Charities

[Swanny]

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/August20134/article-2385754-1b2dd5a4000005dc-730_634x638.jpg

[Col]

Yeah I discovered this years ago about 'charities'....it's disgusting abuse yet nothing is done about it.

Big house near me was lived in by someone who ran a donkey charity....nice house.

Another thing that also astounded me is that there are people making a very profitable-very profitable indeed and not far away- living by 'administering charity money' given to various charities which amounts to quite some cash that has to be distributed... apparently not all charities actually deal with the administration of the donations.

Had a discussion at a charity event once and mentioned to the organiser that there are too many charities doing very similar things and they would be more effective and less confusing for people if they were to merge.........this idea of mine was not very welcomed because the organiser of this multi charity event said it would put a lot of people out of work !!!!!! mmmmmmmmmmm so it is all about employment rather than giving to help a cause.

Check out what Bob Geldof production company has been making over the years from 'feed the starving' !!!!!!

p.s. I am currently accepting charitable donations of pints of beer ...rest assured your generosity will be consumed asap !!!...Thanks in advance :)

[WR6133]

I have a relative who's partner works for a pretty obscure almost unknown charity, we don't talk after I asked how such a small organisation allows them to live such a lifestyle and a lifestyle that somebody as young and unqualified as them would normally only afford if they started selling coke by the container load. I don't donate to charities having seen this. I think people should think hard before they donate about how much of that £1 goes to starving children/abused animals/child soldiers/etc and how much goes on the gravy train for managers.

[Uber Dave]

To some degree I agree with what you all (and most the media) have said but its that thing where you need very competant people who know how to run a buisness in these roles so that they are run properly.

The red cross is a huge multinational chartity and as such needs people with the same skillset as those who run massive multinational companies. Not paying like for like wages would mean less skilled people taking those jobs, would it be run in the same way with the same money available for charity??

The alternative is what? Put some idiot in charge, who does not know what they are doing, and then less money goes out to people who need it as a result of waste and in error. At least he is not taking huge multimillion pound bonus's yearly like the bankers!

[Col]

yeah Dave--- but 'Joe Turkey' votes idiots into Parliament who haven't got a clue about anything then some are given the head banana role of Secretary of State for Health,Educkashun, DEFRA, Defence and Invading ****pot countries ,etc and know absolutely nothing about the service they are leader of.....oh yeah I notice the country is knackered so maybe you have a valid point hahhahahahahhahh

[redken1]

Many charities are victims of their own success. The more funds they raise for their respective causes and the more they take on, the more national and local government will cut vital services, placing a greater burden on the voluntary sector. A classic case in point are the charities which are currently doing so much for our brave young men and women returning from Afghanistan with appalling injuries from the conflict. Whatever one’s views (I have been strongly opposed from day one) on the deployment, IMHO, if the UK state can find the resources/ money to engage in a war (for whatever reason) on foreign soil, expecting members of our armed forces to risk their lives, then at the very least the state should provide the best available counselling/medical/social care for all the troops on their return. I believe that a society which relies on charity is a society which needs to change. Good post and subject matter Swanny.

[Dabz]

We work with a huge number of charities at work. The most successful ones differ from the ailing ones because they approach things like a business. This means they need a knowledgable team of top business people running things. These people cost money but its not the salary that matters, it's the value they add

Large salaries might seem too high to some people but people rarely get paid high sums if they're not earning it

[Swanny]

Really good charitable people would do the job for a lot less and let the money go where it's meant to go. No one needs to earn £184,000 a year, that's just taking the piss.

[Uber Dave]

Really good charitable people would do the job for a lot less and let the money go where it's meant to go. No one needs to earn £184,000 a year, that's just taking the piss.

I would argue some people do need that and more money. But those people are teachers, doctors, emergency services, military, and not people such as footballers, politicians, actors..............

[Swanny]

Why would anyone need to earn £184,000 a year? Surely £100,000 is more than enough to get by on??

[Uber Dave]

So if someone wanted to pay you 184,000 you would turn it down or offer it up to charity so you only took 100,000 home? I know I would not!

