The super-rich Harvard university, as with so many institutions today, is suffering because of the recession. According to a story in today's New York Times, Harvard's endowment, which has recently seen $8 billion disappear in the bad economy, is down to only $29 billion. To help cope with the money crisis, some important measures have been implemented:
Harvard has frozen salaries for faculty and nonunion staff members, and offered early retirement to 1,600 employees.
The topic of a salary freeze is high up in the Times article, as it should be because the story is about an institution facing serious fiscal constraints.
Compare today's article with a story earlier this week in the Advocate magazine about the social service and professional political advocacy groups that comprise Gay Inc, as the organizations grapple with dwindling donations and resources.
The Advocate piece, written by news editor Kelly Eleveld, is about a recent meeting of gay executive directors at a closed-door invitation-only conclave in Washington to discuss how our organizations will address financial constraints now, and in the near future:
According to participants, a wide variety of alternatives were presented by a facilitator, ranging from sharing the costs of administrative items such as computer services, health insurance, and office rent to teaming up on programming or even joining forces in cases where two organizations might have similar missions.
The discussion also included an overview of how different organizations are faring financially at the moment. ...
Mergers, though presented as a topic for consideration, were barely discussed according those in attendance. But Chrisler, whose organization recently merged with a smaller regional nonprofit from Minneapolis, said nothing should be taken off the table.
One thing was not on the table apparently, or, at least not broached by the Advocate, is the matter of Gay Inc considering salary freezes or even cutbacks. I'm not sure who in the gay community is served when a leading news magazine devotes serious space to the fiscal health of our organizations, and compensation of top executives is not part of the story.
I see two problems here. First, there must be sunshine and real transparency when dozens of gay leaders gather to map strategy for our groups and their agendas. I'm sick and tired of the A-gay executives meeting amongst themselves, keeping out general community members and the press, and then telling us afterward what they discussed and decided.
Second of all, even though Eleverd was not at the leaders' meeting, she still could have broached the subject of salaries. Maybe even point out that Harvard and a few Big Banking firms are limiting pay and bonuses for executives, good examples that Gay Inc leaders ought to consider, in order to better serve our community.
BTW, I can't believe the above stock image was used by the Advocate editors to illustrate their story. They couldn't have picked a better image of a nice clean-cut A-gay executive reaching for the bucks, while our non-profits cut services and programs.
On target to the max - an d this is the first year of what will be prolonged depression.
ReplyDeleteAs you should know by know, the Gay Inc. people have never been honest with the peons and secret meetings are the norm.
Most will close in two or three years, as the money dries to the bone. Cause it is ALL about money.