This is probably a different (although related topic) but, there is a grey area that has come up with some positions.  I think Chris (or maybe Mike) mentioned in another forum that they hire musicians or a music director because the skills required are not something that any volunteer can do, which I would imagine is the case for other CTs as well. And I'm submitting that one could apply the same logic to choreographers and possibly other positions. And diva mentioned that there are people in production jobs that by choice don't do (or perhaps don't have the knowledge to do) the "homework" aspects of the job, but I've seen that occur in all production areas (from costumes, to choreography, to directing) - it happens and yes, even when professionals are hired. But when hiring a professional a certain level should be expected (even if they've accepted the job for less than their average pay), so there's an option of not hiring them again. Non-pros (those who don't make a living in the area of production in which they are working) that are paid are in a strange realm of being a volunteer but at the same time not being a volunteer- and emotions, egos, length of time spent as a volunteer come into play.  I don't claim to have answers but the issues are interesting to me.  I do think that leveling the playing field in stipends would help whether the pay is $0, or more.

 

And every group is different and I'm sorry if I lumped them together, but in my experience (which has included CTs in different parts of the U.S.) there has in every case been a large difference in pay for directors versus choreographers and I do question why.  It's possible that the CTs represented here are different from the theatres I've come in contact with.  But I guess I've seen a similar scale posted in the forums here and (perhaps too quickly) concluded that it's the same in most places. I do apologize if I've come to the wrong conclusion and/or excluded other staff who are also low on the pay scale. And, I apologize that this thread has gotten so off-topic.

Get over yourselves- all of you.

 

Eliminating pay won't cure the main problem here- that everyone THINKS he has the most important job or logs the most hours.

 

Pay enables theaters to attract talented people that do make some significant, unique sacrifice.  How much they pay and to whom is a considered judgment that can reasonably vary show to show.  But there is nothing wrong with pay as a concept.  Don't hate the game; hate the players.