned, without knowing the actual duties and performance of the executives, we really have no idea whether their compensation is justified. For example, what if Shniderman personally raised over 50% of Food and Friends annual budget? Fund-raising firms can receive 20% or more of the amount raised. That would make him a bargain.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 19:52:33 PM CDT

Want to see things change?

We should refuse to pay health-care benefits, or for that matter, any benefits not received by the typical low-wage worker, to elected officials.

In fact, I suggest eliminating all benefits for federal elected officials. No vacation, no retirement, no health care. Dock their pay for sick days. No salary increases until every American has health insurance, good schools for their kids, and a living wage.

Why should we pay for them to have these things when they oppose a decent living for the taxpayers?

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)

---

by: oldbrit @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 20:00:59 PM CDT