Quick Take
Janus of Santa Cruz does a great job treating addiction, but a poor job of caring for its employees, writes Holly Rowan Chandler, who worked at Janus from 2023 until 2024. Here, Chandler outlines her frustration at the pay gap between those doing the emotionally taxing work of caring for people with addiction and the salary of the Janus CEO: “The CEO's raise in just one year exceeded the annual salary of some employees and resulted in the CEO’s salary being double the state’s median salary for nonprofit CEOs in 2023, as reported by ZipRecruiter.” Something, she insists, needs to change.
Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.
Janus of Santa Cruz has a stellar history of treating addiction and recently celebrated the first anniversary of its sobering center. During the event, CEO Amber Williams told the crowd that one of the center’s goals was “to serve the common purpose of collaboration and innovation, supporting the future health and wellness of our community.” I found this striking given Janus’ documented failure to prioritize the health and wellness of its own employees – the very foundation of the organization.
Janus offered employees such low, “poverty” wages that in 2017 employees unionized. Employees were making as little as $12 to $13 per hour, not enough to support themselves and their families. Union members made little headway, and by September 2019, the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) at Janus initiated its first strike, largely over continued low wages.
Between 2017 and 2019, more than 60% of the workforce had departed, resulting in disrupted care and long waiting lists for new clients. Of the 53 staff members who voted to join NUHW in 2017, only five remained by late 2019. At the time, Janus management and county officials had secured close to $500,000 in federal funding, but none of it – or any other funding – went to improve employee wages. In 2019, the National Labor Relations Board cited Janus for retaliating against a union employee who advocated for additional restrooms for the sobering center during a collective bargaining session.
Fast forward to 2023, and ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer revealed that Janus reported an annual revenue of $15.5 million, with the CEO earning $202,683. Meanwhile, in a troubling display of prioritization, organization officials begrudgingly paid counselors $21 an hour – just above the newly mandated minimum wage of $20 per hour, and just above the salary of many fast food employees.
Based on these figures, the CEO earned approximately 371% more than the average counselor.
Meanwhile, raises – including cost of living adjustments (COLA) – were withheld that year, even as the CEO’s salary increased by $46,461 from 2022, a 29.7% jump.
I know employees did not get these raises because I was employed at Janus at the time and was myself denied a COLA raise. The CEO’s raise in just one year exceeded the annual salary of some employees and resulted in the CEO’s salary being double the state’s median salary for nonprofit CEOs in 2023, as reported by ZipRecruiter.
During my own time as a Janus of Santa Cruz employee, I witnessed how demanding and emotionally exhausting the work was. Supporting people struggling with addiction requires immense psychological energy. The emotional toll was relentless, yet the compensation hardly reflected the intensity of the work.
Burnout set in quickly, not just for me but for so many of my colleagues who were equally overworked and undervalued. Seeing executives collect comfortable salaries while front-line staff struggled to make ends meet only deepened the frustration. It’s striking that front-line staff are expected to work for below-market pay out of goodwill, while the CEO seeks compensation far above the norm for California nonprofit leaders.
This glaring pay disparity is not just an isolated issue, but reflective of a broader problem in the nonprofit sector. Many organizations that rely on public funding and donations justify exorbitant executive salaries under the guise of attracting top-tier talent. However, when front-line workers – those directly responsible for providing services – struggle to make ends meet, it calls into question whether these organizations truly prioritize their mission over their leadership’s financial gain.
Apparently, these organizations aren’t focused on recruiting top-tier staff for client-facing roles, which seems like misplaced priorities to me.
Moreover, underpaying front-line workers has real consequences for service delivery. High turnover rates among counselors at addiction treatment facilities like Janus mean that clients often lack continuity of care, which is critical for successful recovery. Given the prevalence of addiction and homelessness in Santa Cruz County, this should be a concern for all residents.
The loss of experienced staff diminishes the quality of services provided, leaving vulnerable populations at an even greater disadvantage. If nonprofit executives were genuinely committed to the well-being of their clients, ensuring fair wages and job stability for their employees should be a top priority.
I believe public scrutiny is crucial for holding these organizations accountable.
Based on my experience in the sector, public scrutiny is often the only type of pressure that gets executives to pay attention to the voices of entry-level staff. While nonprofits play a vital role in addressing social issues, we must not allow them to operate with the same financial excesses as for-profit corporations, particularly when their funding comes from our taxpayer dollars.
We need greater transparency in executive compensation, stricter oversight of fund allocation and policies that ensure wage increases benefit all employees. Additionally, capping the pay gap between executives and entry-level employees as a condition for maintaining nonprofit status could promote fairer compensation structures.
The nonprofit sector should serve as a beacon of ethical leadership, not a haven for executives seeking financial gain at the expense of local workers and the most vulnerable of our community, whom they claim to support.
The change can and should start here.
Holly Chandler is a substance abuse counselor and student at the University of Southern California’s Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, pursuing her master’s degree in social work. She is also a fourth-generation Santa Cruz County resident.