Jump to content

AOPA - To renew or not?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, FlyDave said:

Another thought on this topic....

If Mark Baker really cared about GA (and not just his fucking salary!!) AOPA would have been working with Dynon up front and not let EAA take the lead.

Well, I am an AOPA member and proud of it, but just like the good old US of A, it has issues. I like to keep the plane separated from the pilot. In both instances, there is nothing wrong with the plane, but the pilot could use some work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

You completely missed my perception. Your story is a fine one that I've heard countless times before, but I'm scratching my head with what it has to due with AOPA? 

 

Maybe not much.

But I support the AOPA since even if not perfectly I do believe they help and they are on our side - and who else is on our side with the congressmen.  EAA is good, but they are not as focused on the lobby aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aviatoreb said:

Maybe not much.

But I support the AOPA since even if not perfectly I do believe they help and they are on our side - and who else is on our side with the congressmen.  EAA is good, but they are not as focused on the lobby aspect.

I don't know how much money is spent on lobbying with the high salaries. AOPA's marketing works for some people, just not me at this time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erik there will always be people looking at others as fat cats, those green eyes say harsh words, the same is said for those who play golf, tennis is for the rich. socioeconomics status envy occurs at every level. It's impossible to please all, even the so called working class, I was doing work for some large local unions, I had to rent an American car to keep my engagement. The dumb car didn't help me do my job. What the hell this has to do with the Aopa who knows, I gotta have another drink.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As many of you know I work at AOPA and lead the Air Safety Institute.  I wanted to thank everyone for their thoughts - the good and the bad.  I wanted to address a couple of themes.  

1. "What's the value in my AOPA membership?"  I think there's great value in being an AOPA member.  For less than the price of a steak dinner at a chain restaurant, AOPA provides a host of member services.  The advocacy, the magazine, all the free safety education (courses, quizes, videos webinars etc) an awesome desktop flight planner!  What we've done just in DC:  AOPA has blocked user fees literally dozens of times.  AOPA helped craft the Part 23 rewrite now out as an NPRM.  Pushed back on the high cost of ADS-B equipment with manufacturers and helped get prices down from over 6K to less than 2K in under two years. (these are the same manufacturers that advertise with us, so you can see the commitment to members)  AOPA put a stop to unwarranted CBP searches.   Soon to be complete: Third class medical will get done this year, TIS-B traffic information is on track to be "unblocked" so everyone has access to ADSB Traffic.   Next on the list is getting non-TSO'ed equipment approved for installation into part 23 certified aircraft. 

2. "its a rich guys club".  I think that might have been an accurate assessment under previous leadership, but its not the case now.  When CF was running AOPA I too did not renew.  TIMES HAVE CHANGED!  I can tell you that Mark Baker is one hell of a leader and GA is lucky to have him at the helm of AOPA.  Don't take my word for it - Come to any of the regional fly ins, and you'll see hundreds of small GA aircraft and thousands of members and AOPA staff hanging out at the Friday night party sharing a beer.  We are not elitists...we're pilots just like you.  If AOPA does something that gets under your skin, let me know about it and I'll try to make it right.  

3. "AOPA doesn't listen to its members"  I can tell you nothing is farther from the truth.  When we screw things up or our members have complaints we listen and respond.  As anyone on this board will tell you, the times members have reached out to me with a concern it gets addressed and fixed.  And everyone at AOPA feels the same level of dedication to our members.  When the Jenner issue came out, I can tell you AOPA heard loud and clear that our membership was not happy with it.  As a result additional editorial steps are in place to make sure we serve our members with the highest quality content that provides them information that they'll find useful, information and entertaining.

4. "AOPA's leadership gets paid too much"  I suppose one could argue both sides of that point but I sum it up like this.  If the organization is effective I don't really care what we pay the folks that are fighting for our rights, protecting our freedoms and providing us with great media and safety information.  Also in a competitive market that is looking to attract and keep top talent they have to pay a competitive wage.  Think for a moment what a captain for FedEx or Delta makes.  $300+K a year to essentially drive a bus while working 10-12 days a month.  Many of us, myself included passed on an "easy" airline career to work much longer hours for a lot less money.  We do it because its important, meaningful and we share the passion for general aviation and flying.

