desertrat77 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Is the salary too high or too low? Either way, you need a qualified person for a job that complex, and they generally don't work for peanuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadenP Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 desertrat Running the BSA is no more difficult or complicated than running any non profit company of a similiar size, which is not as large as you may think. Bob is more of an general overseer with regional offices and local council offices handling almost all of the everyday business. His main job is keeping the BSA in the National public eye, doing high level PR, and maintaining a National office of highly incompetent former DE's and SE's promoted out of the field and who come up with the many ridiculous rules and regs of the organization that we are obliged to follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Personally I am glad that BadenP said he would lighten up on Mazucca on 7/28 and posted the following: "... I will for your and others benefit tone down my rhetoric on the CSE, even though my intent was to appeal to him to have a change of heart and make the BSA the positive driving force that it once was in our society...." Because I shudder to think of what his unedited thoughts would look like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadenP Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 OGE Point of order, Mr Mazzucca is not even mentioned specifically in my last post, rather what most of the people who are or have been in the position of the overpaid CSE. If you want to insult me than at least have the courtesy of getting your facts straight. The post only discusses the National Office organization down to the local councils. Maybe your red beret is starting to get a little too tight OGE, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Oh, Sorry then BadenP since when you said "Bob is more of an general overseer..." and then started the next paragraph with "His main job is keeping ..." without referencing another name, I thought you meant the person "Bob" mentioned in the first paragraph who I had thought was Bob Mazucca, but as you say I am wrong, I apologize. I thought I was light heartedly making a point but I guess I failed, oh well, wish me better luck next time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eamonn Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 I'm not into any of the magazines like People Magazine or the National Enquirer. Truth is that last time I picked up a People Magazine while waiting in the Doc's waiting room, I didn't know who about 75% of the People were. I do when it comes out, at times look at the Forbes lists of rich and richest people, billionaires and the like. Wrong as it might be I took some comfort last year when my investments were taking a hit, seeing that guys like Buffet were in the same boat. I wouldn't have had any idea what Mr. Mazucca earned or got paid if it hadn't been posted here. Now that I've seen it? I think it seems like a lot of money. Not bad for a guy with the education that he has. I have never taken the time to see how the BSA is set up. I know that on the advise of my accountants and lawyers, when I was setting up my businesses I set up several different companies, which while all linked and all owned by me, were set up so as to avoid liability and ease my tax burden. I'm guessing that within the BSA there are a few different corporations. I'm guessing that LFL is separate? Same goes for supply, Magazines and so on. I'm not ever going to take the time. Why? Because I really don't care. I'm far more worried and concerned about what is happening in my area and my community than I am about what Mr. Mazucca is being paid. Eamonn. (I was upset when People Magazine didn't list me as being the most sexy man in the USA. I'm thinking that I might need more than just sexy knees? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadenP Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 After re reading the articles I think every scouter and scouting parent should write a letter to their SE and cc it to Mazzucca that unless this obscenely high salary is brought into line with other charitable organizations that they will boycott the FOS campaign indefinitely. I guarantee that will raise eyebrows at National, heck maybe another Boston Tea Party is in order, hmmm maybe we could throw those Chinese centinnel uniforms into the ocean as a protest, lol, after they start to fall apart that is. With Mazzuca making this overinflated salary just imagine what his underlings are making, and if you added it all up what kind of super scouting program we could have right now if we brought those salaries in line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eamonn Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Come on BadenP! You know as I know FOS money doesn't go to National. So holding it back only harms the kids in the area where you live. Eamonn. (This message has been edited by a staff member.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissingArrow Posted August 8, 2009 Author Share Posted August 8, 2009 Update: The BSA has clarified the information contained in the Charity Navigator 2009 CEO Compensation Study. In fact, the salary amount cited included Mr. Williams salary, deferred compensation, and retirement benefits. Mr. Williams annual salary effective April 1, 2007, would have been $598,300, but he retired on September 1, 2007, therefore he was paid a salary of $404,078. Complete response: The Charity Navigator 2009 CEO Compensation Study lists the BSAs Chief Scout Executive as earning a salary of $1,577,600. This report was based on the BSAs 2007 Form 990 and discusses the compensation from the retirement year of the BSAs past Chief Scout Executive, Roy Williams, who had 35 years of service with the organization. While the report labels his earnings as salary, in actuality, the number cited represents Mr. Williams salary, deferred compensation, and retirement benefits. Mr. Williams annual salary effective April 1, 2007, would have been $598,300, but he retired on September 1, 2007, therefore he was paid a salary of $404,078. His annual salary would have been in line with other organizations of similar size and scope as the BSA. Further, this report can be misleading because deferred compensation is not paid every year, but is accumulated over a number of years. In this case, deferred compensation was paid out the year of Mr. Williams retirement. Components