Does anyone like Malcolm Rogers?

Lest ye think I'm the only one carping about Malcolm Rogers abundant misdeeds at the MFA Boston, last Thursday's Boston Globe featured another op-ed about Rogers. It's the Globe's second what-is-he-doing opinion-page piece since July. (By contrast, the Washington Post last ran an op-ed piece about museums or high culture back in, oh, I don't know, 1993?)

There are plain factual problems in the op-ed. Micahel Raysson, president of the MFA's security guards' union, refers to MFAB's "profits." He means budget surpluses. Still, given that MFAB is hosting a show of a donor's catch-all collection and that it has allowed him to park his boats on its front lawn, this rings true:

Having embraced corporate culture, the [MFA] has also taken on some of its worst characteristics. This has become especially evident in the workplace. While museum director Malcolm Rogers and his colleagues in management make huge salaries with large raises, the rest of the museum staff has faced layoffs and cuts in salaries and/or benefits. Scholar curators have found themselves to be expendable pieces of the machine. Many staff members have gone years without a raise. The museum's low-wage security guards are now fighting for their life in contract negotiations.

Related: Artnet's Walter Robinson asks: Is the Museum of Fine Art, Boston lost at sea? And in the LAT, Baghdad-bound Louise Roug gets Rogers to say  "One of the things I wanted to do was to unveil the personality of a man of great passions, to help people understand the psyche of a collector." Museum directors apparently have a new job: ego-enabler.