Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Volunteering got complicated …..

414 replies

MellowTiger · 22/02/2025 00:00

I didn’t really know how to title this post. My DH & I volunteer for the same charity. He became involved with volunteer (female) -unknown to me this has been off and on for 6 years. It’s mainly s/text and phone/video call but it’s been very explicit & talk of moving in together. I found out & when challenged he ended it.
OW then started to be awkward with me in online meetings etc (we rarely meet F2F). It got to the point where other people commented on it. We were due to meet F2F as a group so I messaged OW saying requesting she didn’t attend (I have to go she doesn’t). I also said that if she continued being the way she was I would take it further in the organisation and that she couldn’t deny the relationship because I have photos of their conversations.
She put in a complaint saying I had threatened her, which has now been upheld and I now have to be interviewed to be sanctioned.
I feel this is really unfair AIBU? This is a personal matter, I was polite and although I see there was 100 ways to word it, I don’t think saying I’ll take it further (meaning a formal complaint) is really a threat. We ended up cancelling the F2F cos I said I wouldn’t go and without me it can’t take place.
Regardless of the sanction outcome I want to stop volunteering, but this could lead to the charity closure, so my DH says I should carry on. I don’t know what to do.

OP posts:
Negroany · 22/02/2025 15:17

EmmaMaria · 22/02/2025 14:56

And the Equality Act doesn't cover volunteers as such, however in some cases the EA does apply.
The Equality Act applies to everywhere, and everyone, all the time. It is not a piece of employment legislation. It is a piece of legislation that covers equality in all aspects of life.

Show quote history

No it doesn't. It covers employment (but that does include workers, which includes volunteers) and services. It doesn't cover "all aspects of life". I don't have to put wheelchair ramps in my house, for example. And I'm allowed to choose to use an older hairdresser purely on the basis of their age, if I want to. Because the EA does not apply to private individuals.

Negroany · 22/02/2025 15:19

saraclara · 22/02/2025 15:02

@MellowTiger can you confirm whether or not you are a trustee? Does your organisation have any paid staff/a CEO?

I don't understand why you think the charity will have to fold without you. I'm guessing it's tiny then? How many trustees are there?

It would be helpful to know, in order to understand the structure, HR resources and general expertise within the charity.

Can't be that tiny if there's been an investigation and she now has to go to a "panel". I've been a trustee in various small charities and we've never had enough people to convene a "panel", we'd struggle to get two people to interview for a new GM!

Fins2025 · 22/02/2025 15:20

The Equality Act applies to everywhere, and everyone, all the time. It is not a piece of employment legislation. It is a piece of legislation that covers equality in all aspects of life.

Um, no, it doesn't. It's about preventing discrimination in employment and in the conduct of business, third sector and of public services.

It doesn't apply to people in their home or in other private settings. Even though the Scottish Govt tried to regulate what people said to each other in their own living rooms.

martinisforeveryone · 22/02/2025 15:41

crankytoes · 22/02/2025 07:52

You say others within the organisation have commented on her inappropriate manner with you.

You should lodge a complaint against her for bullying.

You could use this and the evidence of other people's witness as a reason why you sent a polite letter not threatening her but pointing out that she needed to back off you otherwise you'd have to disclose the issue.

She had forced the issue by complaining about you so you now have been forced to lodge a complaint about her bullying. And that she has used the charity to attack you

You can show that you did not threaten her. You asked her to not derail the meeting by attending as she had no reason to be there other than to continue harassing you. You did not threaten her. You merely explained that if she did not stop harassing you you would have no option but to disclose the situation as that is the root of her bullying. And now you face been forced to do this

You can turn this whole thing around OP

I agree with all of this except perhaps the 'you can turn it around'. You probably could @MellowTiger but in my opinion you would be better to attend the sanction meeting, present your evidence that you made a polite request saying you hadn't wished to report her behaviour towards you, but if it didn't stop you would take that route. I don't agree with anyone who find that a threat, but as it's been taken further I would want my say.

After clearing it all up, yes, like others I would resign and find something better to do with my time. I'd find better people to associate with too.

Oblomov25 · 22/02/2025 15:52

@EmmaMaria

"The Equality Act 2010 doesn't apply to volunteers in the same way as employees, but organizations should still protect volunteers from discrimination. "

Is that not correct?

Mirabai · 22/02/2025 15:56

Negroany · 22/02/2025 15:19

Can't be that tiny if there's been an investigation and she now has to go to a "panel". I've been a trustee in various small charities and we've never had enough people to convene a "panel", we'd struggle to get two people to interview for a new GM!

