Charity work and money spinning

[Dom Tuk]

Is anyone disgusted by the money that so called charity workers make. Look at Cherie. Getting �100k for an all expenses paid lecture tour to Australia to raise money for charity and the charity in question gets less than a quarter of the money raised. the organiser makes a mint. They cut ribbons and charge for it. Di did it and so do loads of other celebreties. Does anyone else find it disgusting. How much do the top guys at the major well known charities earn??.

[FP]

I know what you are getting at and tend to agree.  However, it can be argued that it is better for a charity to be headed by efficient well paid businessmen if it brings in more money to the charity, even if three quarters of it goes on administration  How many people would get involved in running charities for low wages?   How else could these charities be run?.   It is better to get some money than no money. 

However, I do think that filthy rich celebrities should sponsor charities and cut ribbons, etc. for nothing.  Di is a very sore subject with me and I won't go off down that route.  Lets just say I would gladly give support to Aids charities and Land Mine charities if I had loads of money, a full staff and was ferried to and fro by private aircraft wearing fashionable clothing, in between taking holidays in the Caribbean with various rich lovers (and whilst leaving my children at home). 

[newtron]

http://www.charitywatch.org/  This site rates different charity organizations based on the percentage of money that actually goes to charity and how efficiently they raise money.

[WaldoMcFroog]

I think FP has hit the nub of it - for all it may be morally suspect, if paying celebs didn't generate more funds than not paying 'em, then it wouldn't happen.

[willowherb]

i went for a job running a charity shop for a well known medical charity..and the wages they offered me was more than normal in retail..so i was surprised that they offered so much being they were trying to raise funds..i didnt get the job and now i dont give any money to any charity except the dogs trust and rspca..as i want my contribution to go where its supposed to go..i dont support the pdsa because where i live some people borrow peoples benefits book so they can take their animals to be treated for free..which i find nauseating..

[Dom Tuk]

It would be interesting to find out if top officials from main stream charities like Oxfam, RSPCA etc travel first class on aeroplanes. On an aside i remember one day (as part of my job) entering a house with the local police and finding a huge pile of one pound coins on the kitchen table. There was a suspicion that the housholder was the local drug dealer. I asked the cop why that pile of one pound coins and his answer was' thats the money that poor oldaged pensioners give to the chappie selling the big issue down the high street'...this is where it all ends in a big heap on the kitchen table of the local pusher.

[camille79]

I worked for a charity for 5 years so thought I'd make my contribution to this debate!  Wages for people employed by the charities need to be comparable with other fields because the charity wants the best person for the job, rather than the person who can work for the cheapest or for free.  I started as a graduate and was on a salary comparable with my peers in other sectors, however there were not the xmas bonuses, cars etc. you can enjoy in the corporate field as that would not be appropriate. 

There needs to be a distinction drawn between those working for the charities as professionals and those volunteering - the former bring essential skills and the later (with exceptions) are the extra hands to undertake largely unskilled tasks.  Large charities, although not businesses, still need almost as much office support if they want to do a good job and that is why very few large charities can survive simply on the goodwill of volunteers.

[IndieSinger]

Dom Tuk - why do you give to the RSPCA? Some years ago, we got our dog from the National Canine Defense League. They were overflowing with dogs but were having to put up temporary kennels all the time - they originally had space for about 150 and had to temporarily house nearly 400. This is because once a week, they went round collecting the dogs from RSPCA outlets. At that time, if an owner hadn't been found for a dog after two weeks, the RSPCA would simply put the animal down. This is why the NCDL rescued them every week from as many RSPCA outlets as it could get to in the area.

I wrote to a local RSPCA centre and he confirmed the above.

I will never support the RSPCA.

[IndieSinger]

My apologies - not Dom Tuk, I mean willowherb.

