• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

When did the pay-scale get so low in broadcasting?

T

TXengineer

Guest
When and more importantly, why, did the bar get set so low for broadcasting?
It's a real industry joke how low broadcast "professionals" are paid for the amount of work and stress we all do...

Nowhere else can I think of in the professional industry where the pay got lower as time moves on, versus going higher...

It's a real sad state of affairs...
 
Probably November, 1920.

Reason: A buyers' market. A lot of people desperate to work in radio and willing to accept low pay and bad treatment. When somebody gets tired of it, there is a whole new crop of people desperate to work in radio ready to take their place.

And radio people do nothing but complain. Radio people for the most part, especially at the small and medium market level, are unwilling to work together. Why is it broadcast unions only are active at the network, national commercial and major market level (where they are needed least)? In the workplace, radio people are too often at each other's throats. And some hope they can become low level managers so they can start returning to co-workers some of the same treatment they have received (and, therefore, side with management against their own interest). "The fault lies not in our stars, but in ourselves."

> When and more importantly, why, did the bar get set so low
> for broadcasting?
> It's a real industry joke how low broadcast "professionals"
> are paid for the amount of work and stress we all do...
>
> Nowhere else can I think of in the professional industry
> where the pay got lower as time moves on, versus going
> higher...
>
> It's a real sad state of affairs...
>
 
Someone explained it this way many years ago: In a factory, you might start on one machine, move up to another machine, become a foreman, etc. It doesn't work that way in broadcasting. If you're going to make any money as a personality, you had better be brandable and bring in a heck of a lot of revenue. "Four and hit the door" is dead. <P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>
 
> Someone explained it this way many years ago: In a factory,
> you might start on one machine, move up to another machine,
> become a foreman, etc. It doesn't work that way in
> broadcasting. If you're going to make any money as a
> personality, you had better be brandable and bring in a heck
> of a lot of revenue. "Four and hit the door" is dead.

I think both of you have good points. Radio is unquestionably a seller's market, and the law of supply and demand dictates that salaries be low in radio. You're also correct that the promotional line in radio is a little different than what it is in other businesses. You really have to be able to think very well and learn multiple skills as a personality if you're going to make it to management. Although PD's and OM's tend to come from the programming side, the GM usually comes from sales. The GM is also at least involved in deciding who becomes an OM and/or a PD. So, you have to know and be able to work with the sales side of the building if you're even going to get one of those jobs.

Although I disagree with bierkenstock's implication that union labor would automatically mean a better situation for broadcasters, he definitely has a point that radio people tend to be at each other's throats when they could be working together. That not only makes for a poor working environment but also a good chance for the higher ups to play one person off of another. My own personal example was working for a small locally-owned company that later sold to a large corporate conglomerate. The owners of the small company all lived in the area and did a very remarkable job of keeping the company together. There was a real sense of camraderie that I had never seen anywhere else in ANY industry, especially in radio. Even after several format changes, most of the staff was kept together, and everyone was good friends. We spent our spare time together, and we made sincere efforts to help one another out, both on and off the job. Then, the company sold its seven radio stations to the corporate behemoth. Within two months, my dream job had become radio hell, and I was desperately trying to get out of it. The large corporation did not cause my, or anyone else's (and there were plenty of others), radio hell. The problem was that, as a staff, we began cutting each other's throats. Instead of saying, "We have a special situation. Let's stick together during the difficulties of this change," everyone reacted with fear and apprehension, and many decided the best way to protect their own job was to gun for someone else's. The result was an airstaff at nearly 100% turnover at the one year anniversary of the transaction, and all seven stations had changed PD's at least once during that year. The friendships that were once strong are, for the most part, no more, and the element of fear remains.

I was one of the lucky ones. I got out four months after the change. I got a new job paying $10,000/year more and still get to do weekend radio. It feels kind of odd to see many of my old friends again. I actually happened across them by accident last week as I ended up at an establishment that was hosting one of their listener parties. I was pleasantly surprised that many were glad to see me and even glad for me that I got out of there when I did.
 
I don't think it would either. And I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of unions. But I don't know of another alternative which would provide a structure for employees to work together.

>
> Although I disagree with bierkenstock's implication that
> union labor would automatically mean a better situation for
> broadcasters, he definitely has a point that radio people
> tend to be at each other's throats when they could be
> working together. That not only makes for a poor working
> environment but also a good chance for the higher ups to
> play one person off of another.
 
In private industry, unions are strongest when their members have a unique talent that is not easily replicated or quickly learned. The ML sports leagues are the best example.

Since small/medium market employees are not unique and for the other reasons you stated, they are not good for unionizing. Large market people are.


> I don't think it would either. And I'm not entirely
> comfortable with the idea of unions. But I don't know of
> another alternative which would provide a structure for
> employees to work together.
>
> > <P ID="signature">______________
[email protected]</P>
 
> In private industry, unions are strongest when their members
> have a unique talent that is not easily replicated or
> quickly learned. The ML sports leagues are the best
> example.
>
> Since small/medium market employees are not unique and for
> the other reasons you stated, they are not good for
> unionizing. Large market people are.
>
>
Working on the line at Ford's is a tough job but I don't think it qualifies as a "unique talent." Same for driving a big rig.
 
I don't think we need stupid requirements like not being allowed to touch equipment.<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom