Oxfam Top Level Pay

My fil says this
It depends on whether they bring in the extra revenue and so can justify the salary.

I dont know if I agree with him or not.

I stopped giving items to Oxfam charity shops a while ago because I was certain that the money was not going to the correct places, the deprived but paying hefty salaries. £800,000 is rather over the top for me.

It feels to me as if Oxfam has stopped being first and foremost a charity and has become a profiteering business. The same applies to some other over large charities. I'm sure they still do good work but it certainly seems as if a lot of money is wasted.

I listened to the CEO of Oxfam this morning and I thought he accounted very well. He explained that 84pence in every pound goes directly to the fieldwork which isn't bad - it is a huge organisation to run.

Why are charities so sure that huge salaries get the best CEOs? Where does commitment come into that? Do they anonymously make large donations or live in large houses and drive top of the range vehicles. I've supported Oxfam for over 50 years but the big salaries, glossy mailings, and use of celebrities are steadily alienating me. I've also heard from someone in the field that their 'We're aid workers - we can do it!' attitude contrasts with other charities who are more concerned about boring details such as allocating budgets administered by appropriate personnel to get the best outcome from projects.
I heard on R4 this morning that half Oxfam's income comes from the government.

I should think that the CEO would give a good account of why he should get what he earns Teetime. On his level of salary I would expect no less.

No business would pay more than it could actually afford and would accept that the person in that role would be the person they could afford even if ICI was down the road and paying more. If the person coming in made a good case for the added value he could produce then bonuses on actual added value created by him could be negotiated. It may be that they would get greater AV by increasing the pay of some of those at the coal face.

Your link is 2013, so I was surprised I was still able to vote on it!

It's not just charities, is it? I would vote for anyone who brought in a law that linked top to bottom pay in all companies.

Another problem is that CEOs get bonuses on efficiency which usually means getting rid of workers. I also like the idea of employing more people in HMRC as they bring in more tax, thus justifying their pay, instead of cutting the workforce.

He didn't make a case for his own salary he talked about the organisation as a whole and I still don't think 84 pence in the pound is too bad. I am not saying he should get whatever he gets just saying!!! that he put a good case.

I do not think anyone a all deserves - or needs - the sort of salaries that are paid to top execs in any organisation. It feels particularly disturbing when it is a charity aimed at helping the most disadvantaged.

I give to Oxfam and will continue to do so. Its administrative costs are kept to a minimum and I believe it does a very good job.

I'm sure there are charities which are much more deserving of criticism - for instance, Eton.

Nice one, Eloethan.

Who needs this sort of money? - what do they do with it? I would be hard pushed to know what to spend it on!

I guess that at least Eton do not put leaflets through the door asking for contributions - for them it is just a tax break.

www.oxfamannualreview.org.uk/the-report/financials/

Just had an email from them to tell me how they spend their money.

I felt rather the same as Charleygirl about paying high salaries but this morning I read this article theconversation.com/kids-company-the-sad-truth-about-why-charities-suddenly-collapse-45898?. I've been involved in enough charities and voluntary organisations myself to know it's true. If you're very lucky and fairly small scale, you might find enough volunteers with the right skills and enough time to keep applying for funds, running fund-raising campaigns, looking after the finance, training and supporting the other volunteers, making sure the paperwork is up-to-date. Otherwise, you have to pay them.One of the curses of the voluntary/charitable sector is exploiting paid workers who may want to work for a worthy cause but can't afford to volunteer.

I agree with you Lilygran, and appear to have done the same sorts of things.
But I didnt get your last sentence, or perhaps rather, I have not come across it.

They could decide not to do the job? I may be misunderstanding you.

You mean their good nature is put upon?

People who want to work for an organisation whose values they share may accept a lower salary than they can really afford to accept. Or they may put their own money as well as a lot of unpaid time into the work. Either way, it can be easy for organisers to take advantage of them.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SORREE!! I don't know how my fat little fingers despatched the above rant to the wrong thread! I have reported myself and requested removal. Wishe we had a 'delete' facility as on FaceBook! I think I'll go offline now ...