We weren’t planning on it. When I heard that the Cultural Human Resources Council and Magazines Canada were funding a new compensation study
for the industry, I figured our role in this area had been usurped.
Which was all well and good—Masthead
has always had to rely on individual readers to volunteer information that was hopefully not fabricated, while this new study was based on official records from 29 publishing companies representing 113 publications.
But here’s the thing: The results, released last week
, were kind of disappointing, at least for the plebes (like me), since all we got to see were the “topline scores.”
We didn’t get to see the high-end and low-end salary extremes for each postion; we weren't told how many of those 113 publications were consumer and how many were trade; we didn’t even really get to see what “special interest” publication means.
Wasn’t that information collected, you ask? Of course it was. But it’s proprietary to the companies that participated in the study.
conducts another Salary Survey (Bill Shields oversaw the last one, in 2006), our information would definitely not be as deep as what the CHRC got. But we would, of course, share everything we gather.
So, what do you think? Is it worth the time and energy? I'm particularly interested to hear from publishers/owners/management. Is there value in the survey beyond satiating everyone's curiosity? E-mail me email@example.com