Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Salaries of Charity CEOs

<< < (2/5) > >>

Carol Haynes:
It strikes me a similar to churches trying to raise funds to maintain buildings when the "Church" (ie. the establishment) is a hugely wealthy organisation. For example in England the Chrush of England is the second largest land owner to the Crown - and yet it expects people who have no relationship with religion to dip their hands in their pockets to maintain their cathedrals!

JavaJones:
Seems to me the measure of "percentage of expense for CEO's salary" is fairly reasonable. The larger an organization the smaller it should be as a percentage, but it should still increase in absolute terms. In other words if an organization makes 1 million annually, the CEO's salary should be no more than $50,000 IMO, which is 5% of revenue. If a company makes 10 million annually, the CEO's salary could be $200,000, that's 4 times more, but only 2% of revenue. Ultimately, if nothing else, I think there should be a CEO salary cap. No one, no matter how influential their decisions, deserves to make upwards of 10 million a year. Hell the president of the US doesn't make nearly that amount. :P

Anyway I tend to agree with BrotherS for the most part. These numbers need to be considered in context. $400,000 is a *lot*. But if that's the highest paid charity CEO then I'm comfortable with it. However if there are charity CEO's out there making millions, I'd be very, very mad. It's all a matter of balance. As long as a charity is successful at its mission, which should be to help its target audience, and the executive's salary is a reasonable percentage of revenue and not outrageous as an absolute value, I'm fine with it.

- Oshyan

yabbadabbado:
In terms of charity, I always try to give to the Salvation Army. They give the highest percentage of their donations to charity, much more than any other charity and pay their CEO very little. 

Shades:
@Carol:

Churches are also exempt from (practically) all taxes. I am sure of that in the Netherlands, but I think that is the case in most countries (especially the 'old world').

Besides that they own the grounds on which their churches (and associated buildings) are standing. As such they have a lot of value on which the Vatican can bank. And does. And is tied up as well.

But this does not mean that no money is required for the internal/external upkeep. You would not believe (no pun intended) the cost involved to keep those old buildings standing. And how much the work of the required level of expertise in masonry/woodworking/metalworking costs nowadays.

Stoic Joker:
still part of me cant help but think - maybe it would be better not to have the highest power $500,000 a year salaray ceo, and sales people paid with giant commissions, and instead hire people who really believe in the cause.
-mouser (July 04, 2006, 05:20 AM)
--- End quote ---

Damn Straight!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page