To feel outraged at my friends re charity salaries?

[Pissedoffandbored]

Have a group chat going with a load of my girlfriends. There have been some additions to the group chat this week, some I know well and others are just acquaintances. One girl I don’t know sent a link to published salaries for charities. Girl didn’t know I work for a National Charity in a senior position and slated the amount I earn saying people don’t deserve to earn more than PM. At this point I interjected making her aware of my position and she proceeded to have a go at me. I defended my position but most of my friends agreed I earned too much since I worked for a charity.

So AIBU to be pissed off? Also, is this the general consensus or are my mates just dick heads?

I often think the world would be a much better place if people, when encountering someone who earns big money, £150K a year, or more, instead of saying "that's fucking outrageous, you bloody leech, no one needs that kind of money" actually said "wow, that's brilliant, well done you. How did you get to where you got?"

Then they might actually learn something useful, that could help them on the path to earning a better salary.

But if that does ever happen, it won't be a trend started on MN, that's for sure. Rarely have I come across a forum with such bitter, jealous and mean spirited contributors when it comes to other people's financial success.

Where did the OP mention that people shouldn't be paid when you made this comment?

was in relation to this straw man comment

Those who CHOOSE to volunteer now think much need and required staff should not get paid at all.....

you have been all over this thread with your intelligent emojis and strawmen, I stand by my comment that, yes you have missed the overall trend of the thread

Nope, you are not unreasonable. Sensible market rate is what all staff should be paid and if at that level of job it's a salary higher than the PM's then so be it.

Less than that and you aren't getting top quality staff and it costs the charity more in the long run. If you want well run charities with high performing staff throwing all they have into their jobs you spent going to get that paying less than market rate.

Yabu. Sorry but i think its a disgusting amount charity or not. Yes they need people who are good at their jobs etc. But money doesnt guarantee that. How many ceos and directors etc have been done for various things? They are just people after all, the amount they are paid does not always reflect they are good people that are good at their job.
I would rather see nurses and hca's, carers, paramedics and firefighters paid 150k than a ceo of a charity. Regardless of which charity it is.
How much do the people that work in the chairity shops, the canvassers and the people that sift through the bags of donations getting bitten by other people fleas get paid? Minimum wage with no benifts?? Whislt you are not on the "front line" dealing with the service users, yes you may work long hours but without the people stood in the shops and canvassing where would your charity be?
In my eyes if they can afford to pay you 150k+ (how many more people are on this scale?) Then they are not putting enough in to the cause they are promoting, and certainly not looking after the staff and volunteers at the bottom of the chain.

Your mates were being dickheads.
Charities are businesses. They need to pay decent salaries to get good staff. Stupid people don't understand this.
It's not "easy" working for a charity.
And it's a damn sight better than working for some bastard of a finance firm or in advertising or tech... just making more money for rich walkers IMO 🤷🏻‍♀️

Hold on, it was you doing the full on emoji with pretending the thread was about people volunteering shouldn't be paid.

No I didnt. It was just one of the many example of why staff should not be paid reflective wages or no wages at all. I never said anything about volunteers shouldn't be paid. Have you mixed my post up with another poster as you did bold a post in your early reply to me that was not mine?

Where did the OP mention that people shouldn't be paid when you made this comment?

"I donate to the charity not to pay peoples salaries" was the last line of that persons post.

Your constant use of emojis doesn't bother me in the slightest, but does highlight the type of user you are, so enter clap emoji here etc.

Its bothered you enough to mention it twice like its some diamond rated put down 😂🤣

I like emojis it saves on typing.

The overall theme of the thread is about scrutinising of third sector wages, I would bet my house on you being full on outrage emoji when it comes to private sector wages.

You wanna hand over the keys now?

Charities are businesses.

So they scrutinised as much as the private sector then, tax breaks, difference in wages, included in the partisan press of 'bankers earning 150k plus a year taking using tax loopholes'

It's the charity sector that seem to think they are exempt, and others usually on the left that are not consistent.

I won’t tell you my opinion cos there’s plenty that says what I want to say but I do want to say you know what good for the girl! She has a view about something and she didn’t back away embarrassed when you explained, I think that takes integrity and we need more people like her in the world

you have been all over this thread with your intelligent emojis and strawmen, I stand by my comment that, yes you have missed the overall trend of the thread

Really how so?

See I thought this thread was about friends attacking the OP because she is paid £150k as the CEO of a charity.
After many pages it appears many posters dont actually have a clue how big charities run and are naive in believing £160 million pound a year companies can be run effectively on cheap labour and volunteers.

But if you say I am missing the trend then I will take your very trustworthy word for it.

Charities are held to MUCH higher standards than any other type of business. There is transparency.

But all the "iq of a tin of salmon" people dint bother to look through annual reports and scour the Charity commission website. Their opinion is largely uninformed and based on someone they once knew who temper at a charity HQ for a few weeks a decade ago.

Any over inflated salary is greedy not just charity work CEO's or not. Grabbing all you can get makes you an appalling human being.
Take a step out of your corporate bubble to look at the real world and it's many problems. Selfish parasites.