Show quote history

Well the “investigation” was carried out by one person and the 3 person panel is probably the other trustees. Any small charity needs at least 3 trustees.

ProfessionalPirate · 22/02/2025 15:56

Franjipanl8r · 22/02/2025 11:07

Because she said she’s happy to stop volunteering but her DH is persuading her not to. This whole thing is a DH problem.

Show quote history

It’s within OP’s power to stop volunteering (and imo she doesn’t need to resolve anything with her DH or consider him at all to do so) but if she wants to carry on it’s the charity she needs to deal with.

Oblomov25 · 22/02/2025 16:01

However you look at this, it's sad and embarrassing, whichever charity this is, as a pp suggested assuming religious? As a trustee, people probably know ow had been having an affair with OP's Dh for 6 years, now she's got to go to a panel meeting. None of this is good.

Negroany · 22/02/2025 16:06

Mirabai · 22/02/2025 15:56

Well the “investigation” was carried out by one person and the 3 person panel is probably the other trustees. Any small charity needs at least 3 trustees.

Show quote history

Exactly, so it can't be "tiny", which is what I was referring to in the previous post.

Mirabai · 22/02/2025 16:16

Negroany · 22/02/2025 16:06

Exactly, so it can't be "tiny", which is what I was referring to in the previous post.

Show quote history

That’s as tiny as any charity can be - like I said it’s mandatory to have 3 trustees minimum.

HellsBells67 · 22/02/2025 16:30

YABU for staying with an arsewipe who cheated for six years. HTH

Original poster
MellowTiger · 22/02/2025 17:01

Crackl3andpop · 22/02/2025 03:06

Hi OP!

it’s a threat because you said “if you don’t do XXX I will do X”. While I think what you probably meant to say was “this is a deeply personal and embarrassing situation for us both, given the hostility I feel from you in virtual meetings I would like to request that you do not attend face to face as I do not feel safe to be around your persons. I had been happy to deal with this behind closed doors but if you continue to publicly air your grievances I feel I will be left with no choice but to escalate via internal policies”.

i would also very much appeal to this panel and explain tempers are running high due to it being such a sensitive situation and instead of phrasing it correctly you perhaps let it get the better of you, that you’d like to bring to their attention the evidence of her bullying you and that there are witnesses of this.

but personally? I’d tell them all to shove it. If the charity would cease to function without you then they should be supporting you not sanctioning you in my opinion.

and the OW and your delightful husband would be being told to go fuck themselves as far away from me as possible 🤭

Thank you - I love this wording and I will be using it as a starter for my personal statement.

OP posts:
PandaTime · 22/02/2025 17:37

MellowTiger · 22/02/2025 17:01

Thank you - I love this wording and I will be using it as a starter for my personal statement.

Show quote history

No, you are facing this panel because of your actions, not the OW's. You had the same opportunity to address her bullying as she did (by taking it to the seniors) but instead you decided to tackle it this way which was wrong. You need to show that you acknowledge that and take accountability for it.

PandaTime · 22/02/2025 17:39

You can put in a complaint about her bullying you seperately, but it is not for this panel to address.

Convolvulus · 22/02/2025 17:43

5128gap · 22/02/2025 10:37

The OP didn't warn her not to behave in a certain way. She told her not to attend a meeting. She messaged her saying if she didn't comply she would take it further and that she had photos of the affair messages. That's a world a way from 'Sylvia if you don't stop doing X,Y or Z (specific inappropriate behaviour) I will have to make a formal complaint about X, Y and Z (specific inappropriate behaviour)' OP made it clear she would reveal the affair in all its embarrassing explicit glory if the OW attended the meeting. That's is absolutely a threat.

Show quote history

That's a misrepresentation of what OP says. She said "I also said that if she continued being the way she was I would take it further in the organisation and that she couldn’t deny the relationship because I have photos of their conversations." That is exactly saying what you deem to be acceptable. She did not suggest this was tied in with attending the meeting (in respect of which OP was basically saying she would not attend if the OW did), and she only referred to having photographs to deter the OW from trying to make out that OP is fantasising about the affair.

If OW is publicly verbally attacking and targeting another volunteer, particularly one whose husband she has been shagging, she can hardly complain about that volunteer taking the approved complaints route to stop her.

