U.S. Olympic CEO deserves credit for decision to take pay cut, but she and board still should be shown the door
/
USOPC CEO Sarah Hirshland, left, and USOPC board chair Susanne Lyons before the U.S. Olympic Hall of Fame Class of 2019 induction ceremony. (Getty Images.)
When it comes to tone-deafness and managerial ineptitude, I thought I had seen and heard it all in my nearly 40 years covering the leadership and operations of the U.S. Olympic Committee.
I should have known better.
I feel that way even though U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee chief Sarah Hirshland executive has, to her credit, agreed to take a voluntary pay cut of an unspecified amount from her $600,000 annual salary, as she revealed in a Friday statement to Globetrotting.
The USOC may have changed its name to the USOPC last July, but it has not changed the spots that have made its operations a confounding detriment to the athletes it is supposed to serve.
The USOPC bottomed out morally in its untenable decision to ask Congress for $200 million of the federal coronavirus stimulus bill funds, as first reported Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal.
And, ethical issues notwithstanding, it seems no one at the USPOC realized that the request contradicts the philosophical fundament that has underpinned the USOPC’s argument during a decades-long fight with the International Olympic Committee over the percentage of money it receives from the U.S. broadcast rights-holder and the IOC’s global sponsors. The USOPC’s entire claim to that money, defensible even if it offended much of the world, is that it has no government funding, unlike other nations’ Olympic committees.
Remember that longtime USOPC sales pitch to the American public? “America doesn’t send athletes to the Olympics, Americans do.”
It makes no difference that this was apparently to be a one-time request for relief. Had it had been granted, it would have potentially exposed the USOPC to the legal consequences of being a “state actor” and rekindled the debate over whether the richest country in the world should be receiving such a big slice of those two IOC pies.
And imagine the chutzpah of asking from money for a Congress whose bipartisan Senate subcommittee found the USOPC negligent in its mishandling of the Larry Nassar sexual abuse case in gymnastics and of similar cases in other sports. That negligence has led to a bill that, if passed, would allow Congress to dissolve the USOC board of directors for failure to exercise its oversight responsibility.
The time to dissolve the USOPC board - or, at the very least, replace its chairperson - is now. Hirshland should also be asked to step down.
With an extra year before the next Olympics and logistical plans already in place to give Team USA the materiel and other support it will need in Tokyo, there is no reason to fear the impact of yet another leadership change.
Hirshland et al. failed U.S. athletes in their lockstep acquiescence to the IOC’s indefensible stands about postponement of the 2020 Winter Olympics until (and even after) the IOC conceded Sunday postponement was a possibility. (Two days later, the possibility became reality.)
The request to Congress shows an utter lack of perspective. People are dying, lives are being torn apart by job losses, health care providers are risking their lives - and the USOPC wants money to help its athletes do better in sporting events? Really?
Add to that Hirshland’s admission to the Wall Street Journal that the $200 million figure came from a “back-of-napkin” assessment from the National Governing Bodies in charge of individual Olympic sports. You’re kidding, right? Congress obviously thought so by not including the request in the stimulus package.
As my colleague Alan Abrahamson pointed out in a column Thursday, there is no doubt the USOPC and the NGBs face a huge financial challenge. The USOPC’s email request to Congress estimated a $800 million loss related to coronavirus cancellations to all the organizations under the USOPC umbrella.
“The USOPC did not and is not asking for any funding for our organization,” Hirshland said in a statement originally provided to the Washington Post. “The request for funds to be paid directly to athletes and National Governing Bodies was made in light of the unprecedented impact of the COVID-19 virus on our domestic sport community, specifically focused on interruption of athlete training and earning opportunities, and the cancellation of the hundreds of revenue-generating events managed by the independent NGBs. On short notice we surveyed NGBs and then made additional assumptions about the current and future impact of the pandemic on athlete financial support. “
That’s still no excuse for the insensitivity in asking Congress for money. The USOPC tried to defend itself by saying it would not have been the direct recipient of the stimulus money but that it would go to the NGBs. (The USOPC already covers much of the operating expenses for some NGBs, so what’s the difference?) No matter who gets the money, it was essentially earmarked for what now has become a trivial pursuit of medals.
“Some athletes may be forced to retire prematurely,” the USOPC said in its email request to Congress, according to the Wall Street Journal citation of the email. Yes, that’s unfortunate. . .but OMG, get a grip.
Hirshland should not be the only USOPC employee to take a pay cut on what should be her final USOPC salary. Board chair Susanne Lyons should turn back some of the more than $500,000 she received as interim CEO in 2018. And there should be similar cuts for the other highest paid USOPC employees.
After all, CEOs at many major companies in the United States have decided not to take salary the rest of this year. Yes, that is partly symbolic for these wealthy CEOs, but it still is a strong statement of solidarity with their employees.
“In light of the circumstances related to the impact of the coronavirus and the recent Tokyo 2020 Games postponement, the USOPC executive leadership team continues to gather facts and find ways to support our sport community. As a start, I have made the decision to take a voluntary pay reduction,” Hirshland said in her statement to me.
How about the chief executives of NGBs taking cuts, so they too can pass some on to athletes and perhaps save jobs of lower-paid staff members? In the most recent tax filings available for five of the most important NGBs (in medal counts and TV viewer interest), Max Siegel of USA Track & Field had a salary of $1.14 million; Tim Hinchey of USA Swimming, salary of $699,000; Li Li Leung of USA Gymnastics, reported annual salary of $450,000 (she has not been on the job long enough to show up in a tax filing); David Raith of USA Figure Skating, salary of $366,000; and Tiger Shaw of the U.S. Ski and Snowboard Association, total compensation of $800,000.
I asked all of them, either directly or through their public relations department, if they would accept a cut. Three have responded so far, neither answering the specific question.
“Our team is hard at work with stimulus brainstorming and budget forecasting to look at every option and do our best to support our athletes, clubs and employees,” Belle McLemore, USA Swimming managing director of communications, said in a text message.
USATF public relations director Susan Hazzard said in a text message, “USATF is considering all scenarios in this complex time.”
Ellie Rutland, vice-president of USA Gymnastics, said in an email, “We are currently evaluating all financial considerations as we assess the potential financial impact of Covid-19.”
After alluding to it in a Twitter post, USA Weightlifting CEO Phil Andrews confirmed in a direct message he will take no salary for at least two months “to ensure we have cashflow enough to pay athlete funding and our staff. “ In his organization’s latest tax filing, Andrews’ salary was $118,000.
The USOPC and its affiliated NBGs all are nonprofits, but their staffing numbers and salaries make many look like for-profit corporations, not organizations whose purpose is service to athletes, many of whom live hand-to-mouth. This is especially true of the USOPC.
For the third time in the past two decades, the USOPC leadership has made egregious mistakes. Men and women both have failed at the top.
Its current leadership should meet the same fate as the other two. The door. is over there.
