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