Aviation non-profit executive compensation.

See the question above in the thread. Is it OK or not?

  • No

  • Yes

Results are only viewable after voting.
Morgan3820 said:
Have y’all ever noticed, in these type of conversations when the new to the forum OP doesn’t get the validation that they seek, that the thread often goes on far longer than their interest? And we rarely ever see them again.
Just something that I have observed, fwiw.
Click to expand...
They are looking for support for their opinion. If they don't get it, they'll go elsewhere for it.

I've been in a similar situation where I was deeply invested (time-wise) with an organization that suddenly went off the rails. It's a tough situation to be in for sure. You're kind of forced into isolation, or do something like this. In my case, I published my "side" of things on a medium that I controlled and referred people to that when asked privately about the situation. I pointedly refused to discuss the situation in a public forum. Doing so definitely squashed "my side" of the story to a large degree, but them's the breaks. I'd rather keep my integrity than act like a spoiled child. Anybody that didn't already have their head up their butt knew what the scoop was anyway, so in the greater scope of things it didn't matter - and that's pretty much always the case. And I'm still a member of the organization and permitted to participate, though I haven't in many years.
 
Morgan3820 said:
Have y’all ever noticed, in these type of conversations when the new to the forum OP doesn’t get the validation that they seek, that the thread often goes on far longer than their interest? And we rarely ever see them again.
Just something that I have observed, fwiw.
Click to expand...

actually, most threads pretty much go way past getting an answer... thread drift, urinary olympics, whatever.
 
A non-profit is still a business and it needs to attract talent that can run it like a business. If it was a local PTA then the discussion would be different than an organization that employs tens, hundreds, or even thousands of people.
 
Radek Wyrzykowski said:
If organizational program budgets are cut, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization is constantly pleading for donations from the public and industry. Is it ok for individual executives to receive compensation of over $475,000.00 per year?
Click to expand...
What was your compensation when you worked for EAA? Shall we argue if it was too much or not publicly?
 
$475,000 for and organization that begs for money to survive is too much. How many EAA memberships does it take just to pay for that?
 
PaulS said:
$475,000 for and organization that begs for money to survive is too much. How many EAA memberships does it take just to pay for that?
Click to expand...

Seriously, make a case for what the right level of compensation would be. I’m interested in your opinion.
 
PaulS said:
$475,000 for and organization that begs for money to survive is too much. How many EAA memberships does it take just to pay for that?
Click to expand...

I don't think the ask is for "survival," but for expansion?

Are they, or do we wish, that they only "survive?"

An organization needs dough to thrive.

One that only has enough to "survive," will more than likely die.
 
EAA at least puts on events. Theres local chapters at pretty much every airport They hold the STC for Dynon as they had a major helping hand get it into the certified market. What does AOPA do? And, the salary info I found on Jack Pelton, EAA CEO was 143k. Salary for sun n fun ceo was 168k. Go look at some of the salaries of current and former officers of the AOPA and youll get sick. And what really does AOPA do for us spam cans? Basic Med? Awesome. Have you helped make it safer by helping avionics? Garmin is great, but if theyre the only name in town thats bad. How about lobbying for autopilot certification? Or certification in general. From some of the Dynon certification troubles it sounds like their fsdo is being extra harsh because they use the same as Boeing. They don't get feedback, and every model they try to get the autopilot certified for the faa treats the autopilot like theyve never seen it before. Rather than just looking at the install.
 
Putting aside the OP's vagueness, I was curious about compensation for EAA's execs, how much it is, how a specific compensation level is set, etc.

The EAA's Tax Return (IRS Form 990) is a good place to look. Part VII has the info on employee compensation. According to it, there are 18 EAA employees who make over 100k a year. 13 of those have a position as "Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees," and are therefore specifically listed by name. I listed this info below, along with the year that the person started their position.

For reference, it seems like EAA pulls in about $55 million in revenue a year. As a non-profit, they of course spend about this same amount. Info is split between a Form 990 for the EAA (about $44 million) and a Form 990 for the EAA Aviation Foundation (about $11 million). Note this was all for the fiscal year ending Feb 2020. Revenue was significantly down for the fiscal year ending Feb 2021, due to the pandemic, etc.

