Metropolitan Museum of Art Plans Job Cuts and Restructuring
This article talks about how the Metropolitan Museum's ambitious plans may have been too much. The museum is already facing a $10 million deficit and may escalade to $40 million due to its new additions. To fix this, they announced a 24-month financial restructuring plan that will likely include staff reductions, slower construction of its new wing, and reduced programming. 70% of the museum's expenses go towards salaries, so reducing workers is sadly essential. Once this 24-month span is over, the museum plans to move its finances back to normal.
I have noticed this is a tendency when many companies and exhibits expand. It seems they do not thoroughly plan for all of the expenses and the employees suffer from their poor planning. I'm curious to see if 24 months will really fix the immense mess they got themselves into.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, it seems like the Met tried to make some positive changes to incentive more museum goers, yet this plan actually backfired afterwards since they are left with a "ballooning amount of debt." It makes sense, therefore, that their next move would be to cut workers since a company has to pay into their benefits and tax purposes which can get costly. In the article, I was actually surprised that the salaries cost the company 70% of their total expenses. Although it is unfortunate that many individuals will be out of work, it definitely does make sense for the museum to do this in order to keep the longevity of the institution. However, when I visited the museum last summer, I noticed that there is a "suggested" price to enter the museum meaning people can have the option to pay less or nothing at all-- perhaps if they made this suggested price a concrete number, then they could earn more revenue from this and be able to keep more workers.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, this is what is starting to happen for many companies and places. Employing staff is a huge cost, and if they don't need all of them working, then why have them? Capital is becoming cheaper to have and makes more sense for the long run. I hope the museum can reduce their deficit as much as possible without letting a lot of people go.
ReplyDeleteIt is rather unfortunate the the Museum is forced to lower the cost of its labor, but it is truly a necessary change. It makes me wonder if there was a better way to estimate the costs of the expansion so that the decreases wages or labor might have been avoided or at least expected, rather than sudden like its happened now. Hopefully the layoffs or reduced wages are minimal, but it does seem like the necessary and appropriate response to the circumstances.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the previous comments, it is unfortunate to see that employees will have to be laid off of work because the company did not know how to estimate their expenses. I am interested to see how the next 24 months looks like for them. Would it actually work as they plan or will it fail completely?
ReplyDelete