Gender justice and the pews
Posted by Carol Howard Merritt on 04 Nov 2009 at 01:55 pm | Tagged as: clergy women, salaries, social justice
Note to the women in the pews… it’s time to wake up.
Why do women suddenly change the rules of their lives when they walk into the church? I am, of course, talking about the fact that churches are female dominated organizations–women take up most of our pew space, a majority of our membership roles, and they do most of our volunteer work, and yet, the church persistently discriminates against women.
High-powered women walk into churches that do not ordain women as clergy every day. Young, professional, educated women, who work on Capitol Hill, attend PCA congregations that do not even allow for women elders. And even in our progressive churches, fair-minded women pat themselves on the back, because there is a female Associate Pastor who leads the children’s sermon, not realizing that the AP is receiving half the salary that the male is making.
Most of it is ignorance, I suppose. The women in the pews have never thought about what this discrimination does to female clergy. They are in church to commune with God, to get away from the frustrations of work, and so they do not notice the struggles of women in collars.
Most women clergy are not in a position where they can complain about discrimination. It is frowned upon in our profession to talk about money. And if a woman is in a particularly difficult job situation, she is often powerless, so leaving is much easier than fighting.
In other words, if the very real discrimination is going to stop in our congregations, if our churches are going to become sources of hope, rather than models of discrimination, then the women in the pews are going to need to roll up their sleeves and become advocates.
What can the women and men who are advocates for gender justice do?
1) Become aware of salary ranges of other clergy professionals in your area. Salary information is very easy to get in most of our denominations, and if you take a good look at the salaries in your area, you might find how women are paid much less in our churches. How does your pastor compare to the men in the area?
2) Become aware of the salary ranges on the church staff. How well is the female clergy person paid on your staff? How does her salary compare with the organist, choir director, and secretary? Is there a male pastor who is getting more money, even if he doesn’t have more experience or education? If there is a discrepancy, how can you make the church aware of it and fix it?
3) Do not allow personal information to taint the personnel discussions. Information like, “Well, I’m sure that her husband makes a good salary,” or “But she doesn’t have any children and he does,” or “She is single, she lives in an apartment, she doesn’t really need the money” should not be part of the discussion. Young married women are the head of household 40% of the time, and single women should not be paid less. These discussions should not be taking place, and they certainly should not be factors in determining salaries.
People look to their churches for moral guidance. What are we telling the businessmen in our congregations when we allow these things to persist? And what can we communicate if we begin to ask the right questions?
All I can say is AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.
I wish this weren’t true, but it is.
I’ve been in this situation, Carol, and you are exactly right. I was hired for an associate pastor position, and my total package was less than half of the senior pastor’s (male) salary. My time off for an ill family member was questioned, because it was not my spouse or child (because I don’t have those)! The senior pastor laughed about an applicant for my position who questioned the justice in the salary disparity.
It’s so clear to me now, but then, I was just grateful to be working.
Yes but addressing AP and Head of Staff (Senior Pastors) salaray differentials and gender differentials are different issues and your mixing them. I’m a male associate making half what the male senior makes… thats a seperate issue. Not dissagreeing with your point – just saying using poor numbers, and conflating arguments, makes this dismissable when it should not be.
Andrew,
Well, from the overwhelming amount of personal feedback that I have received from men and women in the last 24 hours, there are a great number of people who are not dismissing these issues so readily.
While men may be in the same category as associates, they have much more opportunity to move up after a couple of years, while women often end up as career associates.
Carol,
Your point to Andrew about men having more opportunity to “move up” is certainly valid, but I’m not sure he was dismissing the broader issue of gender-based compensation discrimination.
The issue of two associates with similar experience levels, one married male and one single female, being compensated very differently is an egregious injustice at the congregational level. It requires a loud an unapologetic cry for justice.
The issue of men consistently being called to serve as senior leaders of our largest (and best paying) congregations over equally well-qualified women is an issue tied to deep-rooted (and often subtle or invisible) biases that are held by members and leaders, conservatives and liberals, women and men, all across our denominations. It is a problem that requires a sustained (and exhausting) period of education, re-education, and reminder at all levels of our churches.
The issue of a 55 year old senior pastor with 30 years of experience and a terminal degree being paid twice (or three times) as much as a 34 year old associate (male or female) with far less experience is, to me, not primarily an issue of justice. While I know something about the difficulty of making it on an associate’s salary, I also know that associates are often paid as well or better than our colleagues (male and female) who serve in very small congregations. The fact that someone with a different role, more responsibility, and more expertise and/or experience is paid more does not (of itself) make us underpaid.