To me, just a spectator on the sidelines, these salaries seem (mostly) reasonable. I feared EAA would be one of those orgs with 100 different Vice Presidents, but that's not the case. 6 VPs, one Exec VP, and a CEO. I could kinda see the OP's criticism of the CEO's salary being high (almost $500k). At the same time, Jack Pelton was previously CEO at Cessna, so it's not like he doesn't have an extremely good pedigree.

Could you argue the CEO (or maybe Exec CEO) should take less? Maybe, but probably not by much. I have to assume if you looked at a for-profit company doing $50+ million in business a year, you'd probably see similar compensation numbers (if not more).

The one thing that raises my eyebrows a bit is the tenure of some of these folks. I could only find start dates for a handful of the positions, but Jack Pelton has been in the CEO spot for 10 years. Sean Elliot has been VP Advocacy and Safety for 12 years, and started with EAA back in 2000 as the Director of Air Operations. These tenures seem long. Most every large publicly-traded company I've been involved with seems to have VPs stay in their position for 3-5 years. CEOs maybe a little longer. I don't know what the right length of tenure is, but I have to think there is danger of an org like EAA having it's exec staff become ossified. Aviation tends to have more than its fair share of "good 'ol boys" clubs, and there is no reason for another one. Also, if there isn't movement at the top, that slows development of the next generation of leaders further down the chain.

upload_2022-3-25_13-21-17.png
 
fasteddie said:
Putting aside the OP's vagueness, I was curious about compensation for EAA's execs, how much it is, how a specific compensation level is set, etc.

The EAA's Tax Return (IRS Form 990) is a good place to look. Part VII has the info on employee compensation. According to it, there are 18 EAA employees who make over 100k a year. 13 of those have a position as "Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees," and are therefore specifically listed by name. I listed this info below, along with the year that the person started their position.

For reference, it seems like EAA pulls in about $55 million in revenue a year. As a non-profit, they of course spend about this same amount. Info is split between a Form 990 for the EAA (about $44 million) and a Form 990 for the EAA Aviation Foundation (about $11 million). Note this was all for the fiscal year ending Feb 2020. Revenue was significantly down for the fiscal year ending Feb 2021, due to the pandemic, etc.

To me, just a spectator on the sidelines, these salaries seem (mostly) reasonable. I feared EAA would be one of those orgs with 100 different Vice Presidents, but that's not the case. 6 VPs, one Exec VP, and a CEO. I could kinda see the OP's criticism of the CEO's salary being high (almost $500k). At the same time, Jack Pelton was previously CEO at Cessna, so it's not like he doesn't have an extremely good pedigree.

Could you argue the CEO (or maybe Exec CEO) should take less? Maybe, but probably not by much. I have to assume if you looked at a for-profit company doing $50+ million in business a year, you'd probably see similar compensation numbers (if not more).

The one thing that raises my eyebrows a bit is the tenure of some of these folks. I could only find start dates for a handful of the positions, but Jack Pelton has been in the CEO spot for 10 years. Sean Elliot has been VP Advocacy and Safety for 12 years, and started with EAA back in 2000 as the Director of Air Operations. These tenures seem long. Most every large publicly-traded company I've been involved with seems to have VPs stay in their position for 3-5 years. CEOs maybe a little longer. I don't know what the right length of tenure is, but I have to think there is danger of an org like EAA having it's exec staff become ossified. Aviation tends to have more than its fair share of "good 'ol boys" clubs, and there is no reason for another one. Also, if there isn't movement at the top, that slows development of the next generation of leaders further down the chain.

View attachment 105690
Click to expand...
If the turnaround was higher, I guarantee you the salaries would be far worse.
 
Should we talk about that out of the 13 top compensated employees, only one is a woman? How many of those are POC?

