Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Paul Gray on July 25, 2015, 10:54:07 AM
-
It is said that if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Fair comment in my book. So:
1) What should a club reasonably expect to pay for a top greenkeeper?
2) What sort of variance is there from one part of the golfing world to another?
3) Where do you find the best greenkeepers?
I'm particularly interested in answers pertaining to the south east of England but, for the sake of discussion, all answers are very welcome. If anyone is uncomfortable publicly expressing a view, all PM's are equally welcome.
Thanks all.
-
Paul - I think it depends on what team he has behind him as to what is sensible to pay, by that I mean there is no point in paying someone £50,000 per year if he has 3 assistants. If he has a crew of 12 then its probably in the ballpark.
Top greenkeeper's can't do much with low budgets, equally it is easy to waste money with high budgets. What is really needed is a general manifesto of what is required and from there the cloth can be cut.
If your looking for numbers as a rough i'd say;
£18,000 for a head man with one assistant
£20,000 for a head man with two more in the crew
£23,000 for a head man with three more in the crew
£26,000 for a head man with four more in the crew
£29,000 for a head man with five more in the crew
the top greenkeepers will be looking for courses with a decent crew
£35,000 for a team of 7 up to £45,000 for a crew of 12
after that the very top guys are getting paid close to £100,000
-
Since most US privateclubs are non-profit, they have to file 990 tax forms. That means you can view the forms on the web, and they commonly have the salaries of their top employees listed.
It seems as if some "prestigious" clubs pay their top employees a lot just because they can.
I just looked at two of"them, one on the east coast and one on the east. Both pay their super over $250,000.00. In one case, more than double what any other employee gets.
-
Paul
http://www.bigga.org.uk/uploads/attachment/358/2015-cgcs-recommendations-greenkeepers.pdf
The above may shed some light.
I'd say Adrian has it slightly low if applying specifically to South of England.
Taking out the very small and very large operations a head greenkeeper at an 18 hole £1,000 to £1,200 per annum members club would be £36k - £40k. Promote the deputy and it can be less than this.
The best way for a greenkeeper to boost this is keep moving around and the best ones tend to.
-
All,
Thank you already for your invaluable input.
-
The best way for a greenkeeper to boost this is keep moving around and the best ones tend to.
Particularly if that move is to America. Even here in Canada I would have to think that the greenkeepers at the top clubs earn well into six figures.
I guess this somewhat explains the differentials in annual dues for clubs in the UK vs NA.
-
So I checked out a form 990 for one of the elite Eastern clubs. Wow, am I naïve. I was shocked by the salaries -general manager about 500 K, superintendent over 300 K. And folks want to argue a minimum wage of $15 an hour?
-
The best way for a greenkeeper to boost this is keep moving around and the best ones tend to.
Particularly if that move is to America. Even here in Canada I would have to think that the greenkeepers at the top clubs earn well into six figures.
I guess this somewhat explains the differentials in annual dues for clubs in the UK vs NA.
Don't forget £ and $.
It's all relative. Five staff and a budget under £100k is always going to command a lot less than 25 staff and millions of dollars.
Every course has an optimum. I suspect many are bloated and wasteful in this respect.
-
So bigger budget and more staff means bigger wage ::) Well I guess that is the 'don't have to think much about it' way to do it. Using Adrian's figures, you employ a head greenkeeper who has 12 staff and pay him £45K. After a year he not only has improved the course considerably but as he is a conscientious employee, he has also cut the number of staff down to 7. You are delighted on all fronts but inform him that despite the improvement in the course and him saving a considerable amount on the wage bill as he only has 7 staff you are going to cut his wage by £10K to £35K. Now is it likely to endear him to stay?
A club should pay the staff what they are worth with an eye on what the club can afford and where it is located. Really good greenkeepers are motivated by a mixture of working environment, challenge of the job and remuneration. As Ryan says it also depends on where in the country the club is too.
Jon
-
It's factual in all walks of life that the more people you manage / size of the operation the more you're likely to be paid in return. It's true of greenkeeping and just about anything else.
I'm not saying it's fair and it could be argued that the guy with two staff and a shoe string budget has the harder job and is more skilled in many respects.
Determining worth is mostly establishing the cost of replacing or what someone else is prepared to pay.
Greenkeepers in the UK don't seem to get the respect that their U.S. counterparts enjoy but benefit from a less volatile working environment. It is my impression that in the UK they aren't educated to the same level, generally speaking.
