To think volunteers prepared to work for free can be very damaging

[feellikeahugefailure]

Just that really. If there are large numbers of people prepared to work for free for certain jobs it really suppresses the wages in that industry and people get used to having (armature) labour for free so wont pay for it.

Anyone else finding this?

Which is all very well if the charity is about clean water in developing countries, ie an additional service as far as UK residents are concerned.

When the charity is working in the UK and has accepted a government contract for delivering an essential service - and recent governments of all stamps have done this and plan to do a lot more - then the "ooh, but we're a charity" bit rings a little more hollow.

In the new NHS-is-a-brand-not-a service, charities bid against commercial companies to provide, say, physiotherapy for the town of Worcester. If the charity is planning not to pay its staff, it can significantly underbid a commercial company. (Which may itself underbid the existing NHS hospital which would be using union-negotiated national pay scales rather than cheapest bodies it can get through the door.)

Exactly rhoda. And sorry, but if someone is that devastated at the sight of all these music college graduates unable to secure work in their chosen field, there's nothing stopping that person from getting the fuck out of the way. People who currently make a living from music could always go and do something else, thus freeing up opportunities for said graduates and saving them from the terrible fate of becoming 'wannabes'. But presumably people who've been in the game a few decades are exempt from the moral requirement to sacrifice their own preferences so other people can get paid to be musicians. They're not being entitled, they just deserve more than the rest of you!

I love the assumption that the alternative to something being done by volunteers would be someone being paid to do it.

Our local playgroup could pay for staff - but not on the 50p per week per child paid by parents.

The foodbank could be run by paid staff but then they'd have to charge for food.

If I'd charged to be Chair of the local preschool (ditto Treasurer and rest of committee) then I suspect it'd have had to sold a hell of a lot more raffle tickets to stay open.

Our local authority shut our library. It's been re-opened and run by volunteers. We could pay them, of course, but then we'd have to charge for loans so it wouldn't be a free service any more.

Ironically, I work for a charity, and according to many sources the money spent on my salary/pension is wasted "admin costs".

Anyone having a magic bullet to all this, 10 Dowing Street is that way >> Be my guest.

BarbarianMum

You can see on the first page of this thread people make a clear distinction between genuine voluntary work - the low cost play group in your example - and fake voluntary work ie Tesco, bullshit 'internships' et al using cheap labour in place of paid.

There is a huge difference between volunteering and workfare. There are many legalities in volunteering that organisations have to adhere to in order to take on volunteers, and it isn't replacing paid work, it's simply helping the charity survive. Libraries are an exception to this, but there was a long and drawn out consultation to get so many volunteers in libraries before it could happen. (wrongly in my view)

Fair enough but what about all the stuff in the middle? Our library is a classic example - until 2 years ago a public service run by professional librarians. Now it isn't. No-one is happy about that but LA has had its budgets slashed again.

It is also a social mobility issue in, for example, media and creative industries, politics, and indeed the voluntary sector. People with family money and support can afford to work, unpaid, and build skills and their CVs, so have a better chance of getting a paid job in the field.

Bil is a musician who also has a day job. Or he has a job and is a night-time musician. I don't think he could possibly make ends meet playing in the orchestra of the local theatre and at weddings etc.

Reminds me of the presenter from MY CAT FROM HELL - tv program on animal planet channel my kids are mad about - every single time introduces himself with by night I am a musician and by day a cat behaviourist.

I see so many coming out of music colleges eager to become working musicians in an industry that doesn't really offer them much. It is sad and heart breaking to see the talent go to waste and watch them having to seek a day job.

My first university had a massive music department so I shared halls and houses with music undergraduates. Didn't meet one who didn't know how hard music was to make a living from. Many had a back up plan of teaching, few managed sideways moves like music publishing but all knew it would be competitive and hard.

When I was retaining from my field- there were several music graduates musicians/ on my course. Heard a few people say how said it was they couldn't make a living with music but all the rest of us where coming from a huge diverse set of backgrounds which hadn't given us the options or money or lifestyle we wanted.

Pausing yet again, I agree with every thing you say. I don't think a lot of people realise that jobs such as counsellors/facilitators in services such as addiction and mental health are working for free now, in these new charity/service provider organizations, and though they may be labelled NHS on them, they are not actually NHS funded at all. Not all, but getting funding and jobs in these type of sectors is increasingly difficult and a lot of the organizational models depend heavily on volunteers, as do the police (specials being the most obvious example, full of people hoping to get in the police afterwards and completely over-subscribed).

It's not looking good, is it HP?

But NewLife, those of us who are amateur musicians are the ones helping music college graduates to get employment! We're the ones going to concerts and bringing our children to concerts. We're the ones employing them as teachers and orchestral leaders and coaches and conductors and extra players and soloists. Amateur choirs often hire entire orchestras.

I used to live in Germany where there is a much more active professional classical music scene - and you know what, there is a much more active amateur music scene too, and the two work together, just like in this country.

