Not being a union doesn't prevent the AAM from AT LEAST calculating some
kind of existing benchmarks based on information provided by its member
institutions.  The technology for doing so is available, and at least one
model is currently used in higher education and the data is massaged by the
AAUP for publication.  AAUP benchmarks are by no means mandates anywhere,
they are simply benchmarks.

If an institution is not attracting sufficient revenue from admissions, if
it isn't attracting sufficient philanthropic support, and if it isn't
earning grants for some of its work, something might be wrong at that
place.  At one time, most of the knowledge professions were low-paying,
including museum workers.  There is no virtue in staying a few decades
behind the other professions that have pulled themselves up. A museum that
rests its case on accepting its financial status quo probably needs new and
vigorous leadership.

I suggest that many museum boards have absolutely no idea what is an
adequate salary for a given position -- (art museums exempted, as their
salary data are quite well collected and reported) -- because there is no
information to which to refer.  An intelligent museum board would establish
salaries based on an effort to be at the mid-range (if that's all the money
there was), or in the bottom tenth (if that is all it could afford) or in
the upper quartile if funds were available to achieve that.  In planning,
an informed board could also set as a goal the raising or acquiring of
enough assets to bring staff salaries to a pre-determined competitive
level.

This would mean that a museum director, as well as an entry-level
conservator, would be compensated equally richly or poorly within the
resources available.  A museum suffering  from inadequate funds ought not
be paying top dollar for a director until that director shows the vitality
and ability to increase resources so everyone is at top dollar.
----------
> From: The Brooklyn Museum, Public Information Dept <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: salaries
> Date: Tuesday, July 22, 1997 12:33 PM
>
> Regarding salaries, there seems to be a basic point that no one is
> mentioning:  if museums are not generating significant amounts of
> revenue (and if they are competing for donated funds within a given area,
> like New York), how are they supposed to pay their employees more?
>
> And the AAM is a professional organization, not a union.  I don't
> understand what it could do.