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?

Here's another uncomfortable opinion from planet Lifecraft.

If everyone paid every penny they had into a pot, and all the money was divided out equally between the adult population, in 10 years time, 90% of us would be back where we are now.

The person who ownes the off licence chain today would use their share to open an off licence, and then another, and then another. And the pisshead of today would use their in share to buy cans of Special Brew from the off licence by the crateload.

It’s not just about having a good salary. Nothing wrong with that. It’s about expecting the less wealthy to put their hands in their pocket, telling them they are helping the truly needy, when in fact...

And so much for all this talk of ‘bringing in’ income. Charities don’t generate wealth. They wheedle it out of people ... so that the directors can have fancy perks.

In my line of work, I’ve seen quite a lot of self-serving NGOs.

The person who ownes the off licence chain today would use their share to open an off licence, and then another, and then another. And the pisshead of today would use their in share to buy cans of Special Brew from the off licence by the crateload.

Quite possibly, because one is an entrepreneur and the other an addict

If everyone paid every penny they had into a pot, and all the money was divided out equally between the adult population, in 10 years time, 90% of us would be back where we are now.

No evidence for the rest of it. And since it's never going to happen, nobody will know. Just sounds like an excuse not to address or attempt to address the stark inequality in our country. It suits the very wealthy to think people who aren't well off have all brought it upon themselves.

And so much for all this talk of ‘bringing in’ income. Charities don’t generate wealth. They wheedle it out of people ... so that the directors can have fancy perks.

Really? You know that as fact?

My CEO meets with the board of trustees 8 times a year. Each time he has to justify his position. Each time he has to show them facts and figures to prove he is worthy of a job that pays him half he could earn elsewhere.
If he fails the trustees can vote him out and a new person in because thats the contract he signed.
He does not travel 1st class he has to use the sane booking system we all use which is cheapest first or have a damn good reason.yes he goes to fancy dinners and visits parliament woop woop its part of his job.
But yeah your right the perks

Exactly right. It's dogma over pragmatism.
It is a well known human cognitive/ moral bias, I think it is known as "tainted altruism", and there was a series of brilliant experiments about it. I read a book or an article about it last year, but can't remember the title now.

I'm a communist at heart & quite buy into "everyone works hard so should just have identikit homes/clothes/material goods." No need for anyone to have anything but the same basic salary as everyone else.

But I dunno... it's been tried as an economic system and seems to have worked badly. So maybe not.

I'm definitely not a communist but do think there should be a cap on the multiple between the highest and lowest paid in any organisation. That way everyone benefits.

Me too ragged we could try communist-lite - all women to have lifelong vouchers for sanitary products and every block to have communal mowers/gardening stuff/drills/other power tools etc etc.

I work for a charity. We have about 100 employees, mostly on part time contracts. The work we do ends up saving the taxpayer money and is mainly funded through contracts with various public sector bodies as well as legacies. Fundraising is very difficult in these times. We get the money from these bodies because the work we do has a significant impact in the community and saves the public sector money.

Yet the staff working in our charity get paid a lot less than equivalent staff who work in the public sector doing similar jobs. Maybe we are mugs for doing such work but there is such an ethos about our workplace that the relatively low pay is compensated for by the reward in the work we do and the impact we have. We do rely heavily on volunteers as well as paid staff - some of our work can be delivered by volunteers but much of it needs paid and well trained staff.

I work in what might be called admin. I run the database and the IT system. You can't really ask someone to save all their stuff on their home PC and use home emails. I think that GDPR might come into that. Sharing documents, maintaining spreadsheets, client records, etc is slightly more complex than some posters on here think. We are always looking for ways to save money and to economise. We get refurbished IT equipment and always look for best value. Because we should be seen not to waste money as it's not 'our money'

Is money wasted on me? I earn about £24k. Service delivery would be significantly limited if I was not doing my job. Am I an admin cost or I am part of the money spent on delivering the service?

People need paying. Invoices need paying. We have a multi million pound budget. Are the people in the finance team an admin overhead or part of the money on service delivery?

I suppose we could all stop what we are doing and demand higher pay. But that would have a massive effect on our clients. It's a way we are guilt tripped into not asking for pay rises.

I enjoy my job. I could get more in a different job but the ethos at work is incredible.

My boss works incredibly hard. They aren't on a massive salary but they have such a responsibility.

It really pisses me off to see some of the comments on here about charity workers. I know that some charities have been awful in the way they have behaved with fundraising. I am glad that we have never done anything like that.

I wish that people could come and see the work that we do and listen to some of the stories that we hear everyday. It's heartbreaking and we have many staff doing their utmost to help people who have really hard lives using all their skills, knowledge and experience on wages that would be far more if they were in the public sector or the private sector.

Given we seem to be stuck with capitalism, I would be quite happy for everyone's salary & total income to be published.

we could try communist-lite - all women to have lifelong vouchers for sanitary products
Well, in one particular communist regime I had a pleasure of growing up in, sanpro (as well as nappies) were considered a capitalist luxury, not needed by true proletarian women, and therefore were not on the production list at all. Did not even exist.

