VENT On street charity workers

Kite2010

Professional wrote: »

I used to work for a small charity. The people who were on the streets fundraising were volunteers who gave up their own time to help others in need. Big charities work like private corporations they basically employ sales people - but not all charities work this way.

My second point is that many of these charities do really vital work, things that simply the government can't or won't do. They rely on public support and since Cameron's cuts this is even more so the case. People on the street is a relatively cheap way to fundraise. Minimum wage is a lot cheaper than a £50,000 marketing campaign.

In an ideal world they'd simply leave us all alone and make all the money they need from sitting in a free office with the phone ringing off the hook without having to spend a penny on marketing. In the real world economic times are tough and charities are taking to the streets to try and get the money they need to survive.

The problem with the volunteers whom don't take any commission charges get painted with the same brush as the chuggers whom get commission, so people try to ignore them.

qetu1357

BoGoF wrote: »

The difference is the MD of Sainsbury's is answerable to it's shareholders. Who is the MD of Shelter answerable to? Again, it's about public perception, would Joe Public be keen to donate to shelter if they knew where the first £130k of donations were going?

I suspect the Chief Executive of Shelter - Campbell Robb - answers to the trustees of Shelter.

Here is his profile

http://england.shelter.org.uk/about_us/our_people/chief_executive

I agree it is about public perception but I would wager that Shelter trustees feel that they couldn't get the calibre of person they require unless they paid a reasonable rate.

Do we really expect he should be paid say £40k?

And if Shelter advertised this role at £40k what quality of candidates do you think they would get?

vikingaero

qetu1357 wrote: »

I suspect the Chief Executive of Shelter - Campbell Robb - answers to the trustees of Shelter.

Here is his profile

http://england.shelter.org.uk/about_us/our_people/chief_executive

I agree it is about public perception but I would wager that Shelter trustees feel that they couldn't get the calibre of person they require unless they paid a reasonable rate.

Do we really expect he should be paid say £40k?

And if Shelter advertised this role at £40k what quality of candidates do you think they would get?

I'd argue that over the last 20 years the higher echelons of the public and charity sector have inflated their wages to a par with the private sector and then gone further and exceeded the renumeration paid to the private sector.

The justification is nearly always the size of the organisation - Council X has 50,000 employees and so the renumeration should be the same as a boss of a PLC of similar size.

The difference is that the public sector such as Council derive their income from a non-competitive environment. If I were the boss of a charity I would feel uncomfortable taking the full whack but that's just my personal morals.

In the public and charity sector there are some brilliant individuals, but far far more dross than the proportion in the private sector. Let's take my widely derided sector - banking. We have some phenomenally talented people who year on year, boom or bust, have made hundreds of millions of profits for the banks and yet we deride their bonuses. We could stop paying them bonuses but they would simply move abroad.

You'll find that someone working as a boss of a public sector organisation isn't readily interchangeable with those in private. In fact many private companies have glass walls and won't employ public sector bosses because they are regarded as second rate.

qetu1357

vikingaero wrote: »

I'd argue that over the last 20 years the higher echelons of the public and charity sector have inflated their wages to a par with the private sector and then gone further and exceeded the renumeration paid to the private sector.

The justification is nearly always the size of the organisation - Council X has 50,000 employees and so the renumeration should be the same as a boss of a PLC of similar size.

The difference is that the public sector such as Council derive their income from a non-competitive environment. If I were the boss of a charity I would feel uncomfortable taking the full whack but that's just my personal morals.

In the public and charity sector there are some brilliant individuals, but far far more dross than the proportion in the private sector. Let's take my widely derided sector - banking. We have some phenomenally talented people who year on year, boom or bust, have made hundreds of millions of profits for the banks and yet we deride their bonuses. We could stop paying them bonuses but they would simply move abroad.

You'll find that someone working as a boss of a public sector organisation isn't readily interchangeable with those in private. In fact many private companies have glass walls and won't employ public sector bosses because they are regarded as second rate.

I disagree.

Charities (I'm not talking about public) work in a very competitve market. Competing for both voluntary and statutory income against other charities.