In some denominations, salary and compensation is tied directly to experience and cost of living and not to the specific role or congregation in which a person serves. I’m not sure that this is a great idea, but I wonder if this system (or something like it) would begin to address some of the biases in the system.
As always, thanks for your insights Carol—you always make me think.
Sam
Agreed. People should definitely be paid according to education and experience.
I’m not sure that the inner-staff inequities should be so high though.
Here’s a report on comparative stats for PCUSA clergy (although I know that not everyone here is presbyterian…): http://www.pcusa.org/acswp/pdf/acswppayequity.pdf
A key finding: Women earn an average of $42,698, while men earn
$54,117; men’s earnings are 27 percent higher than women’s.
In comparison, in the UMC, the gender gap is 9%. And they are taking important steps to remedy the disparity.
What is the PCUSA doing?
you touch on the issue of young, professional, educated women choosing churches that actively discriminate against women. This baffles me, but I see it as evidence that unfortunately much(not all) of church choice has been reduced to a consumer decision along the lines of “I may not like the artist’s values, but I enjoy his/her art.” They see church as a consumer good separate from their individual understanding of themselves.
Thanks for the link.
If I am reading correctly though, the 9% gender gap in the UMC “exists between the wages of clergywomen and clergymen with the same years of experience and same type of appointment” (p21). Conversely, the 27% (almost $12,000) gender gap among Presbyterians does not seem to take into account type of call, years of experience or even full-time vs. part-time.
I’m saying apples and oranges on the discrepancy–although your question of “What is the PC(USA) doing?” is no less urgent just because we’re not as far behind the Methodists as we thought.
S
Carol, thanks for your good thoughts and discussion. There is another aspect of this – that of the general issue of “first call” second career folks who are offered/paid at “entry level” salaries or close to it b/c they are “first call.” Previous relevant experiences and degrees may often be dismissed/discounted (teacher, lawyer, nurse, adminstrator of multi-staffed departments with budgets of .5 million$, counselng, social work…) Add the gender issue and it can get even more interesting…add children for a single parent…still often paid less than younger male counterparts with children but less translateable experience ….and divorced women with younger children may face even a more difficult time landing a first call than divorced men with children, and then offered less than a single-parent dad. Don’t have stats. Have stories. Sad. The justice issue, as you and others descibe, is about paying comparable salaries for comparable training/experience and position responsibilities.
Much of what Sam has said resonates with me. Carol, this does not undermine the validity of your main point. However, statistics that are not comparing “apples to apples” with similar FT/PT, experience, etc., are too susceptible to manipulation and (has been mentioned previously and would be too bad) dismissal.
Again, while I agree with much of what you have said, I would take issue with “inner-office” inequities. Particular specialties aside (sports/medicine), I would venture that difficult to find an industry or organization that does not compensate individuals (regardless of gender) with 25 yrs experience and demonstrated success and leadership* at two or three times employees in entry level positions (*dicey words, I’m aware, but we are talking about churches that are in a position to hire multiple pastors). At times, I feel as though our generation needs to be a bit more patient when it comes to reaping the rewards of hard work, dedication, and service.
just some thoughts…
I’m distressed that “Associate” is equated so often with “entry level positions.” Many associates have many years of experience, and since women so often end up career associates then the fact that Associates are generally paid less (often to do MORE, it would seem), and since female associates tend to be paid less than male associates, I would say we have a problem here. and the problem may lie BOTH in gender inequity AND in the language of “Associate Pastor” which is not always an entry-level position. Some of us stay there, without cost of living increases, without raises, without ability to afford housing in the areas of our churches, without appreciation, without understanding of just how much work we do…while we watch the Head of Staff’s salary go up 3% or more a year.
teri,
Because this “discussion” is held via computer, it is unfortunate that sometimes we type things that are unclear or interpreted differently than we intended.
So, just as in many industries/organizations, persons of comparable experience should be paid in a comparable manner. I might offer a parallel of long-time English Department Head and long-time Composition teacher for Senior Pastor and Associate Pastor in that case. There are some responsibilities and accountabilities that should likely translate to *some* additional compensation, but nothing outrageous.
However, what I believed to be under discussion, and what my comments referenced, was a situation more properly analogized to an English Department Head as compared to a Composition teacher who has been out of college for just a few years. These folks are compensated differently, and for good reason.
