off topic, but...
the GF works for a charity.... it looks after, houses and provides job for people with downs, learning difficulties and severe autism. they hve several workshops and "businesses" (wood & metal workshops, a weaving mill, a farm, plant nursery, gardening, mini supermarket to name but a few...)
she is head of a sister firm that designs products to be made in their workshops. she has taken a bit of a hit financially to work there, but is very alturistic and idealistic, bless her.
the stories she tells of the inefficiencies and incompetence of the people working there and running it are mind-boggling. doubt many of them would last very long in the private sector. the amount of time and money that is wasted on simple tasks and operations is sad.
some of the products in the firms line-up were costing them more to buy the materials, not including production, than they were being sold for. they were working with prices from 2003. ❓
It's not a charity which supports British servicemen, past and present. MSF is of course very worthy but it's not the same at all.
Yeah, one gives money to the lads and lasses who dropped bombs on civilians and the other picks up the body parts.
Not bothered by mercenaries and professional soldiers who do it for the money or the lolz, I am bothered by it being dressed up in nationalist attire by groups like HFH.
That bunch of cons in peteimpreza link to boil my piss. Like britain first pretending to be a forces charity sod all they raise goes to and charitable work.
Not sure that Tom knows what the armed forces actualy do or why people join. In my experience it certainly isnt for the money or the lolz.
There's quite a big gap between the going rate and working unpaid. I've worked for a couple of charities and most of the people there were happy to take slightly less wages than they could get elsewhere to do that job.
I've a friend who went into City finance for a big utilities firm after University. Pretty soon was on a six figure salary but then he left and joined a charity (big well known one, although he now works for another). He reckons he earns about 2/3 of what he'd earn if he stayed in the private sector which is still beyond most people's ideas,
the stories she tells of the inefficiencies and incompetence of the people working there and running it are mind-boggling. doubt many of them would last very long in the private sector. the amount of time and money that is wasted on simple tasks and operations is sad.
but there were such inefficiencies in the way they were investing their money that he saved multiples of his salary in no time at all by simply using standard private sector experience.
It's not for no reason that more and more charities are appointing people from industry to their boards and trustees.
Why is RNLI not government funded?
The volunteers I know would be very reluctant to get involved with if it where so. They do it for love of the work and a sense of duty. Chapeau to them for that. I have been towed in during a gale after being dismasted and a good friend was evacuated after suffering a major heart attack. You only need to look at the cuts to Air Sea rescue and the Coast Guard to be glad the RNLI is self sustaining.
Absolutely this! ^^
Also a bit unsure of referring to all of these guys as heroes
I have issues with that too and I know a number of ex and current servicemen who agree.
Have a friend who works for HfH in a large garrison town, his job is often tough but he thinks its rewarding (mostly), though not the pay. Those he serves need his help to a greater or lesser extent (depends on injuries), I admire him for his commitment. HfH and many other charities are not perfect (the RNLI is one, take a look at headoffice), however the outcomes of there involvement for many should not be underestimated. Choose your cause wisely, give your time, money or both and resist criticising others for their choices. Happy giving!
My brother earns 60k a year as senior management for a charity and could earn much more in the private sector .
The Support for Heroes charity is an interesting case - it will be interesting to see how it develops. Is it that money was being wasted/misappropriated or was it just that they were employing lying chuggers. Rule one of giving to charity is never do it on the street - the chugger (often employed via a third party) percentage take on charity giving is breathtaking unless you give for a considerable period after first signing up. Typically everything you donate in the first year goes to the chugger firm, not the charity, irrespective of what charity they are chugging for.
I do find threads like this amusing - whinging about inefficiency of charities but also complaints about them paying people the going rate for their roles. The naivety that 100% of funds can be spent on 'front line' work. Charities are often big organisations which need administering - you pay peanuts for doing that and you get monkeys.