[redken1]

I’m with you on this one Swanny. Anyone who claims they ‘need’ more than £3538 per week in wages in order to enjoy a reasonable standard of living, especially some one who’s salary is reliant on the generosity of struggling Joe Public, should refrain from wallpapering their house in £20notes. I would certainly not make a donation to any charity which deems £184,000, 171,125 more than someone working for the minimum wage (based on a 40 hour week) a reasonable salary for one or more of its employees. I take the view that if a charity can afford to pay this amount, my hard earned is better spent elsewhere. Just my opinion.

[Dabz]

And when the cancer charities stop researching a cure because they can't attract good enough executives to manage the research facilities that's ok, because at least nobody's getting paid a lot

Similarly the charities who have to manage multi billion pound budgets to provide children's services to protect them from abuse - they won't be able to attract a financial director capable of managing billion pound budgets but that's ok as long as nobody gets paid a big salary

Or we try to find an FD who will choose min wage at a charity instead of a large salary plus perks at a private company

[redken1]

With respect James I don't accept that we have to pay huge wages to attract the best people for these jobs. I think it is a British thing. For example, compare the banking sector wages here with the rest of Europe. I would very much hope that those involved at the top end of the charities you mentioned were not attracted to these positions purely to earn a big salary. I have not said that an FD should be expected to work for the minimum wage, but I do think that many people who are struggling under austerity would be horrified if they were made aware of some of the salaries been paid to the employees of the charities they support. I think all charities should be accountable through transparency. Lets publish the salaries and let the individual make up their own mind.

[Nokesy]

Front line workers generally get paid peanuts for a non 9-5pm job, that deals with the emotions and challenges of lots of people with complex needs. I've spent many years doing that too - now have a decent salary but still work very hard for it but at the end of the day, the only reason we do what we do is for the reward it brings. It only takes making a small difference in one person's life to realise why. My charities strapline is 'changing lives one by one' - which we all do, but the poorest paid do some of the most emotionally challenging work of all, on a salary of 15-16k in the main. They therefore also need considerable levels of management and supervision from those experienced and qualified to provide it, to keep them, service users and the public safe.

Most of the time Charity workers work on days off and whilst on leave because it's really hard to just detach in the midst on things when it involves people's lives - I've got better at it in my current role - only because I'm no longer operational - I work to win and develop new services, maintain contracts for existing services and develop partnerships with other charities to save money and improve service delivery - operationally though, that's incredibly tough to do.

And all whilst facing massive cuts to funding.

I would not change one part of my 18 year charity work career - I have met some amazing people, faced some massive challenges and (hopefully!) really helped to make services for vulnerable people the best they can be and helped some people change their lives for the better along the way. And everyone in the sector is the same in my view - if you are lucky enough to pick up a great salary along the way, enjoy - you are in the minority and have probably worked really hard to get there.

[Nokesy]

And for the record, the salaries mentioned previously are unheard of to me - CEO's of charities I know, which turnover £10-17M, still only earn 60-70k. And we are not for profit.

[Swanny]

Nice one Nokesy :D



And when the cancer charities stop researching a cure because they can't attract good enough executives to manage the research facilities that's ok, because at least nobody's getting paid a lot

Similarly the charities who have to manage multi billion pound budgets to provide children's services to protect them from abuse - they won't be able to attract a financial director capable of managing billion pound budgets but that's ok as long as nobody gets paid a big salary

Or we try to find an FD who will choose min wage at a charity instead of a large salary plus perks at a private company

Surprisingly there are still good kind skilful people out there that care more about giving than receiving. Not everyone is a materialistic



As for Cancer check out Rick Simpson http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/rick-simpson.html and see how much he earns

[Vulcanboy]

What annoys me is that some charity executives earn around £250k per annum, according to their own published Annual Reports. Some charities adverts talk about saving the lives of children, with your money, but spend it on 'infrastructure' projects. I'm not talking about the thousands of real charity workers who give selflessly to others. They give their time and or money, and do fantastic work for the needy. How much did mother Theresa of Calcutta earn? :mad:

[SupeRDel]

On thing that worries me is the amount of times you see people on forums and Facebook who organise events or do personal things then say the money is going to a charity or a family in need that do not seem to be regulated.

People jump up and say "What a worthy cause" and hand over hard cash.

Some say that they hope to raise X amount of £'s but have you noticed that you never see any accounts from any of these events.
No breakdowns of costs and expenses - did the organisers use a portion to cover expenses, etc and more importantly at the end of it how much was given to the actual charity and the proof.