Charity Fat Cats

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

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

'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.

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?

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.

I guessed there would also be bonuses.

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

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

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.

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 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.

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'm just really glad there are people to run the charities, and do it well.

How do you know what their motives are? Do you really believe they don't make their own donations?

And they could probably earn more in the world of commerce.

Which suggests that the people who do these jobs for high salaries don't do the work out of a sense of philanthropy. I think that's what many people think is missing. Yes, I'll help kids, but only for a big fat salary.

"In a statement, Save the Children said: "To run an organisation that reaches 10 million children in more than 50 countries, with thousands of staff, in some of the toughest places in the world takes real leadership, experience, knowledge and skill.

"Without this talent we would not, in the past five years, have almost doubled our income from £161 million to £284 million, enabling us to reach more of the neediest children on earth than at any point in our 90-year history."

interesting

How many high end salaries does a charity need?
Those listed dont even mention the 80k ones and those downwards.

And the swanky offices?
What do they contribute to those at the sharp end?

What do the people at the sharp end get?

Don't you think it possible that the likes of Save the Children are so successful in helping children because of the brain power and business acumen of the people at the top of the organisation? Yes, I'm sure it would be great if they sacrificed their way of life and did the work for peanuts, but is that a really reasonable demand?

What on earth has Blair done, to get an award like this !!

I think giving an award to Blair will seriously affect the amount of donations they get. I certainly won't give to this charity again.

I agree there are too many charities - how can they all be monitored to ensure that they truly are doing charitable work and that the bulk of the donations they get is not eaten up in salaries and other miscellaneous expenses?

I give to a couple of charities but one may well receive a letter from me soon because I do not like to be sent a begging letter for money sent on glossy paper which costs money.

Another medical charity ( I have the condition) each year sends out to each member a very detailed account of the recent research carried out. It is a thick booklet and I would assume that 99% throw it out because unless one has a medical background as I do, it would be impossible to understand and I have mega problems.

What a cheekdaffydil I hope you did cancel. Giving to small local charities is a great way of helping others.

As POGS has said we all know there are overheads which have to be paid and charities need to keep a certain amount of cash in reserve, but the amounts most charities have while still asking for donations for emergency situations as well as ongoing situations is obscene. I also object to charities using money I have donated to the cause to put forward a particular political viewpoint. I want my money to be used for the purpose I donated it, not to advance a political point.

And what about those charities who, when you have set up a direct debit, phone you at home urging you to increase the amount you give. I threatened to cancel my regular payment recently if they bothered me again. I understand the caller is not a volunteer but works on commission. One actually said that surely I could afford a little more. I asked if she was familiar with my finances and hung up.