I was simply (and ineffectively, by the looks of it) trying to echo an earlier comment, pasted at the end of the paragraph, by offering that disparity in pay for people working within the same organization is not uncommon in any field, and may, at times, be justified: “The fact that someone with a different role, more responsibility, and more expertise and/or experience is paid more does not (of itself) make us underpaid.”
Sorry for the confusion.
As for your comments about “Some of us stay there, without cost of living increases, without raises, without ability to afford housing in the areas of our churches, without appreciation, without understanding of just how much work we do…while we watch the Head of Staff’s salary go up 3% or more a year.”
This is certainly an issue, and one not only to be addressed in this forum. I might offer that this situation seems to be a failure attributable to many parties; in particular, the Senior Pastor should not be allowing this to happen with any Associate Pastor who is fulfilling the call that the congregation, and God, have extended to them in that place. In some regard, I would say that responsibility lies with the Personnel committee for better congregational communication among other things, as well as the Associate pastor him/herself for not confronting these issues with Personnel and Pastoral staff. As a pastoral leader, I could not imagine accepting a raise/increase/adjustment that is not offered to other pastors on staff unless there were some compelling and agreed upon reason that is clear to me, the personnel committee, congregation, and particularly the other pastor!
All the best in what sounds like a bit of a struggle for you and/or our colleagues (you used “us” – hope it’s not an unfair assumption on my part)
The reason why it’s hard not to let go of the comparisons, even with uneven positions, is because women have often been shut out of the better paid positions.
Teri is correct to point out the Associate Pastor=entry level position concern. It’s a problem that extends beyond this conversation. People see the AP as an entry level position, so churches pay starting salaries, even when the person is well qualified. My church is very good to me (they are the reason I can write about this stuff on behalf of other women, because I don’t face it as much) but… because I am an associate, people in my congregation are often shocked to find out that I have ten years of experience, that I was a solo pastor for six years, that I’ve written two books, and that I lead conferences all over the world.
But… apples and oranges aside… we can all agree that it’s a problem, right?
So, is there any way that we can solve the problem? I think we can, at least, start asking some important questions.
It is interesting that it is mainly men who are arguing the fine points. Let’s not get lost in the weeds. Go to any presbytery in the continental United States and compare salaries, opportunities, increases and it will be easy to find the problem in inequality. How many men have been the head of the Presbyterian Foundation compared to women? % of head of staffs to women currently in the ministry? How many women executives, staff members that are not support staff at the PC(USA) headquarters? That is why the PC(USA)’s report was so startling in that it was depressing and so widely ignored.
I think that often these fine points allow us to gloss over the real problem of serious systemic inequity in the Presbyterian church. We really have no excuse any longer. We must start advocating, rallying and agitating for women’s equity. Education will not do it alone.
Brian is right, and he echoes the question that Carol asked earlier, “What is the PC(USA) doing?”
I am a member of a rural Presbytery–there are no “prestigious” pulpits or particularly highly paid positions here, and many pastors of both genders labor for very low pay. Still, anecdotally, it looks like men in this presbytery are paid more than women. As a male pastor who is compensated fairly–what should I do; and what should we do?
It seems to me like this is really a grassroots problem. Churches, through PNCs, get to call their own pastors and this is where our subtle (and not so subtle) biases really shine. My bet is that a great number of PNCs end up with a woman or two on their “short list” before ultimately deciding that a man is a “better fit.” I think that the only way to substantively change the current reality of larger, better paying churches calling men over women is to work at the PNC level–with both education and advocacy. (And advocacy at that level gets a little dicey.)
Is there a way for Presbyteries at the COM level to commit themselves to better train and guide PNCs to give full and generous consideration to female candidates? Is there a better way? I fear that if we’re not at least trying to talk about ways to address these issues then we (especially we several men) are just a bunch of whiny bleeding-hearts.
Brian,
One part of your question I can answer:
(How many women executives, staff members that are not support staff at the PC(USA) headquarters?)
Of the 14 “highest ranking” executives in the PC(USA), 7 are female, including our “chief executive.”
Go ahead and speak about the systemic inequity, but do so in the knowledge that at the highest levels of our church organization, it does not exist, and that the church could emulate their efforts. Speak positively when positive speech is due.
Please read the organizational chart: http://www.pcusa.org/gamc/structurechart.pdf
Carol
you have hit a topic that I have wrestled with a lot. I am the primary breadwinner in our household with a loving hubby who moves and finds a job wherever we go. As I pray about my next call, I wonder about salary. Do I stay where I am even though it is presbytery minimum because it is a job?
