In the spring of 2001, shortly after Alex Rodriguez signed an incredible 10-year, $252-million deal to play for the Texas Rangers, he appeared on the cover of Esquire magazine above the provocative headline "Alex Rodriguez Is Underpaid."
The story inside read more like a lesson in economics and marketing than it did about a baseball icon in the prime of his career.
The argument regarding pioneer athletes, from Wayne Gretzky to Michael Jordan to Tiger Woods to Roger Federer, is that professional sports are in the entertainment business but the best players are not paid like top entertainers.
The lead actors in the TV shows and movies are paid significantly higher than the supporting actors, often measured in factors of 5 or 10 or more, because it's clearly understood that people don't watch movies or TV shows for the supporting talent but for the leads. People watch The Big Bang Theory to see the antics of Leonard, Sheldon and Penny, so Johnny Galecki, Jim Parsons and Kaley Cuoco have an extra zero or two on their cheques, compared to their equally talented and funny co-stars.
Not so in team sports, which begs the question that if most baseball fans go to see Rodriguez play, shouldn't he get most of the money, especially compared to his teammates?
When music fans pay $150 to see Elton John, the supporting band makes pennies on the dollar compared to what he brings in for one show, because nobody is there to see the supporting band, no matter how good they are.
Even with individual sports, shouldn't Tiger Woods automatically receive more than anyone else on the course? Far more people tuned into the British Open last weekend to see if Tiger was going to win than to see if Adam Scott could hold the lead.
Closer to home, why does someone like Dan Hamhuis, with all due respect to the Smithers native and former Prince George Cougar, get half the pay the Sedins do when nowhere near half the fans in the stands are there to see him, compared to the twins?
In other words, the Esquire headline had the right idea but said it wrong. It should have said "Everyone Else In Baseball Is Overpaid."
Nothing works people into a lather like knowing how much other people get paid, even when talking about the pay of talented, knowledgeable members of the community.
In the interest of disclosure and transparency, the Ministry of Finance disclosed the salaries of public sector executives who make more than $125,000 per year.
Locally, Cathy Ulrich, president and CEO of Northern Health, made more than $373,000 in 2011-2012. That means her take-home pay was more than nurses and most medical staff but about on par with specialist doctors. Considering it's Ulrich's job to provide nurses and doctors with the resources to heal the sick and save lives in a health region bigger than Germany, she's well-compensated but certainly not overpaid. Factor in that she receives the least pay among her peers leading health authorities in B.C. and a case could be made that Prince George and northern B.C. is getting a discount for her services.
The annual pay for George Iwama at UNBC ($300,000) and John Bowman at CNC ($197,000) is also on par with what is paid to the heads of post-secondary institutions in B.C. Considering the value of these two organizations to the Prince George economy, there is an argument to be made that they are not adequately paid for the degree of responsibility they have.
Same goes for the roughly $200,000 per year Derek Bates makes as city manager. Even though he makes more than double what the mayor earns, the buck ultimately stops at his desk, not mayor and council, to make sure city services are delivered. That's an undertaking few would really want and even fewer are qualified to do.
In other words, is Bates underpaid or is the mayor overpaid?
Fortunately, it's neither.
Both are paid fairly for what they do, compared to other B.C. municipalities and for the burden of their duties.
And they still make a pittance compared to Alex Rodriguez.
-- Managing editor Neil Godbout
