To respond regarding compensation in museum;

Granted, the money simply doesn't appear to be there in many cases.
However, having worked in Human Resources for about a year I understand
that if you increase compensation across the board, what you generally
get is a filter effect. That is, incresed compensation equals increases
competition for positions, and therefore a higher degree of quality and
performance. Also, and this is the important part, you get a staff that
is not constantly looking for a new job.

It costs as much to pay someone for 6 months as it does to replace them.
This is a stat which should be considered in a field in which people
move up by moving laterally.

Finally, I recently settled on a job making not nearly what I'd like.
However the choice was not a hard one. After months of being told by
organizations that there was no negotiation of salary, there would be no
performance/promotion reviews, and that they could not afford benefits,
I had no trouble jumping at a job in which I received not a lot of
money, but good benefits.

In many cases it's not the money that makes people in museums feel
devalued, it's the lack of any significant benefits. Benefits tell a
person that you understand their needs and lives. The museum field has
illustrated to me that it doesn't necessarily devalue its workers, but
that it certainly doesn't understand their needs and values as people
(HUMAN resources).

Institutions should offer more not because we complain about it (we knew
what we were getting into) but because it's the best way to get AND KEEP
better people.

-Rob Lopata
[log in to unmask]

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com