5. "I get tired of AOPA hitting me up for money"  This I agree with.  If you don't manage your email subscriptions you'll get lots of solicitations.  But I will say that only about 6% of AOPA members donate anything beyond their dues.  This seems awfully low percentage given the fact that without AOPA fighting for GA we'd probably look like Europe by now.  I am a hat in the ring member and contribute 4 figures every year out of my pocket because I believe in what AOPA is doing.  Also check the magazine that lists all of AOPA's donors - You'll see that all of the senior staff also contributes money out of their pockets to support the mission.  So even though the "asks" can be annoying, its manageable with email controls and AOPA leaders aren't asking for anything they aren't willing to do themselves.

Is AOPA perfect - hell no.  Are we working hard every day to protect GA, make pilots safer and give our members the best benefits in the industry?  ABSOLUTELY!  So if anyone has heartburn with AOPA, please send me a PM and I'm happy to talk with you directly.  I'll do my best to find a solution or explain the background on any issue you feel that we've mishandled.  

Fly Safe!

George

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More small town stories - in my small town we have a section of the local paper called sound offs. In the sound offs a major point of complaint is that teachers should get paid $10 per class, and get no healthcare, because many tax payers do not make as much as some teachers and some do not have health care. 

It takes a competitive wage to hire good teachers, and I take it as self evident that decent teachers are not just part of our children's future, my children's opportunities, but our local and global economy. The mission is not to hire teachers at a wage at average or lower than the average tax payer. 

The market price is what it takes to hire good teachers.  I take it to be the same principle of what takes to hire a top quality CEO of an airplane organization.  I am sure there are some young guys who will take the position for $60k/year but I do not think they would be worth 60k for this job.  I bet Baker could make more at another job. Just as George could perhaps make more in the airlines, it is too much to expect them to take a dramatic cut.

If they do a good job, then fine, I am happy and I pay my share.  I feel like someone is advocating for my side, so I am satisfied. I don't need a free hat.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

I am curious. What do the CEOs of other major more clearly non-profits make.  Red Cross?  UNISEF? Mother's against drunk driving?  I have no idea - just curious.

Now the NRA CEO - I bet that guy makes a salary.

An idea of the compensation for not for profit hospital leadership in Western Pennsylvania.   

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/healthcare-business/2016/05/13/UPMC-CEO-Jeffrey-Romoff-earned-6-4-million-in-fiscal-2015/stories/201605130194

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George,

Thanks for your response. I have always held you in high regard for your service to this country and for what you do at AOPA.

My posts express my frustration with what I see AOPA doing and not doing. I'm also, as the British put it "GobSmacked" at the salaries of upper management of a "Not for profit" organization that consistently emails it's member asking for money. If the organization needs additional funds so frequently then let Mark Baker kick in a good sized chunk (I'm not talking $3,500) of his $800k + salary. I'm sure he could use the tax write off.

To me, this is definitely a for-profit organization when you're paying more than $800,000.00 PER YEAR to the CEO. I wonder what the average annual income of AOPA members is. Do you think it's more than $500K? $400K? $300K? $200K? I'll bet the average is somewhere between $75K and $125K. And Mark Baker, at $800K is asking THEM to "donate"....seems a little out of balance to me.

On the other issues, Part 23 rewrite and the Dynon STC's, where was AOPA on that? What will AOPA be doing on these issues going forward?

Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, FlyDave said:

George,

Thanks for your response. I have always held you in high regard for your service to this country and for what you do at AOPA.

My posts express my frustration with what I see AOPA doing and not doing. I'm also, as the British put it "GobSmacked" at the salaries of upper management of a "Not for profit" organization that consistently emails it's member asking for money. If the organization needs additional funds so frequently then let Mark Baker kick in a good sized chunk (I'm not talking $3,500) of his $800k + salary. I'm sure he could use the tax write off.

To me, this is definitely a for-profit organization when you're paying more than $800,000.00 PER YEAR to the CEO. I wonder what the average annual income of AOPA members is. Do you think it's more than $500K? $400K? $300K? $200K? I'll bet the average is somewhere between $75K and $125K. And Mark Baker, at $800K is asking THEM to "donate"....seems a little out of balance to me.