I mean, since we're looking for things to be offended about. ;)
 
PaulS said:
$475,000 for and organization that begs for money to survive is too much. How many EAA memberships does it take just to pay for that?
Click to expand...
The great thing is, you don’t have to give them any of your money, unlike our politicians and bureaucrats. I don’t belong to the EAA and I can still go to Oshkosh.
I don’t attend pro sports events either. If all these people can make a gimmick called the EAA that generates them a bunch of money from people willing to pay them, more power to them. None of this is compulsory. You can build an RV 10 without being a member of the EAA.
 
Morgan3820 said:
The great thing is, you don’t have to give them any of your money, unlike our politicians and bureaucrats. I don’t belong to the EAA and I can still go to Oshkosh.
I don’t attend pro sports events either. If all these people can make a gimmick called the EAA that generates them a bunch of money from people willing to pay them, more power to them. None of this is compulsory. You can build an RV 10 without being a member of the EAA.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I like the membership, but when they ask for extra donations, big nope. For the national org anyway.
 
Who cares? If you don’t like an organization don’t join.

Simple solution.

BTW, the OP is overpaid. Yes or No. Again, who cares?

Cheers
 
Wow, another one of these threads. There is a lovely "ignore" button. I'm using it.
 
It depends solely on the value of that individual to the financial success of the organization. If the individual is able to raise revenues by multiples of his salary, it is probably worth paying that person appropriately. Would a lower compensated replacement be able to do the same work and attain the same level of growth in revenue and available funds for programs? I don't begrudge anyone for being compensated commensurate to their value to the organization regardless of whether it is a non-profit or for-profit company.
 
Radek Wyrzykowski said:
If organizational program budgets are cut, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization is constantly pleading for donations from the public and industry. Is it ok for individual executives to receive compensation of over $475,000.00 per year?
Click to expand...

It may seem a difficult decision to not renew, but when it gets to the point when you believe an organization is self serving there is a lot of peace not renewing.
 
Not that it's apples-to-apples, but in two Oil & Gas manufacturing companies I've worked for, my divisions made 5Xs as much in a bad year as EAA, and our division Presidents didn't make $500K/year. I don't see how the value is there to pay a guy half a million for such low revenue numbers, non-profit or otherwise. Just like with AOPA, it must be some symptom of having ties with Washington DC and rubbing elbows with other career board members and uber-wealthy cronies.
 
Here in ‘murica non-profit is a tax (exempt) status - not a business plan. “No margin, no mission” was the mantra at the non-profit Catholic hospital system I worked at. I’d bet a Diet Coke that Jack Pelton has raised many multiples of his salary through his leadership at EAA. He helped monetize BasicMed and the LODA stuff as two quick examples I suspect prove my point.

That’s not at all to say I like the EAA of today better than in the past - I don’t, because I personally feel like it has strayed too much towards profit and away from supporting homebuilts (AirVenture has gotten bigger crowds but fewer aviation vendors over the past years) - but this is ‘murica.
 
Morgan3820 said:
Have y’all ever noticed, in these type of conversations when the new to the forum OP doesn’t get the validation that they seek, that the thread often goes on far longer than their interest? And we rarely ever see them again.
Just something that I have observed, fwiw.
Click to expand...

That's maybe not a bad thing. Usually the resultant spiral is a lot more interesting than whatever the original post was. The beginning always sounds like some version of "I was drunk and accidentally backed over my brother in law and now everyone is out to get me", but maybe that's just me. I'm probably insensitive.
 
Albany Tom said:
The beginning always sounds like some version of "I was drunk and accidentally backed over my brother in law and now everyone is out to get me", but maybe that's just me.
Click to expand...

My personal favorite so far has been the purse snatcher ... :rofl::rofl:

Edit: The tattoo denial guy was pretty funny too ...
 
