WPUK have released a financial statement showing money received by source and how it is spent

[OvaHere]

womansplaceuk.org/2020/11/28/wpuk-financial-statement-2020/

Perhaps we can quit with the 'dark money' narrative now.

I was a little surprised to see a grant from Lush Charity Pot in there. Perhaps as a company they aren't a total write off after all.

What is the problem with paying some of the speakers?

Quite a lot of the women who have spoken up on the sex/gender issue have no or low income, sometimes because they have lost their PAYE job. My bottom line is: if you are asking someone to come and speak at an event and they are not doing so as a salaried individual, you should expect to give them a speaker's fee.

I think it's hugely honourable of WPUK to adopt this practice.

Lush (some branches) as signs in their window that were rather nasty. Oh well, the crocodile always bites because that is their nature.

Anyone complaining about women being paid for their labour, should watch this

TRAs have a list of people to target now, is my immediate thought.

I understand why they did this though. But I also think part of the reason TRAs bleat on about dark money is specifically to get funding sources revealed so they can mass spam them for daring to care about womens rights..

Bloody hell, should have RTFT first, this thread is seriously something to behold

5k is a lot in legal fees, bahahaha

Goalpost shifting masterclass though, truly, bravo. Has to be seen to be believed really.

On speakers getting paid also, I have no issue at all with this. Takes a while preparing, and travelling and such. And even without that, why not pay women for their work?! I guess some would maybe rather not see it as work, but it IS more work.

Where’s jj this morning? Out searching for straws to clutch, maybe?

On the phone to HRMC maybe..

Here is a summary of some of the unethical behaviour by Lush.

womenspeakscotland.com/2020/08/08/lush/

Looks like their Australian division is no better.

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/17/cosmetics-company-lush-admits-to-underpaying-australian-workers-by-44m

The gender spirit mob never seem to get fired up about staff being exploited or discrimination against disabled workers. It's a donation to a perfectly legitimate women's rights organisation that sets them off. Tells you all you need to know.

Has there been any twitter fallout for lush yet? Worth a peek?

@ThatIsNotMyUsername

Has there been any twitter fallout for lush yet? Worth a peek?

A bit of moaning.

twitter.com/search?q=Lush&src=typed_query

Trans people have a RIGHT to know how everyone spends their money, don't you know.

And the staff apparently. A right to know dammit.

And need to know so they can return their already bought Christmas presents don’t’ch know 🤣

I wonder when the snivelling apology will come, along with the donation to Sardines 🧜‍♀️ to prove how truly, truly sorry they are.

Photo of a bunch of flowers too maybe?

"loaded"

@Whatwouldscullydo

On the phone to HRMC maybe..

An old, second hand Nokia probably, don’t forget!

Of course! It probably takes a while.

I'm sure jj has had a really busy day examining the incomes of Stonewall and Mermaids etc. to make sure that there isn't anything as dodgy going on. For balance and all that.

I can imagine that would take a while.

If it helps, the kids each took a quid in for Children in Need some of which might have gone to Mermaids. So that's £2 accounted for. And I didn't even pay tax on that money because my part-time, minimum wage job means I don't earn enough to do so. I certainly can't afford to shop in Lush, anyway.

Photo of a bunch of flowers too maybe?

Please have a look at these flowers as a way to determine how really, literally, truly, literally, literally sorry we are that we had the nerve to spend our money as we saw fit, without first seeking the permission of our customers and staff.

@DickKerrLadies

I'm sure jj has had a really busy day examining the incomes of Stonewall and Mermaids etc. to make sure that there isn't anything as dodgy going on. For balance and all that.

I can imagine that would take a while.

If it helps, the kids each took a quid in for Children in Need some of which might have gone to Mermaids. So that's £2 accounted for. And I didn't even pay tax on that money because my part-time, minimum wage job means I don't earn enough to do so. I certainly can't afford to shop in Lush, anyway.

Well there's the difference. WPUK's turnover is not that much less than Mermaids was until Glinner made them rich. But Mermaids were a registered organisation with publically available account via Companies House. And can you imagine if they'd been anything else. If people had gone looking into them and found they were an incorporated association despite actively fundraising and trading, and the only financial information was a quick unaudited breakdown on their website? There'd have been all kinds of outrage and allegations flying around about their financial integrity in GC circles, including I imagine calls for HMRC/police investigations.

This is like having Donald Trump on the thread - a deep hatred of women and determination to find fault - constantly moving the goalposts in a manner befitting someone who spends too much time online and lives in a fantasy land.

Then report away. But just face facts that the far right nonsense has proven to be just that. Nonsense.

I'd get onto lush if I were you. But something tells me you'd rather scold women for not doing as they are told by men

How many times have people on this thread said ring them, ask, report it? We're still on 'but its a bit fishy....'

Yes. You said. We know. Go deal with it!

Mermaids are a registered charity, JJ. That’s why their accounts are published on the Charity Commission website. Prior to them registering as a charity (which is a significant exercise, many charitable organisations choose not to do so for that reason) Mermaids will have been a not for profit organisation just like WPUK are and subjected to the same scrutiny.

Mermaids is 25 years old.

WPUK is 3 years old.

Mermaids became a charitable incorporated organisation in 2015, 20 years after it was founded.

Perhaps JJ has some allegations to make about those first 20 years of Mermiads, if the aim is to drag WPUK into disrepute by comparing it the two?

register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_resource_id=%2Faccounts-resource&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_fileName=0001160575_AC_20160405_E_C.pdf&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_objectiveId=A8568963&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_mvcRenderCommandName=%2Faccounts-and-annual-returns&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=5054976