You’re asking people working for the non-profit to accept lower pay of tens of thousands of dollars? So basically because someone doesn’t make a personal sacrifice of a significant fraction of their salary you’re not willing to help at all?
Now I wonder, because both 999k and 100k are six figure sums, and one of them I find much more reasonable than the other.
But yeah, running a non-profit often takes money instead of earning you money, and if they have spare money to pay salary to the CEO, maybe they’re all right
That’s not what being a non profit means… they are allowed to make a “profit,” and pay for their liabilities. They just must reinvest them back into the business.
I’m not sure that not having anyone on salary is part of that deal. Or if you were referring to the part where I said about salary being negative, that’s from experience, a couple of directors of a non-profit I know had to donate their salary and add on top of it when times were rough (in that organisation it was pretty often). Large non-profits probably don’t have that issue
I donated once but then I found out they have a CEO on a six figure salary.
So they can get stuffed. If they want more cash they can give that leech the boot.
lol wow talk about a statement that lets everyone else know not to take anything else you’re about to say seriously.
You say “6 figures” as if that’s anything BUT the average for a corporate executive… actually kind of fucking low.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2025/06/08/ceo-pay-study/
You’re asking people working for the non-profit to accept lower pay of tens of thousands of dollars? So basically because someone doesn’t make a personal sacrifice of a significant fraction of their salary you’re not willing to help at all?
I don’t like or accept this logic.
Now I wonder, because both 999k and 100k are six figure sums, and one of them I find much more reasonable than the other.
But yeah, running a non-profit often takes money instead of earning you money, and if they have spare money to pay salary to the CEO, maybe they’re all right
That’s not what being a non profit means… they are allowed to make a “profit,” and pay for their liabilities. They just must reinvest them back into the business.
I’m not sure that not having anyone on salary is part of that deal. Or if you were referring to the part where I said about salary being negative, that’s from experience, a couple of directors of a non-profit I know had to donate their salary and add on top of it when times were rough (in that organisation it was pretty often). Large non-profits probably don’t have that issue