From a 20-Something on the Met's Payroll: Still More on the Brain Drain

A young man with an administrative job at the Metropolitan Museum got in touch to thank me for highlighting the problem of non-competitive pay at cultural institutions, which he says extends even to the nation's premier art museum. His friends in the financial world, he noted, rake in two to three times what he is paid for similar tasks.

Although the young Met staffer identified himself to me, he would not let me use his exact words, let alone his name, because he's been instructed not to talk to the press without clearing it through the communications office. At least the culture, if not the compensation, is corporate!

I need to correct one thing that I previously wrote on this subject: I discovered (from reading Greg Sandow's post) that I was in error when I stated that the recent report on the difficulty in recruiting future arts leaders "completely ignores" the issue of non-competitive compensation.

Although it focuses chiefly on strategies to get young people interested and involved in the arts, the report also says:

Declining public funding of the arts and increased competition for funding from other sources make it almost impossible for all but the wealthiest arts organizations to offer competitive pay packages. Although there is some indication that executive staff salaries have increased, they have not kept pace with gains in the private sector, and arts pay remains below par.

This means nonprofit arts organizations invariably find themselves disadvantaged when searching and competing for the best candidates in the small pool of qualified young leaders.

The Metropolitan Museum qualifies as one of "the wealthiest arts organizations." Yet, according to my secret pen pal, its pay packages are not even close to being competitive with the earnings of his peers.

Also blogging insightfully on this issue: BookGirl.