On the other issues, Part 23 rewrite and the Dynon STC's, where was AOPA on that? What will AOPA be doing on these issues going forward?

Dave

Dave

Thanks for your note.  As I mentioned in my post, ALL of AOPA's senior staff including the CEO donate back to the AOPA Foundation.  

AOPA led the effort for Part 23 Reform and participated in every Part 23 rewrite working group.  In fact AOPA has been working on this since 2008! and when the FAA wasn't moving fast enough AOPA pushed the issue and worked with congress to mandate that the FAA get this done in the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013.  It's now out as an NPRM.  If you haven't read it you should.  Its a huge step forward for GA manufacturers.

I applaud EAA on their Dynon STC...and while its a step in the right direction, it's not groundbreaking.  It's basically an attitude indicator replacement and the NORSEE policy that AOPA helped develop allows for innovations like this.   

What we are working on is a more universal solution that will allow non TSO'ed products to be installed in GA aircraft more broadly.    This will take more time b/c it's more complex, but will be a much better overall result once it's completed.

To close, if questions like this come up and there's a perception that AOPA isn't as effective as you'd like us to be, let me know.  There's probably more to the story and I'm happy to share what we're doing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, GeorgePerry said:

Dave

Thanks for your note.  As I mentioned in my post, ALL of AOPA's senior staff including the CEO donate back to the AOPA Foundation.  

AOPA led the effort for Part 23 Reform and participated in every Part 23 rewrite working group.  In fact AOPA has been working on this since 2008! and when the FAA wasn't moving fast enough AOPA pushed the issue and worked with congress to mandate that the FAA get this done in the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013.  It's now out as an NPRM.  If you haven't read it you should.  Its a huge step forward for GA manufacturers.

I applaud EAA on their Dynon STC...and while its a step in the right direction, it's not groundbreaking.  It's basically an attitude indicator replacement and the NORSEE policy that AOPA helped develop allows for innovations like this.   

What we are working on is a more universal solution that will allow non TSO'ed products to be installed in GA aircraft more broadly.    This will take more time b/c it's more complex, but will be a much better overall result once it's completed.

To close, if questions like this come up and there's a perception that AOPA isn't as effective as you'd like us to be, let me know.  There's probably more to the story and I'm happy to share what we're doing.

Hi George, the part 23 rewrite may be a huge deal for the GA manufacturers ( I think I'd like someone to explain to me how or what performance base is going to do for GA manufacturers as I read the rewrite and watched the videos and came away with a big what did they say?) , but it doesn't have any effect for those of us with airplanes already in service or in vintage years.

  "Its basically an attitude indicator replacement and the NORSEE policy that AOPA helped develop allows for innovations like this",, Really? Why not just say kudos to the EAA? The EAA/Dynon STC may not be groundbreaking to you or AOPA, but it's a real impact for me and thousands of others who need regulatory relief to install reasonable equipment in our airplanes.

 I can't get excited about part 23 rewrite but if you make headway on the non TSO products being eligible to install  in GA airplanes, then you'll get me excited.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Danb said:

Brad, I'm indifferent to this thread being a member of both the EAA & Aopa , the one thing that is quite sorry is the extreme wages among the section 501-C(3) community. I've audited quite a few not for profit organizations in my tour and your correct in the appalling overhead especially wages among those executives entrusted with providing the services of which they were granted by the Treasury Dept. (IRS).   'Nuff said.

The Mooney Summit, Inc is a 501c3 and the executives/board get zero dollars for pay, just the satisfaction of knowing they are helping others when it is most needed. 100% of my graveling for donations goes to putting on the Mooney Summit for the Mooney Pilots, and for the Bill Gilliland foundation to help downed Mooney Pilot's families. So far since the last Summit, we have reached out to 6 families offering our support. I hope we don't have to again for a while. Fly and be safe out there, be diligent, stay proficient.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

The Mooney Summit, Inc is a 501c3 and the executives/board get zero dollars for pay, just the satisfaction of knowing they are helping others when it is most needed. 100% of my graveling for donations goes to putting on the Mooney Summit for the Mooney Pilots, and for the Bill Gilliland foundation to help downed Mooney Pilot's families. So far since the last Summit, we have reached out to 6 families offering our support. I hope we don't have to again for a while. Fly and be safe out there, be diligent, stay proficient.