Golf in the UK generally doesn't pay well. That's the trade off for such a pleasant working environment and how many want to work in the industry.
-
So bigger budget and more staff means bigger wage ::) Well I guess that is the 'don't have to think much about it' way to do it. Using Adrian's figures, you employ a head greenkeeper who has 12 staff and pay him £45K. After a year he not only has improved the course considerably but as he is a conscientious employee, he has also cut the number of staff down to 7. You are delighted on all fronts but inform him that despite the improvement in the course and him saving a considerable amount on the wage bill as he only has 7 staff you are going to cut his wage by £10K to £35K. Now is it likely to endear him to stay?
A club should pay the staff what they are worth with an eye on what the club can afford and where it is located. Really good greenkeepers are motivated by a mixture of working environment, challenge of the job and remuneration. As Ryan says it also depends on where in the country the club is too.
Jon
Jon - Read my post again. I am not saying what you have said at all.
-
It's factual in all walks of life that the more people you manage / size of the operation the more you're likely to be paid in return. It's true of greenkeeping and just about anything else.
I'm not saying it's fair and it could be argued that the guy with two staff and a shoe string budget has the harder job and is more skilled in many respects.
Determining worth is mostly establishing the cost of replacing or what someone else is prepared to pay.
Greenkeepers in the UK don't seem to get the respect that their U.S. counterparts enjoy but benefit from a less volatile working environment. It is my impression that in the UK they aren't educated to the same level, generally speaking.
Golf in the UK generally doesn't pay well. That's the trade off for such a pleasant working environment and how many want to work in the industry.
+1
Unfortunately or fortunately depending which side your on, in the UK one of the reasons you can play golf for $1000 a year on a pretty reasonable course is that the overheads here are very low. US greenkeepers (superintendents) are much more knowledgeable and whilst the gap has narrowed over the last 20 years American course management is almost a different world.
-
So I checked out a form 990 for one of the elite Eastern clubs. Wow, am I naïve. I was shocked by the salaries -general manager about 500 K, superintendent over 300 K. And folks want to argue a minimum wage of $15 an hour?
Cliff,
Is any full time employee at the clubs you reviewed making less than $ 15/hr ?
If not, why insert your political beliefs into the thread ?
-
So I checked out a form 990 for one of the elite Eastern clubs. Wow, am I naïve. I was shocked by the salaries -general manager about 500 K, superintendent over 300 K. And folks want to argue a minimum wage of $15 an hour?
Cliff,
Is any full time employee at the clubs you reviewed making less than $ 15/hr ?
If not, why insert your political beliefs into the thread ?
I agree with Patrick 100%. Stop the politics!
-
So I checked out a form 990 for one of the elite Eastern clubs. Wow, am I naïve. I was shocked by the salaries -general manager about 500 K, superintendent over 300 K. And folks want to argue a minimum wage of $15 an hour?
Cliff,
Is any full time employee at the clubs you reviewed making less than $ 15/hr ?
If not, why insert your political beliefs into the thread ?
~20 years ago I worked full time hours in the bag room at one top (host of multiple major championships) club and then at another as a waiter (no tips allowed) and made barely above minimum wage, which in those years was $4.25-$5.15. Today's equivalent would be about $9-10 an hour. So the answer to your question is yes.
I have no problem with a top greenskeeper making $300k, for what it's worth.
-
When a golf course hires a good supt salary should not be the determining factor as much as overall budget. Often a more experienced and higer salaried guy can save more than enough money in his overall budget via chemical applications, fertilizer applications and water and capital expenditure management. But I do think most courses today find a better fit with a working supt instead guy who has worked as an asst at clubs with extreme budgets and the ability to fix anything with dollars instead of common sense.
-
Paul
I know of one club In Adelaide (Australia) that is a private club with affordable subs (say under a thousand pounds a year) but struggling with past debt that chose to have the course supt as the highest paid employee - more than the GM.
The club has succeeded because the course supt has been able to deliver despite a low budget, limited access to water and difficult climate challenges. He makes a significant difference to what continues to be a successful but affordable club with low budgets.
James B
-
So bigger budget and more staff means bigger wage ::) Well I guess that is the 'don't have to think much about it' way to do it. Using Adrian's figures, you employ a head greenkeeper who has 12 staff and pay him £45K. After a year he not only has improved the course considerably but as he is a conscientious employee, he has also cut the number of staff down to 7. You are delighted on all fronts but inform him that despite the improvement in the course and him saving a considerable amount on the wage bill as he only has 7 staff you are going to cut his wage by £10K to £35K. Now is it likely to endear him to stay?