As I look around our denomination’s resources, we have little guidance for what personnel committees should do. When I was an AP, I received less than half of what the HoS received in compensation. The HoS used to get upset when the personnel committee would determine raises during the yearly review. If they did not give what he viewed as equitable than he got upset. One year we both received $500 increases. He complained because it was a higher percentage increase for me than for him. So how do we determine what is equitable?
There are always exceptions to the rules and yes I am pleased to see that our denomination has 7 women in chief roles. But as a woman, where do I look to see the role models of women in HoS positions? In my presbytery, there are no women HoS even though we have a number of churches with AP’s. Do the women see their gifts differently or is it the churches that don’t want a woman?
I know that my last question does not relate to the salary issue directly, but salaries are impacted by your position. Currently I am serving a small rural church as a solo pastor making less than newly ordained AP’s in my presbytery. So when I think about being broke I keep wondering about jumping ship from my small rural church and going to where the money can be found ~~which is hard as a woman.
Matt~
I can see why you would be confused. I meant executive presbyters, but your point is well taken. It is wonderful thing that we should celebrate. Now, can we get to the broad based systemic issue in the Presbyterian Church? Merely pointing out the one area where there is success is not going to move us in the direction that we need to go. Have you read the deplorable report of women in the ministry that Carol is pointing out, it is embarrassing. Take a look at the professors at PC (USA) institutions. McCormick is the only seminary that has parity at all. Again, I am proud that the GAMC has parity, but it is a hollow victory if my colleagues are shut out from promotions, equity in pay and real opportunities.
Sam~
You are really where the rubber hits the road. I grew up around rural ministries and Carol and I have worked in them. Just getting a minimum salary agreed upon in these places is a big deal. I think that Presbyteries have to redistribute some of their assets in return for congregation’s movement in the right direction on these issues. I think the same about the PC (USA) as a whole. It may mean that some sacred cows don’t get funded at the risk of supporting ministers, churches and ministry.
Brian-
I downloaded the report, but it malfunctioned or something so I didn’t read it in its entirety, admittedly.
To put myself out there, I think that administratively (GAMC and Presbytery Exec), we are actually doing pretty well. The two presbyteries I have been a member of have been staffed (over the years I’ve been there) by 3 EPs (2 female) and 2 AEPs (both female), and the only friend of mine that has moved from parish to EP has also been female. Sure, its anecdotal, but I would think (naively, I don’t know, I’d have to see the statistics) that we are operating at or above the distribution traditionally used for compliance with governmental “Affirmative Action” programs: that the % of “non-majority” people employed by an organization in particular positions meets or exceeds the % of “non-majority” people qualified/certified/employable in the field.
So, my hope would be that as female PhD candidates, female pastors increase, the church would do better than keep pace with these percentages. The hard thing to quantify is the #s of people qualified or employable. For example, while McCormick’s parity is admirable, I would venture (again, I could very well be wrong) that the total # of female PhDs w/teaching experience in, say, Old Testmant, would be fewer than the total # of males with comparable OT degrees/experience, if for no other reason than the # of profs near retirement are weighted heavily to the male side b/c of the educational opportunities typically not available to women for decades. Thus, I might offer that it’s a bit unfair to expect seminaries to have equal %s at this point. New hires – hopefully! Totals – I don’t see that as possible… yet! A similar point might be made about women in head of staff positions… tracking, monitoring, demanding/encouraging PROGRESS is vital. But demanding equality now might be a bit unfair?
Brian, I know that you are a contrarian, but so am I… one of these days we will be able to say, “yep, that’s right.”
Our female pastor is the solo (head of staff) pastor at my church.
In my presbytery, pretty much ever competant pastor gets paid okay, except two male HoS pastors get paid A LOT! I bet that, if you toss out the extremely large, multi-staff churches, that there would be a fair (perhaps not perfect) amount of equality.
So, if we are to agitate, lets stick it to those big churches! Make them hire some women pastors!
Matt~
Yep, that’s right we are both contrarians. I do hope that you are able to download the report, it was maddening and depressing. It was very frustrating to hear very little about it in the PC (USA) as a whole.
My problem is with the rah rah clubs that say we are fine, nothing needs change and slow and steady as it goes (not saying you are in that category). Plus, it seems that many of the women are agreeing with Carol’s assessment in public. I am sure she would tell you that many more who have contacted her in private. It has only been men clergy and women laity who have usually said things are swimmingly. You might want to talk with some of the women on GAMC and ask their experiences at getting to that point. I would guess many women are afraid to voice their opinion by being branded a troublemaker in the denomination. It is already hard enough for them to get the jobs they deserve in our small world.