Mike thats my point originally nfp's were started for the benefit of those intended outlined in the mission statement of the organization, do i think those in nonprofit org. should work for nothing, NO. I feel if they should want  to work for the missions  cause then, it should be nominal, average wages etc.  I've just audited a large senior center,the overhead is within range, now with the ACA they have to either pay the penalty or provide medical ins. most of the employees are covered by there spouses, now over $150K will go to health insurance instead of meals on wheels and dementia care. Thats appalling. Also many nfp are associated with for profit companies there is difficulty if determining where the money goes. Its ashamed they have to hire someone like me to make sure all the laws are followed, my money also takes away from the needed individuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Danb said:

Mike thats my point originally nfp's were started for the benefit of those intended outlined in the mission statement of the organization, do i think those in nonprofit org. should work for nothing, NO. I feel if they should want  to work for the missions  cause then, it should be nominal, average wages etc.  I've just audited a large senior center,the overhead is within range, now with the ACA they have to either pay the penalty or provide medical ins. most of the employees are covered by there spouses, now over $150K will go to health insurance instead of meals on wheels and dementia care. Thats appalling. Also many nfp are associated with for profit companies there is difficulty if determining where the money goes. Its ashamed they have to hire someone like me to make sure all the laws are followed, my money also takes away from the needed individuals.

I've been holding out for a 7 figure plus salary :) , but our bean counter (ken yale, proud owner of a 2016 O3) says "that aint happening in my lifetime" :) I Did get asked by Mooney to spend a couple months in China beginning in a couple of weeks, but commitments here and to my wife made this a non starter.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you George for responding to this thread. It does mean something to me that you have the cajones to come on this forum and address the angry mob.:)

With that being said, I read the AOPA article/annual report last night in my AOPA Pilot magazine and have to say that a certain amount of it sounded like lip service. While I appreciate the desire to stay "positive" I'd hardly agree that "the future of GA again looks bright" as stated in the article.

Most of us DO support the AOPA's legislative efforts with regards to 3rd Class Medical reform, FAA reauthorization, Non-TSO and Part 23 reform, saving airports, and keeping avgas relatively affordable with the transition to unleaded fuel. These issues are important to me and are a primary reason I'm an automatically-renewing member. But I"m still concerned about what I consider to be a loss of focus by the organization.

First on my list of things to drop would be the AOPA Online Flight Planner and the AOPA Go Mobile App. These resources have been in a constant state of change for as long as I can remember and I have to wonder how many people actually use them. I'd bet that the vast majority of us either use Foreflight, Wing-X Pro, Garmin Pilot, or similar to plan our flights.

Next thing is the National Aviation Community Center. Why does the AOPA "host weddings, social gatherings, corporate meetings, Cub Scout camps, and paper airplane contests"? I appreciate the effort to engage youngsters with aviation but the EAA's Young Eagles program seems much more productive than any AOPA effort.

And when the AOPA states that you have "a group of dedicated staff members... to solidify corporate partnerships and other relationships" it gives a lowly Mooney driver like me a cause for concern. If the "corporate partnerships" influenced Garmin to sell G3X Instrument Suites to M20 owners at Experimental prices then I might say okay, but it sure sounds a lot more like time-on-the-golf-course to me.

Another cause for concern regards drones. In addition to advocacy for the "safe integration of drones" the AOPA is now "expanding on those efforts with plans to offer educational resources for drone operators under the banner of its You Can Fly initiative." I'm not sure that teaching people how to fly toy aircraft should be an AOPA mission. And if they're flying them commercially they should certainly pay for their own training.