A club should pay the staff what they are worth with an eye on what the club can afford and where it is located. Really good greenkeepers are motivated by a mixture of working environment, challenge of the job and remuneration. As Ryan says it also depends on where in the country the club is too.
Jon
Jon - Read my post again. I am not saying what you have said at all.
Adrian,
I was commenting on linking wage to number of staff as main reason for amount paid as been too simple a way of looking at it. I was not saying your post was poor but used the figures in it as a basis so no comment was meant about your post. However, as you have brought it up I would suggest that you do link the size of wage to number of staff quite strongly in your original post indeed if you could point out any other point on remuneration you do make in your first post as I can not.
Jon
-
Jon - my figures were very rough/broadly speaking. I was trying to make the point that if the club has an £80,000 Staff budget then you can't really pay the top man £50,000. The bigger wages will go to the bigger clubs that have decided to mow greens every day, fairways three times a week and aprons and tees every other, that have decided to top dress every two weeks and perhaps have fairway watering in addition to the UK norm. Those situations need more bodies. I was absolutely not trying to make a point that if the man saved money on wages his fee should be reduced.
I think I may be way light on London/South East wages. South West is pretty dire the nearer you get to Cornwall. I don't think many clubs are paying in excess of £35,000 to any member of staff in the six or seven counties in the South West...I am not saying they are not worth it....there is simply less money in golf than there was....it is going to get worse not better... if £9 per hour is the minimum wage we would need to raise our one course meal price from £6 to £10 and a pint of lager goes from £3.50 to £5.80....IMO £9 min wage (eqv of $15 uS) sends the UK into massive problems with inflation and a situation where many business values will crash or just not work.
It must be the same North of Manchester.
-
Generally, a great greenkeeper is worth his weight in gold. However, the best guys are not always the highest-paid.
The numbers presented for the U.S.A. are for the top of the line clubs in the biggest metropolitan areas, at clubs where the dues are $15,000 per year or higher.
Suffice to say that 99.9% of greenkeepers in the U.S. don't make $250,000 per year, and I'd guess 95-98% don't make $100k. But, I could be surprised, I always have a bit of trouble understanding salaries in this age of hidden inflation and the growing gap between the haves and have-nots.
-
Generally, a great greenkeeper is worth his weight in gold. However, the best guys are not always the highest-paid.
The numbers presented for the U.S.A. are for the top of the line clubs in the biggest metropolitan areas, at clubs where the dues are $15,000 per year or higher.
Suffice to say that 99.9% of greenkeepers in the U.S. don't make $250,000 per year, and I'd guess 95-98% don't make $100k. But, I could be surprised, I always have a bit of trouble understanding salaries in this age of hidden inflation and the growing gap between the haves and have-nots.
+1
-
The GCSAA does bi-annual salary surveys of its members. According to the latest one:
In 2015, the average base salary for golf course superintendents rose to $85,204, a 3.2% increase over the base salary reported in 2013. This increase represents a 72.9% gain since 1995, or an increase of $35,935 in 20 years. In 2015, half of all superintendents earned $75,000 or more annually, 25% of all superintendents earned more than $100,000, and the top 10% earned $135,000 or more annually.
https://www.gcsaa.org/jobs/compensation-resources
This is gathered from predominantly U.S. superintendents, although a few foreigners are in the data as well. It is not a scientific survey, and the numbers may be slightly skewed, but it gives a general indication. I believe the US compensation is probably about 50% higher than that of their UK counterparts.
-
If you've ever been a member at a club where over a long period of time the G/k isn't producing the quality of course that is required/expected - and this can be for numerous different, and sometimes understandable, reasons - you'll know that, as Tom puts it, a great G/k is worth his weight in gold, and, to add my own description, a damn good one is worth his weight in silver.
A highly important element of any golf club IMO, maybe the most important element, is the quality/standard of upkeep the course, and the person heading up the maintenance team is absolutely key t othis, so reward him well if he's good or better than good.
atb
-
Generally, a great greenkeeper is worth his weight in gold. However, the best guys are not always the highest-paid.
The numbers presented for the U.S.A. are for the top of the line clubs in the biggest metropolitan areas, at clubs where the dues are $15,000 per year or higher.