I have worked in private, public and charity sectors. In my experience there is an equal amount of dross.

I agree some companies won't employ people from outside their sectior and some charities won't employ people from outside their sector.

This is wrong as I have found that people can change sectors (as I have).

And back to the original point. Shelter's trustees believe they need to pay a big wage to attract the CEO they need.

Looking at their profiles

http://england.shelter.org.uk/about_us/our_people/board_of_trustees

they are a mix of private and public sector people so I believe they know what they are doing.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

Smiling sweetly and saying "oh, but I don't like children" is also a good response. I usually just say no thanks and keep on walking firmly.

I can see that initially this must have seemed a good idea to the charities; after all it is much better for them to have a regular stream of income through Direct Debit payments than relying on random one-off donations. It means they can plan long term projects more efficiently. However, this approach has surely now run its course. In my town centre different charities are out at least 4 days a week and I can't believe there are still people signing up.

I also think charities have to do a better job of explaining how they have to operate in a ruthless financial environment and why they do have to spend money on accountants, lawyers and senior staff. The likes of Amnesty, Oxfam and the Red Cross could not do what they do if they were run solely by a bunch of kindly retired ladies who want to volunteer a couple of afternoons a week.

Kieron_n_Stephy

chewynut wrote: »

I really dislike the ones in Nottingham. I wear headphones and sunglasses to avoid all possible contact but nope...some of them have literally jumped right in front of me to make me stop.

They don't back off even when I tell them I'm deaf (since I am). I've got to the point where I just completely and utterly ignore them because one day I'll say something extremely nasty that I'll regret and I imagine being blanked is easier to deal with than being sworn at.

The NSPCC seem to be on a drive in Nottingham at the minute. I've taken to avoiding certain roads where they hover, waiting for naive looking people like me to come along.

I'm also deaf myself living in Castle Donington, when these eijits don't back off despite being told I'm deaf and no thanks, I then start screaming, ranting and pushing them. The looks on their faces with the general public watching is so funny. Could be why my wife don't come with me anymore (!) :rotfl:

Reverbe

vikingaero wrote: »

Thing is, no one forces you to watch CIN or Comic Relief. You can change channels or switch off. The CIN/CR fundraisers I've seen in the street are often no more proactive than charity volunteers holding a tin.

The chuggers on the other hand invade you space, accost you and attempt to stop you. I've been in deep conversation with a friend and mongtard-chugger will butt in - that's just plain rude.

I wasnt talking about the telecasts. I was talking to the abuse I get when going out and about my way around the time Of CIN... its for kids etc etc..thats from ordinary joe and jane bloggs in the street and those who are collecting when i say i dont give to CIN to them

Reverbe

paddyrg wrote: »

I do hope someone from one of the major charities has a read of this thread and sees how much damage they're doing to their reputations by associating with chugger companies. It may mean they cajole more cash in the short term, but the long term brand damage is pretty huge.

I'm guessing it would go way over their head or they would still think they were right. TBH like others here i no longer give to charities I used to give to and support due to their use of paying chuggers etc

Just an added thought here what about charities that beg for our money on tv but seem to be able to pay for advertising slots on every single commercial break if nto more than once a break.. I'm looking at you here Great Ormond Street...

Reverbe

qetu1357 wrote: »

I suspect the Chief Executive of Shelter - Campbell Robb - answers to the trustees of Shelter.

Here is his profile

http://england.shelter.org.uk/about_us/our_people/chief_executive

I agree it is about public perception but I would wager that Shelter trustees feel that they couldn't get the calibre of person they require unless they paid a reasonable rate.

Do we really expect he should be paid say £40k?

And if Shelter advertised this role at £40k what quality of candidates do you think they would get?

Ones that might actually work.perhaps?. how much work do you think this chap does for his 130K?? I'll say it again how much money does one need to live on? to pay for food a roof over your head etc .. not 130k thats for sure or we would all including Martin be on a cardboard box...it's a valid point.

Reverbe

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

. In my town centre different charities are out at least 4 days a week and I can't believe there are still people signing up.

.

me neither Ive never actually seen anyone sign up..:D