This post is getting long so I'll end by addressing the issue of salaries. I've met Mr. Baker a couple of times now and he seems like a fine man and a good advocate for aviation, but I'm not sure that a similarly good advocate couldn't be recruited from the pilot population. Perhaps someone such as a successful retiree might be interested in representing our interests for a lesser wage. If the ~$800,000 salary quoted is correct that accounts for nearly 5% of membership dues and subscriptions, and is almost 17% of  AOPA's entire management and general expenses (as reported in the 2015 financial statement).

Lastly, I don't begrudge corporate America from conducting their business utilizing a fleet of sophisticated and expensive corporate jets; I believe their existence is a net benefit to aviation as a whole. But I do believe that AOPA devotes a disproportionate amount of resources to keeping corporate aviation out of the public's cross-hairs. Meanwhile us little guys who simply love flying, and who pay a sizable portion of our monthly income on planes, maintenance, hangars, insurance, and avgas are left wondering why we keep getting weekly mailers from the AOPA PAC, etc. begging for more cash.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, cnoe said:

Thank you George for responding to this thread. It does mean something to me that you have the cajones to come on this forum and address the angry mob.:)

With that being said, I read the AOPA article/annual report last night in my AOPA Pilot magazine and have to say that a certain amount of it sounded like lip service. While I appreciate the desire to stay "positive" I'd hardly agree that "the future of GA again looks bright" as stated in the article.

Most of us DO support the AOPA's legislative efforts with regards to 3rd Class Medical reform, FAA reauthorization, Non-TSO and Part 23 reform, saving airports, and keeping avgas relatively affordable with the transition to unleaded fuel. These issues are important to me and are a primary reason I'm an automatically-renewing member. But I"m still concerned about what I consider to be a loss of focus by the organization.

First on my list of things to drop would be the AOPA Online Flight Planner and the AOPA Go Mobile App. These resources have been in a constant state of change for as long as I can remember and I have to wonder how many people actually use them. I'd bet that the vast majority of us either use Foreflight, Wing-X Pro, Garmin Pilot, or similar to plan our flights.

I agree the development process for these flight planning member benefits has been sorted and sometimes not without controversay.  In their current form the do not compete with G/FF/WX, but compliment them.  Also AOPA's desktop planner has undergone some significant upgrades in the past few months and with the fuel planning features and the airport screenng fuctions its a phenominal "free" tool for members to use.  Planning a flight on a iPad isn't always ideal. Sometimes I like to use my desktop computer to do destination research and a computer works best for that.  The coolest thing the flight planner does now is allows pilots to load their AOPA flight plan directly into FF and WingX, so you don't have to do it twice.  Check out the tutorial. 

Next thing is the National Aviation Community Center. Why does the AOPA "host weddings, social gatherings, corporate meetings, Cub Scout camps, and paper airplane contests"? I appreciate the effort to engage youngsters with aviation but the EAA's Young Eagles program seems much more productive than any AOPA effort.

This is free to all members and serves as a "best practice" for others at other airports to emulate.  Making the airport a social center brings people and interest to the airport.  It creates a sense of community.  Since the NACC was launched we'ed had about a dozen airports and large hanger owners emulate what we've done.  So if your company needs an free location to hold an offsite and your an AOPA member give us a call.

And when the AOPA states that you have "a group of dedicated staff members... to solidify corporate partnerships and other relationships" it gives a lowly Mooney driver like me a cause for concern. If the "corporate partnerships" influenced Garmin to sell G3X Instrument Suites to M20 owners at Experimental prices then I might say okay, but it sure sounds a lot more like time-on-the-golf-course to me.

Not sure where your quoting that from but I can tell you our focus is on our members...especially those of us who fly small planes just like I do.

Another cause for concern regards drones. In addition to advocacy for the "safe integration of drones" the AOPA is now "expanding on those efforts with plans to offer educational resources for drone operators under the banner of its You Can Fly initiative." I'm not sure that teaching people how to fly toy aircraft should be an AOPA mission. And if they're flying them commercially they should certainly pay for their own training.

AOPA wants to protect GA's airspace access.  Since drones and the aircraft we fly will share the national airspace system we have to be here to look after GA's interests.  Also You Can Fly is a family of programs that includes Rusty Pilots (1500 pilots back flying again) Flying Clubs (25 new Clubs in the past 18 months) and our high school initiative that focuses on providing aviation based STEM to expose high school aged youth to aviation...and yes some of that involves the use of drones b/c kids love the things and if it sparks there interest then it may become a pathway to a real plane.

