Dixon, Wannstedt are Pitt's highest-paid employees
By Rick Wills
Published: Friday, May 28, 2010
The University of Pittsburgh's highest paid employees are its basketball and football coaches, according to the school's most recent filings with the Internal Revenue Service.
Men's basketball coach Jamie Dixon earned $1.39 million in total compensation in 2008, while football's Dave Wannstedt earned $1.01 million. Total compensation includes base salary, bonuses, incentives and deferred compensation as well as nontaxable benefits.
By comparison, Kentucky's John Calipari, a Moon native and former Pitt assistant coach, is paid about $4 million each year and is the country's best-paid men's basketball coach, according to the Associated Press. Texas pays football coach Mack Brown $5.1 million annually, the AP has reported.
"The compensation of coaches involves market forces that impact successful elite programs," said Robert Hill, Pitt's vice chancellor for office of public affairs.
Pitt's other highest-paid employees include Ronald B. Herberman, a professor of medicine and associate vice chancellor for cancer research who earned $670,614 in 2008. The school's athletic director, Steve Pederson, earned $473,232. Donald S. Burke, associate vice chancellor for global health and dean of the Graduate School of Public Health, was paid $448,421.
The compensation figures appear on IRS forms filed by Pitt earlier this month.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.