Having volunteered and personally worked with each of these organization's CEO's, I don't have a problem with their salaries. I know first-hand that they are "on call" 24/7 and their life is not their own. I also know the personal dedication that these CEO's have in helping people live, cope, and help build awareness with the disease; and of course, how they spend their research dollars wisely.

However, I DO have a problem with non-profits sitting on big reserve funds when (as paula says) "Time is not neutral" for those with Parkinson's.

Just cruise the big pharma annual reports, and this non-profit stuff is peanuts. Take a look-see at the CEO salaries of big drug companies. Hour-for-hour and based on job security (they can be let go in an overnight board meeting), most of them earn what they make (but not all). I judge how well they are doing by how much and what they invest in research, and also how much (or little) they donate to patient education or advocacy.

Someone once asked me what I thought a "man/woman of the collar" should make, referring to a priest/pastor/preacher. I borrowed the answer of a wise friend and replied, "Somewhere between what we pay a school janitor and a professional baseball player." It's all relevant to what one feels it is worth.

Peggy

PS - Just for the record, some of the links to the charities mentioned are a bit outdated. I used to be on PAN's board, and they no longer pay their founder a $100,000 salary.