Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkeye
Yea, stevie nicks should be incredibly proud, she may be the one example of reverse pay discrimination based on how much she brings to the table. Especially with those SYW tour figures. The person on stage the least and contributing the least to the songs when she’s not on lead had a staggeringly disproportionately high piece of the pie.
And yes, 8 get it, the drawing people in factor can not be ignored here. But in just looking at it from the angle of “equal pay for equal work” stevie won that game! She needs to be the face of the me too movements success stories edition!
Now please, no one gtake the above the wrong way, I’m diminishing the importance of the movement, just pointing out hilario A irony.
|
It depends on how you look at it and what you consider equal work. In the corporate world, you are rewarded for landing accounts, bringing in clients, etc., so you might have the same base salary as the person in the office next to you, but factor in bonuses and now you're making something very different. This is how Stevie earns money....by bringing in crowds.
Now, if you look at Lindsey on stage for the entire concert (even needlessly during Mick's interminable drum solo) and always having to do at least one thing (play guitar) or sometimes two (play and sing) while Stevie can leave the stage and never does more than one thing (sing), then Lindsey is putting in more time, "doing more work," and would be deserving of a higher salary from this point of view.
But honestly, the breakdown that David posted (which I'm still not sure is corroborated fact) never bothered me much. The men of FM have extremely limited earning potential away from the band, whereas Stevie can still bring in a tidy sum. For Mick to make a third as much as Stevie is a pretty big win for him. They all benefit financially from Fleetwood Mac, but the guys get bigger "raises" than she does when they all come together.