To feel deflated after a charity xmas do hearing a paid worker saying it was a 'free lunch' for them?

[YNK]

I had an injury and joined a great charity group a few years ago to meet for coffee once a week and to enjoy activities and support each other.

Some members are in residential care due to the severity of their condition so they are always accompanied by carers, others have fully recovered.
Members pay for activities and weekly meetings and pay happily and willingly for the chance to meet and socialise.

Some members have suffered and been compensated legally for injuries caused and many are now financially secure and if assistance is provided, I feel this 'them and us' divide is hurtful.

After a very nice xmas lunch, as we were leaving a group of paid carers could be heard saying it was at least a decent 'free lunch'

I feel grubby now and I'm thinking of leaving the group - AIBU?

They may have wanted to be there but then had something else come up after they’d accepted the invitation, it could’ve been “I had to miss my child’s nativity to come to this, but at least is was a decent free meal” referencing a previous Christmas meal they’d had that wasn’t nice.

OP you wanted to show your gratitude but you did that in a way that suited you, much like people who buy gifts they themselves would want. You didn’t consider whether the carers would want a group meal out, they may have appreciated your gratitude more if it had been in the form of a supermarket gift card which would always be welcomed by someone on low pay at this time of year.

Gosh

OP is massively unreasonable and not interested in what anyone else has to say. I think we can all just be glad we didn’t have to go to lunch with her and pretend it was a huge privilege for us.

Wasn't the carer there to look after someone? So they were working? They got a free lunch at work and commented that it was nice. I don't get what they've done wrong?

Let me assure you that while you and your friends are not party to their pay and conditions, they will be utterly shit and the renumeration for dealing with personal care is so utterly shit that a "free lunch" is seen as comfort and respite, which is likely why the statement was made.

These people are not your friends, or your servants, or your gracious proletariat, in the exact way that you are not their friends, masters, or charitable providers of food.

The only contract they have with your circle is to provide care those that they are assigned to.
A free lunch is a work perk, and it is how it is viewed across the board.

I realise that it's dehumanising, but it's how the care industry works.

We have a charity that comes to my work in a offer free hot lunch to anyone who needs it. The charity workers don't judge the circumstances of the folks who take advantage of the meals. Sometimes our staff members will grab one, and I'm glad they do, less waste and you never know who is struggling.

You are right- it is dehumanising to always be on the receiving end of the relationship. Always be the job, the work, the burden, when you would much rather wipe your own arse and go out to lunch without needing a carer to wash you first.

So it probably would have been a better idea to keep the comments out of earshot of the service users (who after all, are as much screwed over by the shit show that is the ‘care industry’ as the carers are)…

in the same vein as you probably wouldn’t stand chatting to your colleagues about your baby shower at the weekend when you are the sister on a wards of women who have just had miscarriages or still births, and standing next to a patient’s bed.

Undertakers are only there doing undertaking for the money, but they still try to behave in a solemn way when near the family even though they don’t give a shit about the deceased in a personal sense.

I attended in hope we could all enjoy each others contribution as equals.

I thought they were invited to be our friends and not considered as mere dogsbodies.

OP you seem to be upset because the comment you heard forced you to recognise that the carers are not you or your fellow attendees' friends, and you are not at the event as equals. But that's the truth. You want the carers to want to be there, and to see it as a social event rather than a work thing, but it isn't, for them. As PP said, the comment burst your bubble.

You don't like that you are a service user and other see you and your group members as such. It's not up to the carers to pretend that a work function is their chosen social activity, so that you don't have to acknowledge reality. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but you don't seem to be taking on board what many posters have tried to say to you.

It’s less about being grateful and more about being polite. Who wants to here someone say stuff like that after spending time with them?

Again being on a low income does not excuse you from being kind or polite.

@inamarina obviously no one has^^ to feel a bond with their clients. I think it's just jarring if you have thought of everyone as part of the group and then realise you are just work for some of the people there.