Suffice to say that 99.9% of greenkeepers in the U.S. don't make $250,000 per year, and I'd guess 95-98% don't make $100k. But, I could be surprised, I always have a bit of trouble understanding salaries in this age of hidden inflation and the growing gap between the haves and have-nots.
That is a provocatively political post, Tom. You know that Mucci won't abide it.
-
Adrian,
I totally agree with what you say in your second post although it is not present in your original post. A club needs to adjust the wage in accordance with its budget constraints but not in my opinion to the number of people in their staff otherwise many in the US would be minted in summer but very poor in winter me thinks ;)
If a club cannot afford a higher wage then it needs to think of ways of making the working environment such as this more than compensates for the lack of money.
Jon
-
In 2015, the average base salary for golf course superintendents rose to $85,204, a 3.2% increase over the base salary reported in 2013. This increase represents a 72.9% gain since 1995, or an increase of $35,935 in 20 years. In 2015, half of all superintendents earned $75,000 or more annually, 25% of all superintendents earned more than $100,000, and the top 10% earned $135,000 or more annually.
Steve:
Thanks for the facts. I am startled by the numbers, but as I said, my basis for said numbers is twenty years old and I have a hard time adjusting for inflation. [You will pardon me for observing that the average mean salary for American worked has NOT increased by 72.9% over the past twenty years, even if Patrick may not.]
As you stated after the numbers, though, I wonder if this is really all-inclusive. For one thing, those $300k guys really drive up the AVERAGE salary but not the median. For another, I wonder what % of American courses have GCSAA member superintendents? I have some doubts that the percentages shown hold true for all of the 15,000 golf courses in the U.S.A., since it is in every professional organization's interest to over-report the average salary of their members to those who might negotiate their pay.
-
Hence my disclaimer that it isn't a scientific survey. By the way, the total compensation for top guys in the northeast is closer to 400k than 300.
-
So, what is a top Super worth?
The man who manages the biggest asset, with the largest budget at most clubs?
WHo has to be a turf expert, water expert, chemist, artist and politician?
Who manages greens committees, managers, golf pros, members, and government regulations?
And, who fights with that bitch, Mother Nature?
Forget what they're worth, why would they do it?
Much like an NHL goalie, they tend to be noticed when something bad happens. When something
good happens, it is expected.
All I know, is that if I ever have my own course, it is the first and most important hire (assuming existing course)
-
Jeepers
When I see those type salaries I have to wonder if we are still playing a game ???
Ciao
-
Sean, what do you do and how much do you make? Are you saving the world?
The salary numbers seen here are not representative. GCSAA's big push is that they are making life better for Superintendents and triumphing increasing salaries is one way they justify what they are doing. But, go to the GCSAA web site and take a look at job listings from July and here are the salaries offered:
56K annually - MN
4K - 4.8K monthly - NY
50-60K - FL
47-57K - TX
25-35K - NC
70-75K - FL
50-60K - MD
60-60K - AZ
40-50K - FL
Many of these jobs are asking for a 4 year grad with 5+ years of experience.
Yes, there is a small percentage at the elite clubs making nice salaries, but mid level salaries have not risen for decades.
in 1995, 60K was considered a "decent" job. I haven't seen much movement in salaries for years, no matter what data is released by GCSAA.
-
I don't think you can judge industry standards by the few ads running on the GCSAA web-site either. Many, if not most, of the better jobs are not advertised at all, but candidates are selected and invited to interview by word of mouth and reputation. Other good jobs are only advertised locally. For example, a few years ago Winged Foot (that brings up the average salaries of everybody else in the world) advertised for the GCS with the N.Y. Metro chapter, but not on the GCSAA. I sent a résumé but can only assume it was lost in the mail because they never called.
-
Seems to me it's just skewed as hell, like income any way you look at it nowadays. The 1%-er clubs have 1%-er employees taking care of their courss and there's a bunch of barely surviving courses paying someone a barely living wage to tend them. It's just Real Life in microcosm (including the self-justifying antics of organizations like GCSAA).
-
The average Sup income for Long Island is probably about $275,000...Starting pay is about $90k for a private not in financial trouble...the continuity and longevity of many of the guys has pushed the averages higher with some making over$450k...RHE
-
I was once a government worker. You work for a rich community you make more money, simple. Had a boss quit once and go to a poor community with a larger budget. He received a bump in salary that resulted in him making more money than many on the city council. Worst decision he ever made.
