Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'

[Sandy Thatcher <sgt3@psu.edu>]

I agree entirely. Few, if any, editors are in this for the money. 
And few have significant enough leverage to demand payment if the 
journal owner doesn't want to pay. It is the rare journal for 
which only one scholar is suitable as editor. As I said earlier, 
any editor that demands payment from us will find himself or 
herself out of the job quickly enough.

I might use an analogy here. I served on the Board of Directors 
of the Copyright Clearance Center for about ten years before any 
stipend was provided. The stipend I get now is nice, but it 
doesn't affect my decision to continue on this Board one way or 
the other. Most of us are not motivated to serve in such 
capacities by monetary rewards.

Sandy Thatcher
Penn State University Press

> I would suspect that most editors of scholarly journals do this 
> as a part time situation in conjunction with their primary work 
> as professors in their various fields.  The numbers of academic 
> journal editors, outside of corporations and professional 
> publishing, who edit journal(s) as their full time employment is 
> probably very small.  Thus, I would argue, information about 
> what they are paid being available probably wouldn't have much 
> effect on anything.
>
> For example, Professor X of Big Name University works as a law 
> professor and gets $10,000 a year for editing the Journal of 
> Silly Legal Cases on the side.  Assume he's probably making 
> $150,000 a year -- the extra $10000 is just not enough, in my 
> view, to either sway him not to be an editor or to demand more 
> money.  His fee covers his time and trouble for the hassle of 
> being an editor, but he doesn't depend on it in any real 
> economic sense that matters e.g. he needs the money to buy food 
> or pay his rent.  Professor X has no real economic incentive to 
> demand $20,000 a year because the publisher will simply get a 
> new editor -- making Professor X's cost for his demand $10,000. 
> If you assume individuals act in their own economic self 
> interest Professor X will go for the situation that pays him 
> $160,000 yearly as opposed to any situation that results in less 
> than that. (And, actually, if you look into it, I would suspect 
> that many people who have marketable skills (law, medicine, 
> engineering) don't serve as editors simply because they can make 
> more money on the side working in their field of expertise e.g. 
> being a consultant, being a doctor, whatever)
>
> Karl Bridges
> Bailey Howe Library
> University of Vermont
> Burlington, VT  05405
> karl.bridges@uvm.edu
>
>
> Quoting Anthony Watkinson <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>:
>
> >  Actually Joe I think that publishers do not post on such matters is
> >  because they know other publishers are lurking there and do not want to
> >  expose their policies to their rivals. I suspect very few editors read
> >  this list.
> >
> >  As I am posting from my home office and work part-time and not in a
> >  senior position for a publisher I feel able to say more than I would if
> >  I was CEO of Elsevier.
> >
> >  I notice that Sally Morris gives more detail about policies that sound
> >  very similar to those I am used to, though, since her time as a
> >  publisher, heavy technology items like manuscript submission systems
> >  have added to the editorial costs never mind reluctance of universities
> > to continue funding.
> >
> > Anthony