This post is getting long so I'll end by addressing the issue of salaries. I've met Mr. Baker a couple of times now and he seems like a fine man and a good advocate for aviation, but I'm not sure that a similarly good advocate couldn't be recruited from the pilot population. Perhaps someone such as a successful retiree might be interested in representing our interests for a lesser wage. If the ~$800,000 salary quoted is correct that accounts for nearly 5% of membership dues and subscriptions, and is almost 17% of  AOPA's entire management and general expenses (as reported in the 2015 financial statement).

Mark comes with one hell of an impressive business pedigree.  And in order to be effective when you engage with congressmen, senators industry leaders etc its important to have the right person in the job.  Again, whether its EAA or AOPA's leadership compensation if they are effective then its worth the money.  , 

Lastly, I don't begrudge corporate America from conducting their business utilizing a fleet of sophisticated and expensive corporate jets; I believe their existence is a net benefit to aviation as a whole. But I do believe that AOPA devotes a disproportionate amount of resources to keeping corporate aviation out of the public's cross-hairs. Meanwhile us little guys who simply love flying, and who pay a sizable portion of our monthly income on planes, maintenance, hangars, insurance, and avgas are left wondering why we keep getting weekly mailers from the AOPA PAC, etc. begging for more cash.

I'm a "little guy too"  And the expenses I pay to operate my mooney come out of pocket.  Many of us own airplanes (SE piston) so we know first hand what owners of light GA aircraft endure to keep them well fed and maintained.  Yes AOPA uses a jet aircraft.  But I can tell you there are strict rules on how its dispatched.  1.  it's always full - saving on airline travel costs and additional cost associated with more days in a hotel, more rental cars, perdiem etc.  2. Its only used when the cost benefits of launching make sense. 3. The trip distance / time calculation has to justify.  Could be get by without it...yes probably.  Does it make us more effective and efficient (just like thousands of businesses) it certainly does.

 

Quote

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sabremech said:

Hi George, the part 23 rewrite may be a huge deal for the GA manufacturers

 I can't get excited about part 23 rewrite but if you make headway on the non TSO products being eligible to install  in GA airplanes, then you'll get me excited.

 

 

We are on this...Please take a look at the July Magazine.  I think you'll like what I have to say in the Safety Spotlight.  ASI and our Gov Affairs team is already working on ways to get a broad set of solutions in place including pathways to install nonTSO'ed stuff into Part 23 aircraft.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

George came and presented at the Mooney Summit III for strictly the benefit of the Mooney pilot attendee's. He had to deal with a few hammering on him about "deliverables" from AOPA when he was there as a Mooney owner to give a great safety presentation. George graciously converted the non believers of the AOPA benefits in a respectful positive manner I found quite impressive. I asked him to return again this October, but because of a schedule conflict with one of the AOPA regional events that George is attending, his predecessor Bruce Landsberg will be there in his place. George is a real addition to the Mooney Community and I for one am glad he is working for AOPA vs. someone with an airline or aircraft manufacture background.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having met George a few times and sharing a meal with him, I think the challenge he is dealing with is damage control. AOPA's prior leadership did a lot of damage to the credibility of the AOPA. Most of it due to the published salaries, the approach to managing their membership (overzealous fund raising) and the lack of visible progress on initiatives that mean a lot to the membership (medical reform, Part 23 reform, etc.).

I renewed this year because of George. As for the future? Chuck Noland said it best "Now I know what I have to do now. I gotta keep breathing because tomorrow the sun will rise. Who knows what the tide could bring?" Maybe medical reform? :D

BTW -- I don't know what the normal salary ranges are for NFP organizations, but at one time in my career I manage a business for corporate America 3 times the size of AOPA and I made no where near Baker's salary.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Marauder said:

BTW -- I don't know what the normal salary ranges are for NFP organizations, but at one time in my career I manage a business for corporate America 3 times the size of AOPA and I made no where near Baker's salary.

 

I vote for Marauder for AOPA president! :blink:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.