SoonerAviator said:
Not that it's apples-to-apples, but in two Oil & Gas manufacturing companies I've worked for, my divisions made 5Xs as much in a bad year as EAA, and our division Presidents didn't make $500K/year. I don't see how the value is there to pay a guy half a million for such low revenue numbers, non-profit or otherwise. Just like with AOPA, it must be some symptom of having ties with Washington DC and rubbing elbows with other career board members and uber-wealthy cronies.
Click to expand...
Salary is often the smallest part of a compensation package of highly profitable organizations.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Not that it's apples-to-apples, but in two Oil & Gas manufacturing companies I've worked for, my divisions made 5Xs as much in a bad year as EAA, and our division Presidents didn't make $500K/year. I don't see how the value is there to pay a guy half a million for such low revenue numbers, non-profit or otherwise. Just like with AOPA, it must be some symptom of having ties with Washington DC and rubbing elbows with other career board members and uber-wealthy cronies.
Click to expand...
What were their stock options like? How about other bennies? Salary alone seldom tells the tale.
 
SkyDog58 said:
What were their stock options like? How about other bennies? Salary alone seldom tells the tale.
Click to expand...

As a Controller in charge of the forecasting/budgeting I had to account for all of it. Their salaries are typically in the mid $200K areas, and bonus structure/stock options could bring total compensation to $400K many times. Again, that is for one division of a for-profit company making $300M in revenue/20%+ EBITDA on a down year. To be clear, I'm not saying that the EAA Prez isn't worth his money, and if you can find someone willing to pay you $400K+ to play with airplanes by all means accept the offer. I'm just making the point that I've seen excellent top-level staff driving multiples more revenue and managing multiple product lines/manufacturing facilities both domestic and internationally, while making the same as a non-profit CEO.
 
This was such a timely thread for me because I work for a non profit, and our board just replaced our CEO. I always thought our CEO made a great deal of money for a non profit in the area that I live in, but I could never tell you whether it was the correct amount. Yes, I could plug his salary in an online system and come up with a ballpark, but never hit it on the head. I do however know that our new CEO makes more and we are yet to see if he's worth it. Non profit employees quite frankly make good salaries.
 
Pilawt said:
Seems he brought enough torches and pitchforks so that all of POA might storm the EAA castle at his lead, but didn't get any takers.
Click to expand...

Like Gary Cooper looking to form a posse’ in High Noon.
 
SkyDog58 said:
That is some major hyperbole or do you really believe that?
Click to expand...

Hmm... I guess it depends on the values one uses for "soon", but I'll admit to a small garnish of hyperbole on my statement. :)

In my lifetime, hopefully not.

Using this:

https://www.multpl.com/us-median-income

which has the median income in 1972 being $9,600 and today, 50 years later, it's 67,500 or juuuuust shy of 7X in 50 years.. today's 67K will be 475K in 50 years.

Assuming Baristas make half of the median national income, they'll be making 475K in 57 years.

This assumes our spending remains at the historical rate. If anything, I believe our congresscritters are addicted to the money-printer and this will accelerate in future -- but that's bordering on politics which is a thoughtcrime here. :D

If I live to 102 to see it, that would be rad, but the odds don't favor it. :D
 
Groundpounder said:
The Susan G Komen Foundation has a Global Express. Only 10% of their budget goes to research and treatment. That is something to get mad about.
Click to expand...
There were already a million reasons to hate the Komen Foundation, but this is also bad.
 
Yeah, there are a few non-profits that I know enough about to not be fond of. I won't mention them by name, but the people with the giant red symbol on the white background that show up at any disaster site where there's a TV camera is one. They're great at taking credit for work that they have no interest at all in doing.
 
donjohnston said:
Should we talk about that out of the 13 top compensated employees, only one is a woman? How many of those are POC?

I mean, since we're looking for things to be offended about. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't make me come over there!

:D
 
Groundpounder said:
The Susan G Komen Foundation has a Global Express. Only 10% of their budget goes to research and treatment. That is something to get mad about.
Click to expand...

It's one of the more odius examples of benefits accruing to the already wealthy on the backs of dead and dying people.
 
Groundpounder said:
The Susan G Komen Foundation has a Global Express. Only 10% of their budget goes to research and treatment. That is something to get mad about.
Click to expand...
3393RP said:
It's one of the more odius examples of benefits accruing to the already wealthy on the backs of dead and dying people.
Click to expand...
I'll just leave this right here.
marketing.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top