The moral of the story is: Don't go to a course where you will be making more than most of the members. They will hold it against you. If you can get it, work where the board wonders how you can get by on your salary.
I have always considered the head superintendent and pro to be one of my peers and have no problem seeing them paid that way.
-
Here is a more simple formula. A head super or pro should be able to live in the same neighborhoods, eat at the same restaurants and send their kids to the same schools as the members they serve.
-
Here is a more simple formula. A head super or pro should be able to live in the same neighborhoods, eat at the same restaurants and send their kids to the same schools as the members they serve.
Why?
Ciao
-
Why not?
-
Why not?
I don't know why not other than its a huge expectation for a club to pay tons of money for a job not based on performance, but on aspiration.
Ciao
-
The average Sup income for Long Island is probably about $275,000...Starting pay is about $90k for a private not in financial trouble...the continuity and longevity of many of the guys has pushed the averages higher with some making over$450k...RHE
I doubt it. I looked up the 990's for NGLA, Maidstone, and Shinnecock - presumably in the top tier of facilities - and the average total compensation package for the superintendents in 2012 (most recent year I could find) was 240k.
I'm having so much fun searching Forms 990.
-
Here is a more simple formula. A head super or pro should be able to live in the same neighborhoods, eat at the same restaurants and send their kids to the same schools as the members they serve.
Why?
Ciao
Because it produces a superior product. Much like having cops and teachers in your peer group a supt or pro who understands the "community" will better serve it.
-
Why not?
I don't know why not other than its a huge expectation for a club to pay tons of money for a job not based on performance, but on aspiration.
Ciao
A top Super is worth his weight in gold, and that figure will vary widely based on where the club is, as well as how well positioned the club is financially.
-
State and local taxes have important roles as well.
-
Steve, don't post much, but confident when I do...RHE
-
delete
-
$400K, are we letting our imagination runaway with us I wonder ???
Jon
-
:o :o
see comments below from others who know a lot more about it than I do.
-
you'd be pretty surprised at the teacher/cop number too(+ Greeklike benefits)-but most can't afford to live here anyway unless they inherited their home
-
$400K, are we letting our imagination runaway with us I wonder ???
Maybe a bit but not too much. The form 990s are available on the web and show salaries and other compensation for many of the top clubs. I have searched for two of the clubs on LI and the salaries were both around $255k and bonuses were $41k-$80k.
Google "clubname form 990" - there is a website called CitizenAudit that appears to scan and post these forms. Compensation info is around page 10.
-
Sean,
Superintendents of Schools on Long Island are paid even better than those of golf courses. http://7online.com/archive/7778676/ We are talking about the head guys of each organization.
-
Sean,
Superintendents of Schools on Long Island are paid even better than those of golf courses. http://7online.com/archive/7778676/ (http://7online.com/archive/7778676/) We are talking about the head guys of each organization.
Wow. I guess this is what a deeply divided society looks like. Might be time to think about ditching the dollar and having individual state currencies.
-
Looking to Long Island or Monterey to baseline pay wages is an exercise that doesn't match reality.
Outliers like this have gotta be more than 2 Standard Deviations from the mean and thus excluded....somewhere between 50-60k per year is likely where the actual median is found.
-
$400K, are we letting our imagination runaway with us I wonder ???
Maybe a bit but not too much. The form 990s are available on the web and show salaries and other compensation for many of the top clubs. I have searched for two of the clubs on LI and the salaries were both around $255k and bonuses were $41k-$80k.
Google "clubname form 990" - there is a website called CitizenAudit that appears to scan and post these forms. Compensation info is around page 10.
wonder where the compensation for private putting greens, golf pro lessons, school teachers tutoring is posted.....?
Meaning it's a moving target and really none of other people's business ::) ::)
-
In 2015, the average base salary for golf course superintendents rose to $85,204, a 3.2% increase over the base salary reported in 2013. This increase represents a 72.9% gain since 1995, or an increase of $35,935 in 20 years. In 2015, half of all superintendents earned $75,000 or more annually, 25% of all superintendents earned more than $100,000, and the top 10% earned $135,000 or more annually.
Steve:
Thanks for the facts. I am startled by the numbers, but as I said, my basis for said numbers is twenty years old and I have a hard time adjusting for inflation. [You will pardon me for observing that the average mean salary for American worked has NOT increased by 72.9% over the past twenty years, even if Patrick may not.]