Sensible market rate is what all staff should be paid and if at that level of job it's a salary higher than the PM's then so be it.
And yet large organisations with lots of money at the top all magically seem to have no money to pay their minimum wage workers decent sick pay or improve their wages.
This 'market rates' always seems to favour those at the top, whilst pushing pay and conditions down at the bottom.

I'm more than happy for a CEO of a non profit organisation be paid appropriately, but they should have the morals to do right by their staff before congratulating themselves on how brilliant they are.

I left my NHS guaranteed pension job to bring my skills to the charity sector. I am working for a lower salary and continue to do more than my paid hours for the work I do. Those who choose to criticise the charity sector do so out of ignorance for the expertise and and qualifications of those who work in the sector out of dedication for the work we do and the causes we support fail to recognise the sacrifices we have made and the value we bring to the third sector who would not be able to survive with out us.

the sacrifices we have made

Their opinion is largely uninformed and based on someone they once knew who temper at a charity HQ for a few weeks a decade ago.

They have an HQ!!! That's fucking disgraceful. I don't donate to charities so they can pay for a bloody HQ. They should be working out of a tent!

The pay is right.

We'll have to disagree on whether its "pure greed", since I strongly believe people should be compensated for the role they perform.

I'd be interested in what those who think this is sheer greed actually think a CEO does and is responsible for? Especially in large scale charities? I get the impression that there is a blind ignorance in this respect for many posters. How many of you work closely enough with your/any CEO to have a clue on what it entails before you judged what it was worth?

And more than that, if people realise a charity covers more than tin rattlers and letter campaigns? That this includes independent hospitals like the London Clinic? The institute of engineering and technology? The Francis Crick Institute?

This makes me feel crap. I work for healthcare company who care for kids with severe health needs. I work hard to do my best to bring money in for my family and earn less than 7% of your salary.

Any over inflated salary is greedy not just charity work CEO's or not. Grabbing all you can get makes you an appalling human being.
Take a step out of your corporate bubble to look at the real world and it's many problems. Selfish parasites.

The OP has already stated she could earn much more not working for a charity doing the same role

I deal with the real world every day.
I deal with its homeless problem.
Its substance misuse problem.
Lack of mental health support.
Debt problem.
DV problem.
Employment problem.
Food and fuel poverty.
Lack of support and adaptations for disabled people
Social isolation problem.

What part of the real world am I nit seeing Dre?

Do you have the knowledge and skills to be the CEO of a large charity Desert?

Don't feel crap about your job you clearly make a difference and I guarantee the people you support know your name and appreciate you but not the name of those at the top!
At the same time dont berate the OP because she has worked towards this type of role and possesses what is needed to preform it well.

I'd be interested in what those who think this is sheer greed actually think a CEO does and is responsible for? Especially in large scale charities? I get the impression that there is a blind ignorance in this respect for many posters. How many of you work closely enough with your/any CEO to have a clue on what it entails before you judged what it was worth?

I couldn’t have put it better myself. The lack of awareness of what it takes to run a charity bringing in 10’s of millions of £5 a year is staggering. Of course someone in a charity with an income of £1,2,3,5 or even possibly £10M shouldn’t be paid £150k but seriously, having responsibility for a business of £100’s of millions of ££££. Of course they should be.

Big charities are not just tin shakers, tea parties and maybe a charity shop they have extremely complex income streams, much of their money will come from grants and foundations as much as they do from donations. They have to run a full infrastructure, IT, HR, Payroll, their finances are complex and need experienced and skilled accountants and a substantial charity cannot and will not run on volunteers alone. Many will fund research, complex support programmes and are accountable for every penny they spend and are scrutinised by both companies house and the charity commission.

The sheer greed, parasite poster thinks ANYONE Who earns an "excessive" salary ought to be ashamed of themselves. How she is defining excessive is unclear.

It's one of those bitter posters mentioned upthread.

Oh and just for clarity, a big Charity like Cancer Research brings in £630 million a year. Much more than a large corporate like marks and Spencer.

All this info is in the public domain. It's not a secret.

See I thought this thread was about friends attacking the OP because she is paid £150k as the CEO of a charity.

I see how you have consistently ignored my quoted comments of yours re 'people apparently not wanting to pay volunteers', and still ignore the fact that the overall trend is people saying that interrogation and justification of such a wage considering the funding model is not a bad thing.

It is you who is trying to justify such a wage, as a simplistic they do good things [insert whatever emoji you think is relevant]

I think a salary should reflect the amount of responsibility one has.
So someone managing the financial side of an multimillion pound company / charity should be paid accordingly.
Because, let's face it. People are trusted to invest & spend that money wisely. They will also be under public scrutiny. So why not pay good wages for the best people available? Why settle for second best just because an organisation is a charity?

With the greatest of respect what do you do for the children’s healthcare charity @DesertSky? It’s clearly something with very low pay, not being a doctor, nurse etc? Why is your role so important to the running of the charity?