February 08, 2008
Dispute Over Salary Survey of Christian Ministries
Jack Siegel, a Chicago lawyer, has blasted a blog writer’s examination of executive pay at large Christian ministries. Give & Take reported on Thursday on the salary study by Bernie Dehler, which appears on his blog FreeGoodNews.
Mr. Dehler is playing the role of “armchair compensation expert” and may be condemning Christian leaders for perfectly acceptable pay levels given their workload and successes, writes Mr. Siegel on his blog, Charity Governance.
For example, Mr. Dehler questions William Franklin Graham for earning more than $465,000 in combined compensation as the head of two nonprofit groups. But Mr. Siegel would like to know more details before criticizing Mr. Graham.
“It may be that Graham is a highly effective leader and that both charities accomplish many positive outcomes. If that is the case, Graham may be worth his weight in gold, entitled to every penny he earns,” writes Mr. Siegel.
What do you think? Should Mr. Dehler have provided more information before questioning the salaries? Or do you agree with his criticism of the salaries?
— Ian Wilhelm
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Aid Worker Highlights Kenya's Needs
Next: Tips on Winning Corporate Donations
No one disputes that Graham may be worth his weight in gold. However, Graham is hardly being charitable if charges in gold.
— Paul Camarena Feb 8, 02:39 PM #
That camel will never fit through the eye of a needle!
— Dennis Fischman Feb 8, 04:07 PM #
Why does Graham have to be charitable in offering his services to a charity? Shouldn’t any analysis of compensation take into account the benefit the individual provides to the organization? Mr. Dehler argues that compensation simply cannot be anything over 100% of a compensation survey range. In this regard, he seems to be right in line with the Senator Grassley’s approach. Will Congress now be setting salary limits? I think Jack Siegal is on the right track. A better way to handle the issues is to disclose the compensation amounts, including from other entities, and let the donors decide whether they want their dollars to support the salary. I think Mr. Dehler is afraid that their answer just might be “yes.”
— Patrick Feb 8, 06:35 PM #
One would only have to look at the World Wide contributions from the two organizations William Franklin Graham heads that are well beyond mere salary compensations, before quoting verses that relegate him to a camel unfit for God’s kingdom. Dig deeper and you may find the corner stone of a foundation that has withstood scrutiny for 60 plus years. It should be noted too, that salaries and donations are publicized monthly.
— James Feb 8, 11:09 PM #
A worker is worthy of receiving the wages they earn. We should not expect those working in the non-profit realm to be paid below the standard.
Beyond this point, one cannot look at someone’s salary and decide they are greedy, or even overpaid unless they have all of the information. Character is never determined by how much one earns, but instead by how much one gives or how much one hoards. There is no mention of any other area of life besides earnings. This is only a very small part of the story. Salary alone does not determine character. It is what we do with the funds that God has entrusted to us that determines our character.
Thirdly, have we considered what this individual may give back to the organization, both time, and financial resources? While I would never say that financial accountability isn’t important-it is very important, my guess is that we would be ashamed to measure Franklin Graham on just this one account if we had the whole story. For those of us that look at his salary and say WOW, that is too high! What are we doing with the funds God has entrusted to us? Small or large, our biggest concern should be, will I be found faithful.
— Diane Feb 9, 02:02 PM #
get out and see the work he does, and then judge him,He does a lot of good where ever He goes. I don’t agree with your comments.
— Christine Brock Feb 10, 06:23 AM #
Hi Ian-
Thanks for the link to my article at FGN. Some comments to your reader’s comments.Paul C. says:
“No one disputes that Graham may be worth his weight in gold.”
Based on what, him being a celebrity? The son of Billy Graham? Is this a statement from “celebrity worship?” Were the Apostles worth “their weight in gold?” If so, why didn’t they pay themselves as much?
Patrick said:
“Why does Graham have to be charitable in offering his services to a charity?”
The alternative to excessive CEO pay isn’t poverty,,, the opposite is a “reasonable” salary based on peer review… just as all salaries are determined (for nurses, teachers, athletes, etc.). Those in the entertainment business are different, such as Britney Spears or George Clooney, but non-profit CEO’s are not entertainers, even though they may be famous from public exposure. Mother Theresa was also famous, but felt no need to be paid excessively.
Patrick said:
“Mr. Dehler argues that compensation simply cannot be anything over 100% of a compensation survey range.”
Ken Behr, ECFA President, told me via phone that he would take disciplinary matters with an ECFA member over the computed 100% level. That’s the only reason why I mention it for ECFA-member ministries. They are some over 100%, but ECFA doesn’t do or say anything.
RE: Franklin Graham, James said:
“It should be noted too, that salaries and donations are publicized monthly.”
What are you referring to? I have never seen Franklin’s salary posted monthly anywhere, and doubt it very much. Keep in mind that if Franklin is heading-up two organizations, he is not “full-time” at either one. They are two part-time jobs, which would indicate even less pay for each ministry is deserved when comparing salaries to other full-time CEOs.
Diane said:
“We should not expect those working in the non-profit realm to be paid below the standard.”
I’m not advocating “below-standard” but instead “reasonable” as determined by salary review with peers.
Diane said:
“Thirdly, have we considered what this individual may give back to the organization, both time, and financial resources?”
What a person does with their personal income has nothing, at all, to do with their paycheck. Could a minister ask for a $1 million paycheck so he can donate to more charities? Obviously not. Instead, they should be simply paid what they are worth.
Christine said:
“get out and see the work he does, and then judge him,He does a lot of good where ever He goes.”
Of course Franklin does many good works. If he didn’t, he would be fired on-the-spot. He should still be paid a reasonable salary via salary survey data. It is common practice, and not rocket science.
…Bernie
— Bernie of FreeGoodNews.com Feb 10, 09:19 PM #
I would have replied to Mr. Siegel’s blog article that blasted me, but he doesn’t allow comments. As for Franklin Graham, his two CEO jobs are part-time. It is impossible to have (2) full-time jobs. Many of his CEO peers have (1) full-time CEO job and work just as much, if not more, than Franklin, for a fraction of the pay.
Is Franklin worth all that money because he’s the best for the job? Or is he worth all that money because he’s the son of Billy Graham, the most famous Christian alive today?
…Bernie
— Bernie of FreeGoodNews.com Feb 11, 12:12 PM #
FYI- Mr. Siegel posted my response to his “blast.” Read it here:
http://www.charitygovernance.com/charity_governance/2008/02/bernie-dehler-o.html
…Bernie
— Bernie of FreeGoodNews.com Feb 12, 03:53 PM #
For most exempt employees in nonprofits, CEO’s or otherwise, their job is one that simply does not allow for working two full-time jobs. To think that a CEO earning six figures from two positions is giving full-time attenion to either one is somewhat deluded thinking!
The world of televangelists, of course, is a different animal from “real” nonprofits. A full investigation of how these folks make their money and how it is spent is certainly in order.
Surely someone should be exposing these sorts of overindulgences!
— Jack Tracey Feb 12, 04:37 PM #