And so much for all this talk of ‘bringing in’ income. Charities don’t generate wealth. They wheedle it out of people ... so that the directors can have fancy perks.

In the small charity that I used to work for, very little came in via donation. We got more via membership but that gave us little profit by the time we'd provided members with annual publications, newsletters etc. We provided as much as we could electronically to cut costs but many of our members didn't have computers. We'd still get members asking what they got for their money, and if the mood took me I'd say they got to support our cause, as well as attendance at events and the publications.

Most of the money came from bequests. We didn't nag for those as we weren't a large enough organisation to do that. They came from long-standing members who believed in the charity's work. They were then carefully invested and fortunately some of the trustees were trained in finance and knew what they were doing investment wise. That's actually where most of the money came from. We didn't wheedle. Usually it isn't charities who wheedle - they sub-contract to organisations who specialise in getting money out of people. I've cancelled membership of the charities that use those organisations. But don't tar all charities with the same brush.

As for perks, on one occasion when going to a conference overnight I asked for a meal allowance and was denied it. When I pointed out that I was unavoidably away overnight for the good of the charity I did manage to get help towards dinner, though nothing else. I wasn't allowed to take volunteers out at Christmas, unless we paid for ourselves, as that could be seen badly. We were only reimbursed for the cheapest form of travel. All of which is fair enough. But just bear in mind that charities are not all about perks for fat cats.

But volunteering itself can cost volunteers money, which means it can become exclusive, and it shouldn't be. The vast majority of our volunteers were wealthy middle class people who took early retirement. Had they worked for it? Yes. But they were also part of the baby boomer generation who saw their property prices soar. Many of them retired early on profits made from houses bought in the 1970s. The had good pensions of the type we'll not see again. So yes, they worked. They were also lucky.

People play the hand they're dealt. Some people are lazy, yes. As for poor choices, you rarely know it's a poor choice until some time down the track. I made a bad choice regarding my career but with the evidence I had at the time it looked like the best choice. It was a turn of events outside my control that later made it seem like a bad choice. I know full well some people are lazy, but there are enough people out there condemning them without me joining the throng. I'd prefer some understanding of how people end up on a park bench swigging cider.

Lots of charities- probably the majority- don’t rely on public donation.

‘Really? You know that as fact? ’

Yes, I know for a fact that charities don’t generate wealth. Every bit of wealth they have was generated by someone else.

Which is why their top brass’ ‘because I’m worth it’ attitude gets up my nose, and not only mine by the look of it.

“Yes, I know for a fact that charities don’t generate wealth. Every bit of wealth they have was generated by someone else.”

?? What about a housing association? Their income comes from the rent their customers pay to live in the houses they built. How was that generated by someone else?

“Charities don’t generate wealth. They wheedle it out of people ... so that the directors can have fancy perks.”

Oh FFS.

In my charity we do talk to individual major donors. We talk to them honestly and directly about what we do, what our plans are and the evidence of need, demand and impact that underpin those plans.

They are intelligent and shrewd people. They ask searching questions. They make considered decisions about where to put their money.

I also write numerous bids for funding projects and our charitable activity. They have to be detailed and clear and the budget is minutely scrutinised.

I manage a department that enables us to earn income for the charity.

No one, NO ONE gets any fucking perks.

Yes, I know for a fact that charities don’t generate wealth. Every bit of wealth they have was generated by someone else

The charity I work for helps prevent taxpayer's money being spent through the NHS and the social care system as we work we really hard to reduce the need for vulnerable people to need to access this and to stop people falling through the gaps.

Not creating wealth - but we bloody make sure taxpayer's money is not having to be spent in the NHS because we are that 'stitch in time that saves time'.

You'd be surprised how many people suddenly find they need a charity like ours when life hits the buffers.

NO ONE gets any fucking perks

We get coffee and tea bags.......

@Belenus, I hear you.

But here we have someone on 150K. Different scenario, and closer to the one i’m referring to.

I worked for a while in a charity whose director wanted to launch a project in China because he really liked Chinese food.

‘NO ONE gets any fucking perks’

Camilla Batman got a swimming pool, didn’t she?

“Yes, I know for a fact that charities don’t generate wealth. Every bit of wealth they have was generated by someone else.” Private schools have charitable status don’t they? I’m sure they generate wealth.

I worked for a while in a charity whose director wanted to launch a project in China because he really liked Chinese food.

Oh you should have posted earlier. Clearly then that proves every single charity is corrupt and only exists to line the pockets of its CEOs.

‘Private schools have charitable status don’t they? I’m sure they generate wealth.’

Non-profit, is non-wealth generating, is one of the basic conditions for charitable status.

‘Oh you should have posted earlier. Clearly then that proves every single charity is corrupt and only exists to line the pockets of its CEOs.’

Coming back to the 150k salary...