Charity

Anyone know how much the worker drones get for their efforts these days? I got stopped a few times lately and asked to supply them with £10 a mont h. When I suggested a fiver a month he turned me down. I would have thought £5.00 better than a demand to eff off. But no. I told him that his bosses must be on good money to be so choosy. So how do es their remuneration scheme work?

Reply to
Weatherlawyer
Loading thread data ...

Last time I had one at the door signing up for the RSPCA, the first two years worth of donations went to the company signing up the donors, then after that it went to the charity ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

nth. When I suggested a fiver a month he turned me down. I would have thoug ht £5.00 better than a demand to eff off. But no.

does their remuneration scheme work?

the collector gets something like the first year's donations

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

you SPOKE to a chugger !!!!

Reply to
Jim at the Common Riding

Bloody hell! I was feeling guilty for feeling self satisfied about hitting the get out of charity free card. That is one hell of a lot of dough but ev en so I doubt the actual canvasser sees much of that. I'm actually beginnin g to feel angry at the arm wrestling that goes on with the damned beggars t hese days.

Ever read diary of a supertramp?

Reply to
Weatherlawyer

I refuse to give to these large, organised charities any more. They've become an outright racket IMV.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

g the get out of charity free card. That is one hell of a lot of dough but even so I doubt the actual canvasser sees much of that. I'm actually beginn ing to feel angry at the arm wrestling that goes on with the damned beggars these days.

The flipside is that without all that there would be far less good work don e. If only the best of both could be had somehow.

Its not normally 2 years btw.

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

No, but one of the problems that has put me off charity giving is the way so many people are on the take. Take Nepal, for example. There are still officials over their creaming money off the top of all the aid in exchange for allowing help to be given.

Corruption at Fifa is nothing until you attempt to send money to aid people abroad. Those people are parasites making money from others suffering in my view. The lady I used to know, she died, worked for Tear fund in Afghanistan, and said the factions out there, were all on the take at the expense of the poor and downtrodden masses. No wonder you can never help such countries.

As for this country, I find the attitude to legacies very irritating they will accept houses when you die, as long as there are no strings attached. They prefer the money, and certainly do not want the hassle of selling valuable collections unless they are worth over a million due to the admin.

If that was so, how come they can run charity shops? Brian

Reply to
Brian-Gaff

Perhaps because they use volunteer labour.

Reply to
charles

You only need to tune in to Really at around tea time, and you see these heart rending please for money by texting, or direct debits etc. Save the children, Oxfam, Rspca, Sense ( formally deaf blind uk)

The listgoes on. I think I prefer the angle used by Macmillan etc, where they try to mobillise people to raise money rather than blackmailing the weak willed by sob stories. One thing that seems to be a problem in other countries apart from the corruption is the poor research. for example, when I was young Blue Peter used to be involved with projects to bring water and sanitation to villiages in Africa etc. However many of these schemes have either follen into disrepair, or were built in the wong places as the pleas are now goign out to build them again. Do the people there not look after their gifts, is it the result of all the stupid wars that displace people, or was the place not correct in the first instance? A while ago i used to donate to Send a cow, but I saw a program about what the locals did with the animals and in effect wasted the ongoing wealth they provided for short term gain. Before you start providing aid, you need to educate the people about management, otherwise its a bottomless pit. Brian

Reply to
Brian-Gaff

I'm sure you know this, but many charities try to steer clear of these pitfalls. I am a trustee of a local charity for the blind. We are in a loose affiliation with the Greater London Fund for the blind, but when we collect, on their behalf all the money goes to the local organisation. We do have some part time paid workers, but much of what we do is using volunteers. The problem we see looming is the way the councils are just farming out what used to be paid jobs to organisations such as ourselves, in order to save money. This should not be the way things are done. We are turning the clock back. Brian

Reply to
Brian-Gaff

On 05/06/2015 23:57, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: ...

That is debatable. Have you ever seen them collecting for the RNLI?

Reply to
Nightjar

and the "in order to save money" is because the central government grants have been reduced.

Reply to
charles

don't worry they are all floating to Europe for us to look after ...

Reply to
Jim at the Common Riding

I haven't, but the RNLI do have flag days.

Reply to
charles

Indeed, but the collectors are RNLI volunteers and supporters, not employees of professional collecting companies. All the money donated goes straight to the RNLI.

Reply to
Nightjar

Brian-Gaff posted

It depends on what your charity actually does. Just because a charity does certain things to help a disadvantaged group, doesn't necessarily mean it should be fully funded out of taxation.

Reply to
Big Les Wade

If that's true, it's another reason to ignore them.

I'd guessed they were volunteers, so am usually polite.

If they are all just salesmen on commission, explains why they are so pushy.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

You've got that the wrong way round. Charities are now having to do work that used to funded out of taxation.

Reply to
charles

There are two ways of looking at that though. People often feel uneasy when not all the money collected goes to the charity. However the better fund raising companies will be able to take what is donated, and spend it on bigger higher profile events and promotions, that in turn drag in far more money than the sum raised in the first place. Of that they will take a sizeable cut of the profits.

So you may end up with a situation where you could have 100% of donations (say £5k), or let the fund raisers speculate with the money, and say generate £20k - of which they take £10k and you take £10K.

Reply to
John Rumm

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.