Hectors House Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 And the charity is? AGE UK oh the irony! http://bbc.in/1r0obiH Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TheCountOfNowhere Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 It's time for the young to vote..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crashmonitor Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Knowing a very well heeled retired charity worker that is putting his step grand daughter through private school makes you question the whole concept of charity. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Knowing a very well heeled retired charity worker that is putting his step grand daughter through private school makes you question the whole concept of charity. I would like to do some FOI across all UK charities. How many employ more than one person from the same family? Nepotism gone mad in most of them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TheCountOfNowhere Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Knowing a very well heeled retired charity worker that is putting his step grand daughter through private school makes you question the whole concept of charity. All the charities i've cared to have a look at have their accounts on line. Most of the ones i've looked at the chief exec is getting 100K+, usual 150k+. A lot of them get "grants" from the government. I don't give to charities now. When we are being taxed to fund chief execs of charities to receive a 6 figure income something is far wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
redwing Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) All the charities i've cared to have a look at have their accounts on line. Most of the ones i've looked at the chief exec is getting 100K+, usual 150k+. A lot of them get "grants" from the government. I don't give to charities now. When we are being taxed to fund chief execs of charities to receive a 6 figure income something is far wrong.A As we all know, the government is moving as fast as possible from actually providing any services to the public itself. Instead the services are out-sourced. The out-sourcing organization is either profit-making or non profit-making - the latter are called 'charities' because having charitable status means they don't pay shareholders or corporation tax and return any surpluses into investment. Wages and salaries in the not for profit sector are generally well below those in the profit making sector. Suggest a fair comparison would be the salary of the CEO of Barnados or Shelter or Oxfam against the CEO of Serco or G4S. The last CEO of Serco, Christopher Hyman, had a salary of £1,916,843 when he departed in the furor over Serco overcharging the government. I think you should direct your fury elsewhere. Edited November 24, 2014 by redwing Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkG Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Suggest a fair comparison would be the salary of the CEO of Barnados or Shelter or Oxfam against the CEO of Serco or G4S. People give money to charity to, you know, help the people the charity supposedly supports, not to pay fat-cat wages to the charity's employees. Nor do the charity volunteers work for free so the CEO can make a six figure income. This is why I now only give to local charities with volunteer staff, or to the few that are still worth supporting despite massive troughing by their management. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wurzel Of Highbridge Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 They could do with a good Channel 4 series on where your charity money really goes. Needless to say, I now only give to local charities and make a point of telling everyone I know how much the directors get. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Si1 Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) As we all know, the government is moving as fast as possible from actually providing any services to the public itself. Instead the services are out-sourced. The out-sourcing organization is either profit-making or non profit-making - the latter are called 'charities' because having charitable status means they don't pay shareholders or corporation tax and return any surpluses into investment. Wages and salaries in the not for profit sector are generally well below those in the profit making sector. Suggest a fair comparison would be the salary of the CEO of Barnados or Shelter or Oxfam against the CEO of Serco or G4S. The last CEO of Serco, Christopher Hyman, had a salary of £1,916,843 when he departed in the furor over Serco overcharging the government. I think you should direct your fury elsewhere. Serco has about 20 times the cash flow of Barnardo's. Making their former CEO look rather better value. Edited November 24, 2014 by Si1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Si1 Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 I wonder if that's legal? I mean it's deeply unfair competition for any other organisations wishing to tender to provide social services to Norwich council Quote Link to post Share on other sites
olliegog Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 if one looks into most charity's finances - where the money goes - it is horrific. why single out age-uk - the same may be said of lots of other charities who rely on volunteers at the coal face - foodbanks and animal charities are further examples. I will only give to local charities who have a much lower profile and really 'need' the funds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 I wonder if that's legal? I mean it's deeply unfair competition for any other organisations wishing to tender to provide social services to Norwich council Who would you ask? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Georgia O'Keeffe Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) Serco has about 20 times the cash flow of Barnardo's. Making their former CEO look rather better value. Leeds City Council has half the cashflow of Serco, perhaps they should be paying their CEO 1 million, to keep it consistent like Edited November 24, 2014 by Georgia O'Keeffe Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SNACR Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 All very well not giving to these charities but the reality is the government will just forcibly take the money off you and give it to them plenty would already be filed under 'too big to fail' probably. Big finance/corporations, big government and big charity is the unholy trinity destroying, at the very least, english speaking western countries. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
billybong Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Charities have been big business for quite some time now. If they can't even organise their pension funds properly then what justification is there for their massive wages and pensions. Are they threatening to go to work in Dubai or somewhere like the bankers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Si1 Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Leeds City Council has half the cashflow of Serco, perhaps they should be paying their CEO 1 million, to keep it consistent like Except serco's CEO was still considered overpaid Quote Link to post Share on other sites
R K Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) Serco has about 20 times the cash flow of Barnardo's. Making their former CEO look rather better value. Odd measure. On that basis Osborne should be paid c. £1billion p.a. Edited November 24, 2014 by R K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Si1 Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Odd measure. On that basis Osborne should be paid c. £1billion p.a. On the other hand, whether labour or conservative, compensation when working in government is very significantly for the sake of being in public service Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jammo Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 Some charities make the problems worse then they were when they started. Giving clothes to African countries makes textile workers in those countries unemployed as they cannot compete in the market against free stuff. The unemployed people then need clothes, and so the cycle repeats. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sure thing! Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Just been having a look through a lot of the well known charity accounts on the charity commission web site, pension deficits all over the place. While there are plenty of good local causes and some decent large charities, some of these are just taking the piss. And to top it off, noticing some of these are getting significant chunks of money from various taxpayer funded departments/organisations/local authorities, there goes my choice to avoid them.. Edited November 25, 2014 by Sure thing! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crashmonitor Posted November 26, 2014 Report Share Posted November 26, 2014 I was watching a documentary recently and the unemployed graduate's main goal in life was to get a job within a charity. Should the role of a charity really be to provided jobs for graduates (granted they are in need) or help for the cause. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.