Is this normal for a volunteer position?

[Toddlerteaplease]

Saw an appeal a few weeks ago for volunteers to work in some archives. I applied as I'd be really interested in it. And I know the archivist. After several weeks I've been asked to write a letter detailing my skills and experience. Is this normal?! I'm not applying for a paid job!

As with applying for a paid post, you need to outline the aspects of your work history and experience which are relevant to the volunteer role. They need to know if you can do what is required, so expand and explain how your skills from previous jobs equip you for this post which will also demonstrate that you understand what is required in this role.
Also, they need to know you are capable and will want reliability too as volunteer applicants sometimes don’t appreciate the commitment that is required - for example, expecting to happily do the role every week until anything better crops up - because they are not being paid they think they can just say they won’t be coming in.
List your interests and which aspects attract you to the role.
Good luck!

DH recently applied for a volunteer position, using his specialist skills, and had to submit a CV, application and letter. Then he had two formal and one informal interview. He wasn't appointed, even though no one else had applied and they'd been looking for a year as he wasn't a churchgoer.

If you're working in an archive, they'll also want people with clean hands so you're up there.

But think of the damage good-willed but badly-skilled people can do - like that 'restoration' of the Jesus painting last year - that's why they need skills and references

Oh yes. Comes as a surprise doesn't it? Volunteer roles nowadays are very different, they are essentially jobs that are unpaid.
I get very annoyed about this as my sector of work has moved further and further into the voluntary sector. There are plenty of volunteer roles available, but I cannot afford to work for nothing.

In fact, not to put you off if you're interested, op, but actually this is my old sector of work. I can guarantee that 15 years ago someone would have been paid to do the work. It's possible that they would even have had to be qualified.

@MayYouLiveInInterestingTimes Me too :) . To be fair we don't know exactly what the work is, archives have always used volunteers and there has aleays been a place for them but I agree there has been a creep into roles that should probably be paid. I think theres a place for volunteering - it can benefit both the organisation and the volunteer, but there needs to be a clear demarcation between volunteering work and paid work

Depends exactly where you were and how far you’re going back I suppose. 40 years ago all work used to be paid and there was no volunteering to speak of. If work is being done it needs to be paid IMO, otherwise you undermine the whole principle of working for a living - as we see happening - and bring back this attitude we’ve seen on this thread, where we should all be grateful to be given the chance to be allowed to service the rich (tug forelock while you’re at it too).

At the moment I am seeing a clear line emerge between voluntary and paid work, and it’s the wrong one - paid roles often say you need to have been in a paid role before to be allowed to apply. All entry routes are being cut and neither qualifications nor experience, paid or not, are considered transferable any longer. What’s the point?