If someone can go through music college and not come out a better player than me, then frankly they can starve all they like but I still won't want to listen to them. And if they are good then I'm no competition to them. What right do they have to say the amateur can't enjoy what they love? Sod that. The pros I know are happy to work with us amateurs. They are generally paid when we are paying to play despite doing exactly the same job.

time

Yes, has always been hard breaking into music industry, but I strongly believe it has got harder to earn a living and have given the reasons why.
I don't think volunteers and amateurs help tbh, and semi pro's push the fees down.
For those who are determined yes, it's still possible, just
It certainly isn't the earnings it should be, but hey ho.
I know it's the same for many jobs these days.

I've volunteered in a few organisations, but never have those been in a position to pay someone for their work (the only exceptions would be when I have acted as a Chartered Accountant for some local charities, some of which probably could pay if they had to... I'm guessing /hoping that few people in their right mind would waste time feeling sorry for other CA's whose potential income I've undermined).

The arts aren't essential to life - thererefore when the economy is bad, they will suffer, And they are a "glam" industry, appealing to people, and so will always attract more people than they can sustain.

I have enjoyed lots of different types of volunteering

I have met lots of different people that I would have never normally met

I have willingly donated my time

Some corporate companies actively encourage their staff to volunteer in the wider community

You never know who you are going to meet or what new things you will try doing

I have never thought of it as taking someones paid job

Doing voluntary work got me my TA qualification, and, ultimately, a permanent job as one.

I'm a member of a Facebook group called Stop Working For Free, which highlights the massive problem in the arts/music/literature world of large, profit-making corporations expecting artists/creative people to work for 'exposure' (even those who have been making their living out of music/writing/design/photography for years, for whom exposure is not that big a deal because they are well-respected and famous).
Regarding Newlife's H: it's not that 'amateurs' shouldn't play music, it's that people willing to work for no money (because they are young, dazzled by the possibility of fame, or have always been pampered and supported by family money) are playing into the hands of the greedy businesses who need the 'content' (music, writing, visuals) but don't want to pay for it.
The biggest and most often cited example is the Huffington Post. That website is worth millions of pounds, yet will not pay writers a penny. One of their top bods has just been quoted as saying that paying writers makes their work 'inauthentic'.
And yeah, there are loads of ignorant whiners saying that those who can't earn a living from artistic/creative work should just 'grow up' and get a 'proper job', but the insistence on paying everyone but the creative artist for the things you watch and read and listen to is hugely, hugely damaging to society.
Yes, partly because when the only people who can afford to create things are drawn from a small pool of comfortably-off you get a very narrow, stilted, monotonous culture. And partly because (and this is already happening) the idea that the money should go to anyone and everyone apart from the person doing the actual key work is now spreading across to other industries. So you get things like Task Rabbit and Uber where millions are made by the shareholders and the app designers, but the people doing the work pretty much have to pay to be employed...

I don't think we can shut the stable door now. The horse is some way off in the distance...

Look at t'internet. It's all freeeeee !!!! YouTubers, Vloggers, Bloggers... all plugging away for nothing in the hope that they will grab people's attention. Times change. It's tough, and no doubt because everyone now believes they can do anything, standards have slipped.

The next generation will probably balk at paying anyone anything at all. If they have clawed their way up by working for nowt, I'm sure they'll have scant patience with oldies moaning that they should be paid for writing/editing/playing music/acting.

armature? Fucking hell

The same happened to the art of the typeface designer - nowadays erroneously called 'fonts'.

They take forever to design, longer to digitise, even longer to amend kerning, spacing, leading etc. They used to cost a small fortune to buy per family, e.g. Times New Roman.

Nowadays they are freely available everywhere. Why? Because there is software that automates the real work, which is why, regardless of letter shape and size, they all work the same on a page. I know just how adjustable the old fashioned typeface used to be, how much more manipulation was available - I used to design and digitise them! But Word and WYSIWYG has ruined all of that.

Apparently tis called progress.

Question: why does 'progress' usually mean a loss of standards?

Every single member of staff where I work started as a volunteer, myself included
Without volunteering I would not be in the position I am now, well paid job, qualifications, CV, references, new friends and a new lease of life!
It has been amazing and I've loved every moment of it

Every single member of staff where I work started as a volunteer, myself included
Without volunteering I would not be in the position I am now, well paid job, qualifications, CV, references, new friends and a new lease of life!

Lovely for you that you have the job you want but consider for a moment if you had not had the time to volunteer because you were spending that time working in low paid jobs to make ends meet. This is my issue with volunteering and unpaid internships. The people that are able to give time for free are those who already have a certain amount of wealth to allow them to do that. Its just another factor that widens the gap between the rich and the poor.

OOps that first bit was supposed to be a quote for the post above!

See this is why I could never work in the field that I qualified in

The only way into the field is about 18months volunteering (on average)

I have children though - If I have to put my children in childcare to work, I need a way to pay for that nursery/breakfast club.

So I can't work for free.. which = I can't work in my field at all

At least not until they're much older and can have their own house key, but by then no doubt my qualification will no longer be relevant

Addtionally, people volunteering to work for free reduces the burden on those that should be paying. Schools should be properly funded via public funds, not relying on parents giving time for free. Likewise in care roles. Why should the education and health care system be subsidised by volunteers? They need to be properly funded and that is only going to happen when a government has the balls to redistribute wealth via taxation.

I applied for lots of the lowest paying positions in my field, and the response was always the same: "go and get some experience first". Which = volunteering. I was applying for the lowest rung of the paid jobs in the field