Donna makes a good point. In labor markets, it is necessary to pay people more to attract them to jobs that have high risks or unpleasant conditions. Since most people prefer pleasant, comfortable working conditions, there is a larger supply of such workers and pay tends to be lower, ceteris paribus.
I believe it was Isaac Stern (or maybe Artur Rubinstein) who once said that playing at Carnegie Hall was such a thrill, he’d pay for the chance.
So does it make sense for the UNC crowd to talk about the need to significantly increase compensation for the next president (Molly Broad makes $312,000 plus a fine house and car whose make I wish I knew) in order to attract the high caliber person they want? I think not. My hunch is that there are a lot of very competent people for whom the current compensation package plus the ability to introduce oneself at cocktail parties as “President of the University of North Carolina” would be ample reward.
What does not make sense is announcing ahead of time that the salary will go to at least $450 or $475K, figures that have been tossed around. If you were running a business and needed a new key management person, wouldn’t you try to negotiate the lowest compensation package you could? The UNC search committee should be as careful with taxpayer money as executives are with stockholder money.