[willowherb]

indiesinger...i worked for the rspca for many years for free ..i am well aware of them not allways being able to keep every animal..sometimes its due to lack of faccilities..i only give anything i wish to them because in general they do a good job..i used to be a paid up member but left because the branch i worked for we were constantly fund raising but a percentage of what we took had to go to headquarters..and a friend of mine who started that branch and is a titled lady to boot still working for them age 84 and if that branch was abe to keep all it raised then yes they would have been able to open kennells etc to give the animals a chance..also i left that area and now i support the dogs trust by direct debit ..i agree with what you are saying their is nothing you have said which is untrue..if i pass a rspca collecting box or if i see them at crufts then yes i give whatever..i was asked to work for them in this area i moved to ..but i dont want to through my own choice..some times us members would take an animal in and we used to advertise them in the local paper to see if we could find them homes..to save them being put down ..but its not possible to take them all in as the members would be over run with animals..and softies like me would want to keep them all..the fact is they havnt got enough dog kennells..its as simple as that..before any one has another go at me i do think some of their funds could be better spent but its those at head quarters that make all the final decisions..the dogs trust is marvelouse when i used to live near them i would go and help out with the dogs etc..and yes they let all the dogs live even if no one wants them..the rspca inspectors face a dreadfull job and they are not overpaid at all..its just a minimum wage ..and where would we be without them may be some dogs or cats have to be put to sleep but even that is better than living in filth starving and mistreated..at least they are no longer suffering

[willowherb]

and another thing i did hands on work and saw some of the cases of abuse i took a golden retriever in myself weighing 20 pounds instead of 60 pounds he had been beaten round the head with a stick and left in the garden tied up..why you may ask..well because he made dog hair and was lively like all golden retrievers are..it took us 4 years to get him to a decent weight and then the poor thing died with a brain tumour..a left over cause from his beatings ..at least he had 4 years of happiness..we would be in a dreadfull mess without rspca inspectors..where i live now they come and check that horses in a field belonging to gypsys are looked after ,,and they do that regular..so the gypsys are allways making sure they provide water etc..with all the awfull cases of animal cruelty who is going to deal with it if we had no rspca inspectors....the inspectors are desperately underpaid and the funds are not used as they should be but we certainly need that charity..

[newtron]

I have a friend who cleans the office building for a local chapter of Save the Children.  For a cleaning job, she is getting paid fairly well.  I don't know how much the regular staff get paid, but apparently it's enough to live on, even though she says that most of the employees work much less than full time.  She also describes them as the most wasteful people she's ever met.  They leave milk and perishable food out almost on a daily basis.  My friend says it feels strange throwing away so much food when you are surrounded by posters depicting starving children. 

[landie]

Far better to give to a charity such as the BBC's Children in Need or Red Nose Day where, I believe, all the proceeds go to the needy.

[KARL]

Most, if not all, of the big charity organisations can trace their existence back to the passion of a handful of individuals, perhaps in some cases only a single person, who saw the plight of fellow humans and wanted to help. Today these have become corporations within an industry which sees the world as a market, and they compete in very familiar ways too, and politics in a general sense is their �game� also. They have their management structures, publicity agents, etc. and are as fuelled by buzzwords and networking as their non-special-status brethren in the commercial world. When once working in Sudan, my job took me from one Nile to the other and, as I switched on the TV at home on one of my leaves, I was surprised to see a representative of one of the best known charities state that if more money was not available urgently there would be huge suffering due to flooding in Khartoum where the two Niles meet. I had not noticed any significant increase in the water levels on either Nile nor had anyone told me of flooding.

[KARL]

Of course it is possible I conspicuously failed to notice a disaster, but what I did notice was the conspicuous presence of shiny, large, new four wheel drive vehicles which regularly pulled up at the Hilton, an establishment which had probably the only caf� in Khartoum which westerners would feel at home in. Many of them trooped up with their conspicuous walkie-talkies on their belts (this was a good while back), the trade-mark of aid workers. Let us not be na�ve, our charity money provides jobs, not only in the third world but just as significantly at home. It also provides catchy news. Our consciences bother us when we see fellow humans suffer and we are right to want to give, but there is also truth in the accusation that the charities are an inefficient means to an end. Those who go to poor countries, and professionally contribute to their development, need not forego a western level salary to match or outdo the long term contribution the average charity organisation makes for the same money. But until I discover a better solution, I think the charities should be allowed to continue, although under strong pressure to seriously improve efficiency. Possibly the best example I have come across was Water Aid who simply paid for materials so locals could build their own reliable rural water supply system � no permanently resident foreign aid workers, no shiny cars, just plain old help. The Kenyans in question were very pleased with the help and proud of their own achievement. The money was mostly collected through tax efficient donations direct from salaries � absolutely minimal overheads in the donors� world.