Charity Fat Cats

Still think the salaries and cost of offices is unnecessarily toppy. Is there a comprehensive breakdown of where and how all monies are used? Be interesting to see.

And why use the word real before leadership, experience, knowledge and skill. Is it supposed to add (mistakenly in my view) gravitas to those receiving such salaries?

I don't know what their motives are, jings, nor did I say I did. I described what such huge salaries suggested to me. I suspect that they and the use of fancy, expensive offices, will make the same suggestion to other people's minds too.

I give regularly to our local food bank - that way I know who is benefiting. When they make special appeals I also give to Age International and the DRC.

I was totally put off the British Red Cross who regularly contacted me to increase my donations even though I told them that I could not afford more. In the end I told them that if I received one more call I would cancel my DD. They did not take the hint so lost my donations.

I think another problem is that certain high profile charities are almost untouchable. Channel 4's Despatches in, I think, 2010 found that the London Marathon charity paid only 25p in the £ to good causes and its highest paid employee (who they would not name) earned £250,000 - twice the amount of the highest paid employees of Oxfam and RSPCA. The London Marathon Charity, like all other charities, has to file accounts but discloses the absolute minimum amount of information required in relation to salaries and other expenses.

I can see jingle's point. A salary of around £100-120,000 does seem very high but it is much less than for comparably responsible positions in the commercial sector. Speaking personally, I gave up a very useful job in adult literacy teaching to return to legal secretarial work because I found it exhausting and demoralising to work just as hard for a fraction of the pay. Of course, I wasn't earning anything like the sorts of salaries we're talking about here, but the principle is the same. When people have families and mortgages to pay, can they always be as altruistic as they might like to be? And let's face it, these charity CEO salaries are a drop in the ocean compared with what bankers have earned for wrecking the economy.

Save the Children bosses get bonuses on top of their high salaries. Is anyone else suddenly thinking of bankers' unscrupulous behaviour?

I guessed there would also be bonuses.

I also guess that their fancy office doesnt have furniture from Ikea. But I could be wrong.

I remember once a friend telling me that he went to a meeting to discuss the setting up of a charity, and the first thing on the agenda was to make sure that there was money available to pay the chairman a salary. He never bothered with that particular charity after that.

My neice used to work for one of the bosses of a very famous worldwide charity, as an au pair. Hearing her describe his very high powered life style with many perks and priviledges put me off that chariity for ever.
Also, this Christmas I have received so many gifts from various charities. pens, coasters, stickers etc. Why on earth don't they put that money to better use?

'A salary of £100.000 -£120.000 does seem very high BUT it is much less than for comparably responsible positions in the commercial sector'

It's a hell of a lot more than MP's get but nobody thinks they are worth the money and I don't think the average Joe Bloggs who donates what little they can will view such exorbitant wages in that way either.

I agree you require good people to run a charity. You require good skills but the word 'charity' does mean doing what you can knowing that all monies donated should go to the 'charity' it was intended for to capitalise on doing good work, protection of others etc. That doesn't mean everybody should volunteer, as thousands do, but surely there is a point where common decency and respect for the charity should kick in and it is obvious paying wages in such high figures is nothing more than obscene.

I wouldn't mind so much if those who are paid very well for making decisions did so wisely but I can't be alone in seeing so much wastage. Whether that be a charity shop being told to keep the door open in winter whilst throwing heat out of the door by having the heating on to supplying say farm equipment which now lies idle because the tractor has broken down and needs a £20 spare part but the charity doesn't have provision nor afterthought of keeping a project on going. Money is given freely and sadly I think because a charity is not held accountable money is also spent very easily but not necessarily wisely.

Don't get me wrong charity work is a noble cause but like anything it can be subject to being a Golden Goose that if not respected will stop laying the golden egg and I think some of the stories we hear are making us think hard before we donate to charities that put greed and a big bank balance before the cause.

This might be of interest. Charities listed alphabetically and more details about fundraising income and salaries relationship. I do think some are certainly overpaid! www.theguardian.com/society/salarysurvey/table/0,12406,1042677,00.html

Very interesting table.
Surprised by how small some of the charities' incomes are.
Cystic fibrosis for instance. And the Samaritans.

That table was 2003. Any update, trisher?

oh dear. I did think that salaries were lower than I thought they would be!

I'm sure an updated table can be found on the internet, durhamjen.

We may not like it, but charities are now big businesses with directors, chief executives and all the usual company trappings, including big pay-scales, pensions, perks, spin, smoke and mirrors. All that doesn't encourage many well-intentioned volunteers to continue doing charity work. The days of the free, gifted amateur are gone now, money talks and dictates what happens, like it or lump it.

I've lumped a few already because I don't like it.

I've lumped some too.

And so have I, as have other people we know, and that does not bode well for the future of charities, I think. But on the other hand most people still seem to willingly support the big media-driven public charity efforts, so who knows. I find it strange that a person can take a huge salary from a charity while passing round the begging bowl to an increasingly pressured general public. Why don't they get their rich charity colleagues and banking friends to chip-in some more and help alleviate the damage they've caused by their greed?

I had strong words with Christian Aid a few years ago because they phoned my 90 year old father and badgered him to make a monthly contribution. He was told "Everyone can afford £15 a month". He couldn't and was hurt and humiliated by the call.
My pet hate is those well crafted adverts that ask you to text a small amount e.g.£3 for a blanket for children in Syria. Inevitably these are a metaphorical foot in the door to get your phone details so you can be telephoned to ask for bigger donations. As others have said , it makes me less likely to respond to any appeal other than local ones.

The last column of the chart is surely the most important one as it shows the amount per thousand pounds donated that is paid to the Chief Executive.

For instance, as I understand it, the Arthritis Care charity pays its CE £65,000 which, relative to some of the other charities, is on the low side - but this figure represents £5.56 out of £1,000 donated. Oxfam, on the other hand, pays its CE £75,000 but this figure represents £0.40 out of £1,000 donated.

I'm not sure how useful the chart is in reality because the only expenditure it details is the Chief Executive's salary. It doesn't show the total expenditure (other staff salaries, advertising, cost of premises, etc.) and how much remains to be spent on the core needs of the charity.

Also these are details of only a tiny proportion of the charities in existence. There are thousands of them - and more seem to be springing up every day. I very much doubt that they can all be monitored to see exactly how they are being run and how donations are being used.

Smaller charities appeal to me. The church at St Martins in the Fields does good work for the homeless. I recently started donating to Air Ambulance which relies entirely on donations.

i volunteered in an Oxfam shop for over 20 years ans saw how it changed. paid managers are necessary as it has to be run on a business basis but i feel that it is now a case of too many chiefa and not enough indians. i still support them by D/D but the asking to increase my donation really annoys me .

It is sad how even good things can get so tainted.

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

I support a very small charity that actively helps Syrian refugees and is run by volunteers with the help of some paid drivers who risk their lives taking in supplies.
I have also added extras to my food shop to take to a local food bank.

We do send all our donated stuff to the Red Cross shops; the top staff may take big salaries but they are usually in there first to help when there is a disaster.

DH works hard for a big national charity on a voluntary basis, but I have noticed how their marketing has changed over the years.