Another Thought on the Salary Restoration Fund

As I indicated earlier—see “Some Stewardship Thoughts”—I find the Salary Restoration Fund manipulative and potentially counterproductive. On the other hand, the jobs of most staff people are hardly making them rich, even if the rector is well compensated. Lou has vowed not to benefit from the Salary Restoration Fund until the salaries of everyone else are raised to their 2010 levels. Magnanimous as this sounds, it still has the potential to restore all salaries even as pledged income falls short of its stated goal.

May I suggest a compromise, and one that would encourage adequate funding of St. Paul’s? Apparently, a substantive amount of money has been given to the Salary Restoration Fund already. If enough money is received to restore staff salaries, they should be restored. Additional contributions should be allocated to the general fund until such time as the stewardship goal is met. Only then should the rector’s salary be restored.

A PDF version of this post is available here.