San Francisco Museum of Modern Art Announces Layoffs of 29 Employees
Title: SFMOMA Announces Staff Layoffs Amid Financial Struggles, Sparking Union Response
The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) has announced the layoff of 29 full- and part-time staff members, amounting to a 7.5% reduction in its workforce, as part of a broader effort to address ongoing financial concerns. The decision, revealed on May 7, has ignited a wave of criticism from the museum’s employee union and raised broader questions about the sustainability of arts institutions in a post-pandemic world.
Layoffs and Union Response
According to the museum’s official statement, 20 full-time and 9 part-time positions were eliminated, alongside an additional 13 unfilled roles that were cut from the organizational structure. While the museum claimed that both union and non-union positions were affected across multiple departments, it provided no departmental breakdown or clarification on how many union members were involved.
In contrast, the SFMOMA Union stated that 26 of the eliminated roles were covered by its bargaining unit and criticized the move as abrupt and unjustified. In an Instagram post, the union contended that the museum gave no prior notice before executing the layoffs. In response, the museum noted that severance offers were in line with its current collective bargaining agreement and included “enhanced packages.”
On May 8, the union organized a show of solidarity where personnel were encouraged to wear black to an all-staff meeting, using the slogan “No layoffs. Cut from the top.” Union representatives also met with museum leadership to contest the layoffs.
Financial Pressures and Visitor Declines
SFMOMA cited a structural deficit of $5 million as the primary motive for the cuts. The museum’s leadership noted that the COVID-19 pandemic has had long-lasting consequences on public behavior, primarily reducing attendance at cultural institutions. This mirrors broader travel and tourism trends, with Visit California projecting a 0.7% decrease in statewide tourism this year and a 9.2% drop in international visitors compared to 2023.
“Post-pandemic changes to audience behavior and engagement have made our financial model unsustainable without significant adjustments,” the museum said in a press release.
Despite Financial Contributions, Deficit Remains
The announcement came just weeks after what appeared to be lucrative financial achievements for the museum. In March, SFMOMA received a record-breaking $1.5 million corporate grant from Google.org for a retrospective exhibition on Ruth Asawa. The museum also raised $3.7 million during its flagship fundraising gala, Art Bash — its most successful to date.
These accomplishments have fueled skepticism and frustration among critics and staff, who question how layoffs could occur in such close proximity to major fundraising victories.
“We’re seeing financial progress in key areas, but that doesn’t close a structural deficit overnight,” a museum spokesperson remarked, emphasizing that the recent fundraising efforts were earmarked for specific projects and not general operations.
Broader Trends in the Museum Sector
SFMOMA is not alone in its financial woes. Several major museums in San Francisco — including the de Young Museum, the Asian Art Museum, and the Legion of Honor — have considered similar measures to cut costs. These actions follow guidance from the city’s previous mayoral administration to decrease general expenses by 15% to help close a projected $876 million budget shortfall.
Nationally, renowned institutions like the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and the Brooklyn Museum have also enacted significant layoffs, reducing staffing by nearly 10%. These museums also cited pandemic-driven changes in public engagement, tourism decline, and budgetary constraints as primary causes.
Labor and Culture at a Crossroads
SFMOMA’s situation is a microcosm of a broader reckoning between cultural institutions and the workforce that sustains them. Many museums have faced increasing scrutiny over their treatment of staff, with unionization efforts gaining traction and calls growing louder for financial transparency and accountability.
The ongoing tension raises important questions: Should museums continue to prioritize high-profile exhibitions and capital campaigns at the expense of staff stability? How can institutions reconcile their roles as public custodians of culture while maintaining sound financial footing in uncertain times?
As museums across the country struggle to find new ways to remain relevant and economically viable in a changed world, the choices they make now — who they lay off, who they keep, and how they adapt — will likely shape their legacies for years to come.
Conclusion
The layoffs at SFMOMA underscore the broader financial challenges facing museums in the wake of the pandemic. As the museum works to stabilize its budget and adapt to evolving public engagement, it will need to navigate complex conversations with staff, patrons, and the public about priorities, values, and the future of cultural institutions in the 21st century.
In the meantime, many within the SFMOMA community — especially unionized workers — are signaling that they will continue to fight for a seat at the decision-making table, advocating for transparency, fairness, and long-term institutional support