As you stated after the numbers, though, I wonder if this is really all-inclusive. For one thing, those $300k guys really drive up the AVERAGE salary but not the median. For another, I wonder what % of American courses have GCSAA member superintendents? I have some doubts that the percentages shown hold true for all of the 15,000 golf courses in the U.S.A., since it is in every professional organization's interest to over-report the average salary of their members to those who might negotiate their pay.
Tom--
Since those numbers don't say they are inflation adjusted, I think you'd be surprised. I'm no expert, but it seems like the U.S. median household income in 1992 was something like $29,080, while in 2012 it was $49,486. That's a 70.1% increase. See http://www.davemanuel.com/median-household-income.php. For individuals, the median income was something like $15,690 in 1993 and $28,031 in 2013 -- a 78.65% increase. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html.
That's median. The mean (for individuals) shows a bigger percentage increase from 1993 ($22,191) to 2013 ($43,041), or about 94%. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html.
-
The average Sup income for Long Island is probably about $275,000...Starting pay is about $90k for a private not in financial trouble...the continuity and longevity of many of the guys has pushed the averages higher with some making over$450k...RHE
I doubt it. I looked up the 990's for NGLA, Maidstone, and Shinnecock - presumably in the top tier of facilities - and the average total compensation package for the superintendents in 2012 (most recent year I could find) was 240k.
I'm having so much fun searching Forms 990.
I know it's mean, but I'm fascinated by the debt some clubs are carrying. It makes me wonder about sustainability.
-
Ken,
That is mean. But, conversely, I was wondering what the comedian income of superintendents was......
-
I was the superintendent at a private club in the hamptons and made nowhere near the salaries being thrown around in this thread.
18 holes, 696,000 budget,established 1896, 360 members.
Never lost a green, never went over budget, never made close to 6 figures.
Held the job for 26 years.
Frank Hannigan of the USGA was asked at the start of a U.S. Open who was the most important person on the property, he replied, "the superintendent, if he fails, we all fail."
-
In my 30 years in the biz, I have noticed the counter trend to GCSAA trying to boost image and salary. And that trend is towards management companies, who generally pay less than private clubs, maybe more to pros than superintendents.
That said, I have also seen a trend in the best management companies towards keeping good supers. In the earlier days of the wave, they didn't respect what the supers did, IMHO, and often went the cheap route. Of course, savings is what they sold to at least municipalities who had let their budgets bloat a bit.
But, as someone noted, all it takes is one year of lost greens turf to balance out those salary savings and I don't see many turning over the reigns to 25 year olds any more. I used to tell a joke that I heard a management company had fire employees and used the golf course dog to maintain the course. When I called the course to see what conditions were, the super answered "ruff."
Also, management company maintenance budgets were often a fraction of what others had, but that gap seems to be narrowing in general, although I can't say it is universal, and I am talking from experience from some of the bigs. Chambers Bay and Kemper is a good example of giving a course what it needs to fulfill its function, albeit, at the top end of the spectrum. Kemper does a wonderful job at the mid level courses of mine that they manage. Nice balance of budget and results.
-
Here is a more simple formula. A head super or pro should be able to live in the same neighborhoods, eat at the same restaurants and send their kids to the same schools as the members they serve.
Really the best post of the lot.
-
Frank Hannigan of the USGA was asked at the start of a U.S. Open who was the most important person on the property, he replied, "the superintendent, if he fails, we all fail."
Interesting post especially since the USGA emasculates the super when they take over a course for the US Open - most famously at Shinny.
-
Think about what it costs to renovate your greens, rework your bunkers, replace your irrigation system before its proper useful life, explain those dead spots to prospective members or greens fee payers or replace badly maintained equipment. Then you will have a start on what a first rate greenskeeper is worth.
Then try to quantify the quality of your course or the pleasure of the golf experience.
Than you will get an fuller sense of what a greenskeeper is worth.
Trust me, in most cases its more than what you pay them.
-
When I build a bridge I am not paid based on what it would cost if it fell down.
-
As someone who worked golf course maintenance to pay my way through college (great job, lousy pay), I can say that the only thing more expensive to a course than paying an appropriate wage for a competent super is not paying enough to hire a competent super. While I did not understand it at the time, the decisions that my boss made resulted in a need for massive reconditioning in the future.