Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

hideshow 16 child comments

parent

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 29 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

They have 1,334 employees so a lot of it is fringe benefits... 30k for employer contribution of health/dental/vision/FSA&HSA program costs, $5k for sick leave payout costs, $5,250 training/tuition assistance budget. That's 40,250 per full time employee right there.

If you take the almost 9mil C suite makes and round down to 150 Million and divide by 1,319 employees (subtracting C suite) that's 113,700 per employee. Now if we withhold the benefits above, that's $73,450. But we're not done yet.

1% for workers comp, 6.2% for social security, 7% 401k match, 1.45% medicare, so a total of 15.65%. So we divide our 73,450 by 1.1565 and we are left with an average salary of $63,510.

They also have an additional retirement plan which almost sounds like a pension, but I couldn't find easy info on. If that's what it is, then that further reduces the avg salary by 10%. They also offer $2,500 adoption assistance and an EAP program that's not factored in.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 10 points 9 months ago

So, ceo has 20× the average in their company, wow

parent

[–] HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 9 months ago (11 children)

I thought that was the point of non profits, you gotta funnel money to the people running it or you get looked at like a failure by the other oligarchs.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] Prove_your_argument@piefed.social 44 points 9 months ago (9 children)

I can't comprehend why the highest executive at one of these places would get paid more than 250k. It's a nonprofit in fucking ohio, MCOL in cities at best, LCOL in huge swaths of the state.

They wield tremendous power. Nonprofits should not be tools for oligarchs to shelter assets and defraud the public, but they are all over the US and probably the world.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 20 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Because that's the going rate for CEOs. Any of them could go to some private corporation and make just as much, if not more. So, nonprofits have to pay competitively or only afford CEOs willing to take the pay cut.

Which is all really terrible because no CEO is worth that much. They only get paid that much because big corporations have absurd amounts of money, and the people in charge of setting salaries have no restriction on paying themselves that much.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] iloveDigit@piefed.social 26 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Any of them could go to some private corporation and make just as much, if not more. So, nonprofits have to pay competitively or only afford CEOs willing to take the pay cut.

How is that a problem?

Why not hire someone like me instead of someone that wants capitalist omnicide?

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works -5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

We live in a Capitalist world, and like it or not, those CEOs know how to make companies thrive in it.

That's the idea, at least.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 9 months ago (4 children)

A non-profit does not need to embrace capitalism to survive.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

You got the point, but non-profit that doesn't usually exist on the brink of collapse or stops existing entirely

parent

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

You say this with certainty, so you've got me curious. Could you show me some successful international non-profits that reject Capitalism?

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

All non-profits that rely only on donations, like the Linux Foundation.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago

Linux is a great example, thank you.

parent

[+] iloveDigit@piefed.social -9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

To me the real reason it's a red flag is that nonprofit staff are supposed to file income taxes, and those taxes have funded the Iraq invasion and Guantanamo Bay and starvation in Gaza and subsidies for the oil industry and shit, but there are other ways to divert that money through the nonprofit with tax exemption.

So if I was the CEO of that nonprofit why tf would I ever take a big salary when I actually want to help the world survive, not ruin it like some corporate asshole?

Seems like a signal that someone like me isn't allowed to be CEO of a nonprofit like that because I've done everything I can to avoid paying these warlord taxes instead of being part of some rich people money laundering club

parent

[–] hector@lemmy.today 3 points 9 months ago

The ivy league swells, oligarchs, see nonprofits simply as patronage and prestige, getting their intimates positions on boards or the like getting a half million to attend a few meetings and looking like a philanthropist.

Meanwhile their stated missions are neglected. If you want to donate to charity, do it directly. Going through a nonprofit is handing 90 percent to the intimates of the ruling class, for them to look good.

parent

[–] iloveDigit@piefed.social 23 points 9 months ago (1 child)

They serve 30,000+ libraries in 100+ countries according to Wikipedia, sounds like it might involve a lot of staff

They might be leeches but on the other hand you might be underestimating how much work goes into trying to keep library databases accurate

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 points 9 months ago

I don't know why your getting so many downvotes because there seems to be a level of truth to what you say. They supposedly have 1,334 employees, which would make an average wage of 120k... But you have to notice it says "fringe benefits" which would include health insurance and retirement, which is $20k+ just for the health insurance and tax stuff and then if they do an employee 5% match that's another 5k bringing the avg salary down to 95k.