of his compensation included in this report include: Salary of $404,078 (Mr. Williams annual salary effective April 1, 2007, would have been $598,300, but he retired on September 1, 2007, therefore he was paid a salary of $404,078.) Accumulated (over three years) value of deferred compensation 457 (f) of $912,479 Retirement payments of $131,493 received after retirement (Sept 1, 2007) Various retirement gifts and recognitions which total $71,452 Unused vacation valued at $11,746 Expenses of $46,352 paid by Mr. Williams are listed on the form which includes: compensation value of personal automobile, cell phone, additional life insurance premiums, and tax preparation services on which taxes were paid by the employee. In the introduction, the Charity Navigator study appropriately states: These are running multi-million dollar operations that endeavor to change the world. Leading one of these charities requires an individual that possesses an understanding of the issues that are unique to the charitys mission as well as business and management expertise similar to that required of for-profit CEOs. Attaching and retaining that type of talent requires a certain level of compensation. The BSA is one of the largest youth-serving organizations in America. The position of Chief Scout Executive for the BSA includes providing leadership for more than 300 local Boy Scout councils who serve more than 4 million youth members and participants, and 1.2 million adult volunteers. In addition, the Chief Scout Executive manages approximately $183 million in totalrevenue and provides leadership to nearly 7,000 employees in all 50 states and in three international BSA offices. Further, the study recommends that interested parties should find out if their favorite charity has a compensation committee. The BSAs management compensation is authorized by the Executive Board, an all-volunteer group. Detailed study and analysis is assigned by the Executive Board to its Management Compensation Review Committee, comprising the volunteer president, executive vice president, and treasurer. The Management Compensation Review Committee engages third-party executive compensation specialists to make recommendations regarding competitive compensation arrangements for like services in other organizations. The mission of the BSA is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. In order to achieve this mission, the BSA and its volunteer leadership believes it must provide competitive compensation in order to continue recruiting and retaining the high-caliber individuals needed to support BSA programs. In all it does, the BSA works to accomplish its mission while practicing good stewardship of benefactors and volunteers gifts of time and money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadenP Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Oh come on Eamonn, we both know most of the FOS goes to paying council professionals salaries, if FOS was boycotted National would have to supply that lost revenue. What do the boys get, in our council 10% off of summer camp and formerly 5% off of patches, but not anymore due to cash shortfalls. It would hardly even be noticed by the boys. It would force National to rethink their priorities salary and organizational wise, trim some of that deadwood in the upper eschelon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal_Crawford Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 My experience has been that corporations (including non profits like BSA) rarely trim the upper echelon. The just get by with less at the lower to middle pay grades. Generally, its the guy at the top who decides to trim the fat and (big surprise) he never sees himself or those close to his level as fat. There might be a show of downsizing upper management but that is often the elimination of an already vacant position. Hal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsummerlin Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 MissingArrow, good post, thanks for the information, but this doesn't change anything for me. $400K salary? That is the explanation? How many boys could we send to summer camp with that "deferred" compensation? How many camp facilities could be upgraded for this money and the rest of the "deferred" compensation due the new CSE? A Scout is thrifty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eamonn Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 "if FOS was boycotted National would have to supply that lost revenue." The person who looks after the accounts runs into the SE's office " Hey George you know we don't have enough money to cover payroll this month?" SE: "Don't worry Brenda I'll call the bank and use the line of credit". Time passes. Council President says to SE " Do you know that we have used $100,000 line of credit at the bank?" SE: "Yes we ran out of money due to no money coming from FOS,but don't worry we'll just sell the camp" Each and every Council is a corporation and there is no way that National is ever going to come in with and money to save a Council. (Of course I'm betting that you knew that!) Ea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadenP Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Eamonn you must be a big fan of Don Quixote because you seem to love constantly trying to tilt at windmills, lol. Do you have any idea who really owns every council in the BSA, its not the volunteers, its National plain and simple, if the local councils start to fold up due to lack of financial support eventually National will fail as well it is a total symbiotic relationship. Are you also aware that National assesses an amount each year from every council, and where do you think that money comes from? Hint: FOS, but you knew that didn't you Eamonn. So for someone so experienced with the BSA in high level positions I do not understand why this is such a surprise to you. The BSA National office is nothing more than a conglomerate of little corporations(councils) working under the directions of the National office and covered under their umbrella. And if the councils started to rapidly fold up in greater numbers due to lack of financial support you are damned right that National would have to step in and pick up the pieces, otherwise National would just be a shell with no substance but you already knew that,didn't you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSScout Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Chicago Area Council Owasippee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now