Richard~
Is she a solo pastor or HOS. She is probably not both.
Andy~
That may not be true in every presbytery. When we began ten years ago in South Louisiana Presbytery there wasn’t a minimum salary or maternity leave policy. I know full-time women who made $15,000 a year cash and housing. In many presbyteries there isn’t any adequate childcare policies. I would hate to say that there may still be some presbyteries that are not as good as your presbytery. Yet, I think agitation for female HOS would be an admirable start.
I’m going to take a closer look at the latest reports and see if my perception about pay in my pres is true (I know the part about the top two paid pastors is true). If I’m wrong, I’ll post a note here.
Brothers and sisters –
Let me begin by saying that I believe any inequity based on gender is unjust, and unjustifiable.
Having said that, I’d like to present another theological perspective to the issue of clergy remuneration, both because I have not yet seen it addressed above, and because it is one I have worked hard to share with churches that I have served.
I remember the rather formal wording on the piece of paper that outlined my very first terms of call: “In order that you may be free from financial burdens in your service to this congregation, we obligate ourselves to remunerate you according to the following terms:”
That phrase has long stuck with me, because it offered a perspective that is different from the rest of the world’s — i.e., that we will pay you not according to some (rather arbitrarily determined) measure of “worth,” but rather according to how much you need to be free from financial burdens, so that you may devote yourself more fully to the task of ministry. It seems a wonderfully practical and faithful application of the maxim, “from each according to his [sic] ability, to each according to his need.” As such, it also seems to me a more just distribution, at least from a biblical perspective. And since the pastor’s terms of call are publicly voted on by the congregation, I suggest that it offers a powerful opportunity to witness to stewardship in action.
Have I followed this model? It has been an uneven path. I accepted my first call for $11,000 in large measure because that’s all the church could afford, but I made clear to them that my wife’s salary made it possible for us to live with me receiving such a relatively small salary, and so the congregation should not feel any shame in that. I spoke at length, and strongly, about it to leadership at my second call, and refused tremendous pressure from a senior colleague to accept an unneeded increase in salary so that he would not look bad accepting an increase in his own package. Still, there were many who did not “buy into” (no pun intended – !) this perspective. And yes, this means that if my rich uncle were to die and leave me a fortune, then I should not receive any pay from the church. And by the same token, if (heaven forbid) my family were to encounter sudden privation or financial difficulties, then the church would step up (as best as they were able) to help fill the gap.
As always (with regards to issues of money and its stewardship), I think it’s very much an area where the church can bear a profound and practical witness. I offer it here as an alternative to the reigning paradigm.
She is considered HOS. She is also the only pastor too, so I guess she’s also a solo pastor, I don’t know. I know I was on the PNC that hired her, and we advertised it as an HOS.
So glad to see this discussion. Recently I have been doing research (interviewing women pastors) on gender issues that women face today as they seek ordination and in their first and second calls in Presbyterian and Methodist churches. The female pastors in their thirties often say gender is not an issue for them in their work (I think the implication is that they believe they have been able to move beyond the gender inequities of past generations). The PC(USA) report and this discussion shed much needed light on the situation.
I interviewed two women pastors from Eastern European churches a couple of days ago; the one women (age 56) is now a senior pastor but had to wait over 6 years between finishing seminary and being ordained; the younger pastor(age 33) had experienced no gender discrimination and was surprised to learn of her older colleague’s experiences back in the eighties. Another of the women pastors realized she did not know the history of ordination in her country and when women had first been ordained. We had very little time to talk, but our short discussion was fascinating.
This is a timely discussion, thank you.
You touch on many areas which concern women in ministry. As an Anglican Minister (not PCUSA) I have seen and experienced much that would be shocking to the average church goer, indeed frequently these incidents turn people off ‘church’. There are many women ordained yearly, answering the call, but are more than likely to be in unpaid posts.
Prejudice was enshrined in the Act of Synod, when women were accepted for ordination in the ’90’s. There is a great absence of non-partisan discussion. I wonder that it is the case that churches mirror society. There are good pastors and bad pastors, regardless of gender, or church affiliation. Until true meritocracy, in the sphere of leadership, is established this inequality will remain, so too the dissonant voices ignored.
It is incumbent on all people of faith, not just leaders, to draw people to a place where acceptance of personal faith is possible.