RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/26/2009

Activi$m

by Jeremy Hooper

gay-piggybankHow many hundreds of thousands are our group leaders being paid? Read it and weep (or scream):

How much do they make? [Wash Blade]

Yea, but do any of them get to work in their underwear? We think not. Score one for scrappy little G-A-Y!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Scandalous! (and I don't mean the high salaries)

Posted by: zortnac | Mar 26, 2009 5:02:39 PM

Oh, the image.. working at your desk in your drawers!
Well, okay, when I come to NYC and stand on the corner across from your office
and yell 'Jeremy', I guess I better give you a few more minutes to come out.

Posted by: LOrionL | Mar 26, 2009 6:05:13 PM

Ha! I actually work on the street level, right in front of a huge window. But the way the sun hits it, you can't really see in at all.

In fact, it's almost like a two-way mirror. From my side, I get crystal clear images of people checking themselves out, fixing their hair, etc.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 26, 2009 6:18:05 PM

I can certainly understand paying executives salaries that are appropriate to their position. But, generally, when an executive of a major corporation takes down $300k, they are held accountable for the productivity / profitability of the group(s) that they oversee. When you have executives who simply "farm out" the tasks that they are charged with, they essentially shirk any responsibility for the outcome.

And, I will admit that it is always best to hire "talent", even in the Prop 8 and similar campaigns. But if it is necessary to go outside the organization to find the "talent" (political campaign operatives), then what the hell are we paying these guys for?

Maybe their compensation should be more incentive based??? Maybe they should get 50% of their salary as a guarantee, and the other 50% is tied to substantive objectives. Like, "If the next Prop H8 is defeated, $150k bonus! Hell, $300k bonus!" If it isn't defeated then we may be looking for some new blood.

And, it may be unrealistic to assume that a non-profit can structure salaries the same way that the private sector does, but maybe it is time to find out.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Mar 26, 2009 7:33:32 PM

If you posted a picture, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. :)

Posted by: Bill S | Mar 27, 2009 7:40:30 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails