BaptistLife.Com Forums.

My salary and benefits package is proposed in February, publicized in March and voted on in April. It is paid by revenue received through tuition and fees, and if it increases, the board has to justify the increase and show where they are going to get the money. If my salary goes up, it affects the tuition and fee schedule. Having it disclosed is part of acceptable, expected accountability when you work for an organization that operates on contributions.

Hiding salary figures by burying them in budget expense categories is a time honored Baptist tradition, handed down by some of the best in the SBC, for avoiding questions and challenges from messengers on the floor of the convention regarding either overstaffed executive offices or overpaid executives. The megachurches picked up on the use of similar methods to keep their pastor salaries from being known by members of the congregation.

I get your point about not contributing to CBF. I haven't for a while. But if I were, I would want to know, in light of the 30% decline in budget giving, what kind of salary and benefits package had been offered, and if it included perks like being able to commute by plane from home in Austin, and how much it cost to provide housing in Atlanta. In light of CBF's stated ministry, and its financial situation, those kinds of things don't seem prudent. But, of course, you can pay for whatever you want to have. Money follows priorities.

Sandy you are really losing me delving into salary discussions. Why on earth is that important?

I think you are just looking for another place to ding the CBF.

While Timothy may not see executive salaries as "relevant", it seems to me that there is an analogy with the arguments (mostly in the Politics forum) about the gap between the compensation of workers and of owners/bosses, and while neither CBF nor SBC is in the same league with Chase Bank or Mobil Oil or Apple, it may not be unreasonable or irrelevant to talk about some of the same issues in this connection. And there has certainly been plenty of "dinging" of megachurch CEOs ... er, Pastors ... for their homes and planes and yachts, again not in a CBF context but in a Baptist context... And then there is also the question of manses, and whether the Atlanta condo might be one of those... So I'd say, go ahead, Sandy...

Haruo, I think Sandy is barking up the wrong tree frankly. The differences between what local church clergy are paid and what denominational execs are getting paid in most denominations isn't nearly the order of magnitude difference that you are thinking about with business CEOs because most denominations don't have the money to pay that well. Most denominations are downsizing, cutting staff, and eliminating programs and offices.

Sandy is basing his question entirely on the fact of the coordinator having a condo and a home in another city. If Sandy saves up his hard earned money and buys a cabin on the lake do I then get to question if the school he works for is paying him too great a salary? It is just a dig at the CBF. He has no facts or he would have reported them.

By the standard used here, then I am part of that. While doing my current interim, the church has helped provide a garage apartment where my wife and I have stayed on weekends and where I have spent a couple of nights each week. By the standard, then my "opulent lifestyle" has taken from missions. Is that the way this is being interpreted, since I didn't move to Hampton while serving here in interim since my wife had a job 91 miles away?

Ed: To Tim and Dave, Why keep feeding the troll? This thread has simply turned into another platform for Sandy's historical line of unsupported generalities critical of CBF..

Sandy makes a relevant point. I cannot imagine Frank Page or one of the seminary or mission board CEOs commuting across several states to their office. I'm guessing this has a modicum of traction but none of my money is involved, so I am ambivalent.

If the CBF budget hemorrhages end I don't suppose any complaints will be heard.

Sandy is not a troll, here or elsewhere. He has a long record of denominational populism and the SBC and BGCT has been among his targets.

"Troll" is uncalled for.