I can say honestly that the most important factor for me would be the presence of a good organ, the desire for fine music, the reality of beautiful liturgy, and so forth. A difference of ten or even twenty thousand dollars between a church which had these and one that didn't would not alter my prerequisites. Also, the moment I read that a grand piano (even a Bechstein, yet!) is being touted is the moment I stop reading.

That being said and all things being equal one should expect for a full time post a salary range of anywhere between fifty to sixty thousand and more, depending on the part of the country and the 'job description'. But the important things are those mentioned above, which can make the salary of less relative importance. I (and I know that I am not alone) have always been more concerned with what I got to do and participate in than how much I was paid for it - providing the pay was anywhere near appropriate.

How true, Clerget. The figure I surmised is probably not representative of everywhere, in fact, maybe not of most locales. I have, though, heard of some who surpass a hundred thousand - which, to me, puts them amongst a very pampered few pied pipers (who most often often don't really deserve being pampered).

The bottom line for those who have musical and liturgical integrity is the instrument, the choir, the priest and most of all - the liturgy.

A 'decent' part time salary should be, I think, between 20 and 30. A full time one between 35 and 50, in some cases more. These figures will vary depending on locale and cost of living.

Too, specifically to answer the original question, for many reasons that I shant enumerate here, it would be most helpful and 'above board' if salary ranges were revealed in advertisements for open positions. It seems to me that there are some positions that are advertised as 'full time' but, salary wise, aren't. Then there are some that are advertised as 'part time' which seem to be expecting 'full time' work. We are deserving of greater truth in advertising.

I also think it’s disrespectful to those who do this to support their families in addition to their love of beautiful worship of God. Does anyone ever feel comfortable making contact in order to ask about a salary range? (I’ve never had to do that, being one of the youngins here…) It would be mutually beneficial to post that information so as to be clear upfront and to make the most of everyone’s time.

Also, some of the postings here are not descriptive at all, whereas some are very detailed. There needs to be a happy medium.

And depending on your situation, you might not want to do this, but the interview is a great time to ask the "tough questions," such as: what is your resource for Gregorian chant? (This will tell you if they even sing Gregorian chant at their parish). Noel Jones also suggested asking the following: "If I had to replace the entire musical staff (working for me), would you support that decision?" His justification for that particular question is to find out if there are any "sacred cows" in the parish that the pastor won't ever let go. You are eventually going to be in conflict with this person, and you want to know if the pastor will side with you, or someone else. When the inevitable conflict with the "sacred cow" happens, you either have to cave or that's the end of your time at that parish. I digress: this was supposed to be a post about interview questions. I would also ask the following: what is the role of music in the Mass? (This will tell you if the pastor is of a mindset that precludes Sacred Music). Be sure to ask follow up questions as well, because if the answer to the previous question was "helping people pray," (as it was during my interview and I imagine would be for many, YMMV) your next question should be, "how does the music help people pray?" It's a legitimate question, and you want to know what the pastor thinks.

In short, ask the following "tough questions" if you feel particularly inclined:

1. What is the role of music in the Mass?

2. What is your resource for Gregorian chant?

3. People don't always work well together, especially after a change of administration. If I see the need for a personnel change, would you support my decision? (this is a softer way of asking Noel Jones' question, because if the pastor says something like, "it depends," you can ask a follow up, "upon what?")

Remember, always ask follow up questions. Make them explain themselves. This is just my personal chip about this, but I think that administrators do a great job of grilling applicants and making us explain and talk and trying to shake us in the interview so that they can narrow the field. Remember that an interview is as much about determining if they are the right fit for you, and not just the other way around. It can certainly seem that way if you are in dire need of the job, in which case the situation changes, and the above questions might not be so important to ask. However, I would still ask them, just perhaps not press any of them with follow up questions: they would still show that you are thinking ahead, and that you are aware of the demands of the job.

And in some of those cases, the salary might be so high because they know it is difficult to find someone who will be able and willing to do what they want them to do.

Also keep in mind that AGO standards include about a $30k range per category, when you consider benefits. They are a negotiation starting point, not a set salary.

Yeah, but do you really want to work for someone/someplace like that, CK? That person, priest or not, sounds like a jerk. Plus, if they refuse to negotiate, then how much do they really want you to work there? I think it's indicative of what things would be like if you worked there, unfortunately.

I think that if a pastor wants to hire...
a. a highly competent musician
b. who can help create the right "ethos" of the liturgy through his/her decisions
c. who is willing to live a life of consistent adherence to the Catholic Church's teaching on sexual morality, and is therefore likely to have a large family
d. who is not constantly looking to leave for higher wages somewhere else

...that then they will offer something in the AGO/NPM range or even above it, in some cases.

.

I lead the best possible music within the limits of my musicians,

I feel it's important to expand those limits also, or in many places you end up with a choir that sings from the same repertoire of 12 pieces for all eternity.

MJO appears to have just indicated he prefers the posting to provide that he'll be paid in gold bullion....

Gee, i'd be really happy to tey one of those 'difficult' 100 k jobs. I bet i could make it work.

Oh they're not usually difficult at all. Except for your sanity and dignity.

As I have said before, If I needed the money, I couldn't afford to work in Catholic music.

.

@Rphillips: don't assume anything particular about MJO's dot-posting. It may just be the case that he posted a comment, changed his mind, and then went back to take it out.

As it happens, the forum software only lets users _modify_ a posted comment, not delete it; so when MJO takes a comment out, he has to leave _something_ there. He chooses to leave a period.
--admin

M.Jackson.Osborne - Would you like to clarify what you meant by posting a yellow, or gold bullion, response?

Jackson is an enigma and is like the Trinity - not meant to be understood by man. ;-)

MJO would apparently want to be paid in gold bullion

on a periodic basis. ;-)

Gold is good, but there is precious little of it in Catholic music.

Hymn number 666, "I got dem iron pyrite blues, hep me Lord!"

I have also noted that academically, music directors are often the most qualified but lowest paid on church staffs.

That is simply supply and demand at work. There are lots of people who love music and would love to be paid for playing music. There are lots who would love a regular gig offering weekly income, limited night work, in an environment which is usually relatively free from addictive substances (alcohol). So there's lots of competition for such jobs.

And I'm not sure that comparing priests vs musicians qualifications is exactly fair. Sure the musos have higher level quals - but how many of them have actually studied at seminary level for seven years, while also eschewing the possibility of a life and sex partner.

There are many differences between priests and DMs that make their situations hard to compare.

-Priests' educations were usually subsidized
-Priests receive all kinds of benefits that DMs do not, including room and board, health, retirement, sometimes cars
-Priests receive gifts and stipends that are unheard of in any other position

Parish musicians have a specialized skill, and DMs have to be good leaders or they will fail. The level of diplomacy required is in most cases incredibly high. Weekday and weekend hours are required and holiday hours are insane. Of course they should be the highest paid on parish staffs.

I think this is normal in job postings of all kinds. Very few hint at the salary.

I think it's especially true at the two ends of the spectrum. Places offering a pittance don't want to put that in writing. Likewise with those $70-80-90-100k jobs: they don't want word to get around that they're paying the music director a nice salary.

As soon as someone grumpy hears that a musician with an MM and 10+ years of experience, who is proficient in multiple instruments and the sacred liturgy, is earning the same amount as any other professional, guess who is going to hear about it? Most pastors don't want that kind of a headache.

"Salary commensurate with education and experience" doesn't really mean anything, because it could mean ANYTHING.