Being a fellow Angeleno, I would have to concur.  LA is a
high-maintenance town.  Low 20s for not an entry-level position is
opportunistic at best.  If you get someone, you won't be able to
retain them for long.

What's my frame of reference?  I'm a museum afficionado who works for
a utility with no degree and makes $50K a year plus.  Not bragging.
Just giving something against which to bounce it off.

And I want to go into the NPO field next year and am willing to work
for less, but not less than half.


Gayle Montgomery
[log in to unmask]
Southern California



---Adrienne Deangelis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> May I try to be the first to express flabbergastment at the salary
to be paid
> for this "not an entry-level position"?  Unless, if course, this was
a typo.
> A salary in the "Low 20s" won't support anyone in LA.  You couldn't
even live
> in the hinterland and drive in--you'd end up spending your salary on
your
> car. Please tell us that this salary is a mistake!  Or, that the ideal
> candidate is a 13-year-old living with mommy and daddy.
>
>         A. DeAngelis (who has now blown any chance of a job on the
Avenue of
>                 the Stars)
>

==
Indigo Nights
[log in to unmask]

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com