Convolvulus · 22/02/2025 17:44

LIZS · 22/02/2025 12:53

But it is not op place to decide who can and can't attend meetings. She clearly wants ow out but her h can continue as before.

As you don't know what the powers of trustees at this charity are, you don't know whether it is OP's place or not.

Convolvulus · 22/02/2025 17:48

saraclara · 22/02/2025 13:56

This thread is absolutely batshit. The lack of logical thinking from most posters, or of any consideration at all for what is and isn't acceptable people management within a charity, is just insane.

A charity is not exempt from HR regulations. If anything they have to be even more careful, because volunteers can be more difficult to manage.

I am both a charity trustee, and a normal volunteer, and have seen situations from both sides. Small charities are even more at risk from getting these things wrong, as they don't have the same structural scale as large NGOs and private companies, and are often tempted to cut corners on expensive HR advice.

In my organisation, among other things, we have had to ask a trustee to step down (rather than be pushed) and manage a safeguarding situation by asking a volunteer to step down from the role they were doing, to one where their mis-step could not be repeated.

We would absolutely be taking the OW's complaint seriously. The rights and wrongs of the affair would not be our business. We would only be concerned with the complaint regarding OP's threat, and would be contacting our HR company to ensure that we addressed the situation correctly.

Edited

Would you not be concerned with the counter-complaint that OP inevitably has to make with regard to the volunteer's overt public hostility to her in dealing with charity work?

TourangaLeila · 22/02/2025 17:52
  1. You DID threaten her. In fact I'd call is blackmail.
  2. Your anger should be directed towards your husband.
ItTook9Years · 22/02/2025 17:56

Oblomov25 · 22/02/2025 13:45

@ItTook9Years

I appreciate Charities have a Code of Conduct. And the Equality Act doesn't cover volunteers as such, however in some cases the EA does apply. Or rather you can't just have charities behaving willy nilly, unreasonably.

Yes, but this case would not have EA considerations on the basis of the info here.

ItTook9Years · 22/02/2025 17:58

EmmaMaria · 22/02/2025 14:56

And the Equality Act doesn't cover volunteers as such, however in some cases the EA does apply.
The Equality Act applies to everywhere, and everyone, all the time. It is not a piece of employment legislation. It is a piece of legislation that covers equality in all aspects of life.

Show quote history

Which bit of the EA is a concern here, exactly?

ItTook9Years · 22/02/2025 17:59

Oblomov25 · 22/02/2025 15:52

@EmmaMaria

"The Equality Act 2010 doesn't apply to volunteers in the same way as employees, but organizations should still protect volunteers from discrimination. "

Is that not correct?

Who is being discriminated against in relation to a protected characteristic, exactly?

saraclara · 22/02/2025 18:02

Convolvulus · 22/02/2025 17:48

Would you not be concerned with the counter-complaint that OP inevitably has to make with regard to the volunteer's overt public hostility to her in dealing with charity work?

Show quote history

If OP had taken this straight to the board/whoever should be dealing with it, yes we'd have been concerned about it. But she didn't, and she's lost the high ground by basically blackmailing the OW.

OW got in first, so while the background will be heard, it's OP's actions that are to the fore, and what the meeting will be about.

JLou08 · 22/02/2025 18:05

It was a threat. You used a threat to stop her participating in something. I can understand your reasons but you have gone about things in the wrong way, as soon as she started acting awkward around you you should have made a complaint yourself or at least has a discussion with management about what was going on.
Your DH doesn't want you to leave the role because he will lose his link to OW. I very much doubt his feelings have been switched off after a 6 year affair where he spoke about leaving you. I suspect he is biding time to get it started up again more discretely.
Leave him and the charity.

Miaowzabella · 22/02/2025 18:28

RodeoRoo · 22/02/2025 08:42

NB. It seems there are still many people in society who don't understand the volunteering industry. It's not a free for all walk-in, walk-out as and when business practice. There are policies and conduct to adhere to.

Well, yes, but what sanctions can the charity apply, apart from saying 'we no longer wish you to give us your time and skills free of charge'?

Miaowzabella · 22/02/2025 18:33

TourangaLeila · 22/02/2025 17:52

  1. You DID threaten her. In fact I'd call is blackmail.
  2. Your anger should be directed towards your husband.

You can't tell other people who they are allowed to be angry with! In this case it's perfectly reasonable to be furious with both the cheating scum husband and his mistress. I'm just surprised the OP is still giving the time of day to either of them.

Swipe left for the next trending thread