Years ago, when I was a childminder, I was invited sometimes to children's birthday parties. Yes, looking after them was my job, but still, it was nice to be acknowledged by their parents as important to their children - that's the closest comparison I personally have. I might not have always wanted to go but it would have been rude to say anything remotely negative while at those events.

Yeah, they should've made certain they were out of earshot for sure.

Sounds like the carer was just happy to get a free lunch?

No, they're not there as friends, but it is nice to have their work appreciated and valued by the charity and service users and to be invited for lunch.

We don’t know the context.

Person A ‘I have to get caught up on xyz’
Person B ‘yeah this afternoon will be busy but it’s been nice and at least we got a decent free lunch’

its just colleagues chitchat of which op heard a small portion and assumed it was derogatory.

Op wanted them to attend as friends. They aren’t friends. But she is then upset because they haven’t acted as though they are being paid to attend and professional.

I didn’t invite the undertaker to my mums post funeral wake as a friend of the family then complain he didn’t act like an undertaker at the wake.

A Sister on a ward who had a baby shower would be obviously pregnant. Do they not allow that? They wouldn’t have to mention a baby shower. But again, the sister wouldn’t haven’t been invited to the patients bedside as a friend.

This is the issue. Op (and possibly the company) have blurred boundaries. She believes that because people the charity supports have bonded (though her op suggests they haven’t) doesn’t make the carers friends.

Op wanted them to attend as friends. But is jumping at ‘well it’s unprofessional to say that’ in which case she is viewing them as working.

Thank you both. Nice posts on a thread that is overly harsh towards op.

This.

My Nan always took her carer out for a Christmas lunch (& paid her time too so she wasn't missing out on hours) to show her appreciation for making her life so much easier.

Her carer was lovely and wouldn't have dreamed of being rude about a kind gesture from someone who was really grateful for her support.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't carers some of the most poorly paid workers in the country?

Why would you expect them to feel bonded to the group?

Yes. And there’s a huge shortage of them. Wonder why.

Yes, I think you're right, and it's a job I certainly wouldn't be capable of doing well, if at all, even if it suddenly became extremely highly paid. I'm afraid I'm missing the point as to why it was rude of someone attending the lunch to say to presumably a fellow carer, that it was at least a decent free lunch, when they were being overheard out of context.

It is similar to a parent overhearing a nursery worker saying a comment that made it clear they just saw looking after their child as work. Lots of parents would feel upset about that.

This situation with OP is common in care situations. Because paid staff and those they are caring for do bond if they spend a lot of time together. It is a difficult situation that has lots of issues that are rarely recognised in public.

Given that the OP hasn't explained the situation entirely, & frequently contradicted herself (they were paid, they weren't paid, it was a group of them, it was one man she'd never seen before, it was a treat, it was work, there's a them vs us mentality, we're all so close, this one comment has dissolved the glue of friendship, I never said anything about glue, etc.) I think we may term her an unreliable narrator, and charitably suggest her interpretation of what actually happened may not chime with others present.

I do feel sorry for carers. It is an important job and ideally they should be super professional. But in reality they are paid less than people working in supermarkets.

I can't even work out where you are finding the offense in what they said.

I get it OP, having worked in care. It was a comment that shouldn't have been said in earshot of anyone other than other care staff. It may be true but a bit crass to hear.

Given that the OP hasn't explained the situation entirely, & frequently contradicted herself (they were paid, they weren't paid, it was a group of them, it was one man she'd never seen before, it was a treat, it was work, there's a them vs us mentality, we're all so close, this one comment has dissolved the glue of friendship, I never said anything about glue, etc.) I think we may term her an unreliable narrator, and charitably suggest her interpretation of what actually happened may not chime with others present.

Agree.

I have asked the OP to explain what this part of her opening post means, and as yet no response:

Some members have suffered and been compensated legally for injuries caused and many are now financially secure and if assistance is provided, I feel this 'them and us' divide is hurtful.

One overheard comment which the OP has no idea what it was in response to or any of the context in which it was said and yet has jumped to a damning judgement of the person who said it and why they said it.

I think the OP has explained herself well. I think those saying she has not are failing to understand the nuances in this kind of relationship.