Forum Topic

Charity chiefs' earn more than £100k.

Many charity chiefs of national charities earn more than £100k per annum. Should this be right? Just what do they do to earn so much? And many of their senior execs of earn enormous sums.  I'll have to think twice before a drop a quid into their tins next time. Or is this just the Daily Telegraph stirring it up again?

Gerry Tan ● 4650d18 Comments

I completely agree with Nigel's point.A charity will always need funding first to enable to get a project up and running in the first place. Once that happens the charity needs to recruit its staff and volunteers to run it. Therefore, regular donations are essential since it provides the backbone of income by helping the charity to plan and budget for its vital work in the safe knowledge that the resources are in place.Volunteers will become much more likely to support the charity that they volunteer for since they can clearly see the importance of its work and the use of its funds. If you are not making a regular donation to the charity that you are volunteering for then consider doing so if you are able to afford it.

Ben Owen ● 4647d

"Undertaking charitable activity is the route to go. "Who directs the volunteers?Orders whatever supplies they need?Sorts out their insurance?Does the marketing and advertising?Etc. etc. etc.With the greatest of respect George a charity without a capable and competent leader is a rudderless ship. I speak from experience of helping to turn one round and from working for one where the charismatic nature of the leader spurred both paid and unpaid staff to give the extra 1% that made a difference.

Nigel Brooks ● 4647d

I have given up on donations and it will stay that way until I know how much benefit is truly received and how that relates in value to all funds received.Why an admin person often gets paid but a front line charity worker is usually a volunteer is just crazy to me.Undertaking charitable activity is the route to go.

George Knox ● 4647d

Oliver,I don' know if you once tried to get a job for a charity and were rejected, but by 'eck you are cynical. Not everybody who works for a charity is posh!In your last paragraph you moan about under achieving charities in the sense that they don't meet your expectations. Can you name them and tell us what is so bad about them? I might agree with some of them!

Ben Owen ● 4648d

It's hardly a surprise, Ever noticed that it's only posh kids out of university who do gap years and so on who work for charities?Ever noticed that those who are full time employees are always well heeled?I feel sorry for all those volunteers who are putting a large percentage of their efforts into paying the wage bill of these people who really do not need to earn so much.Then again there are quite a few occupations that have salaries way beyond the abilities and skills required whilst many are way undervalued.So many fund raising events are big hurrahs for the social wannabees, the Peru trek, the amazon spectacular, don't see too many queueing up to do the Peckham overnight vigil or the experience the Harlesden Horrors.Of course much of this is target marketing - go where the money is and milk it and by getting the wannbees to raise sponsorship, that's free labour as well while the CEO , board and management take a nice slice and swan off to the next charity dinner.Then there's the specialists that give up time to make things happen. Usually free and often at their own expense.A bit galling to find that the person next to you with the OBE is also on a very handsome salary.With all the tax breaks charities get, far more ought to be going direct to the very needs it exists for.  Some charities do exactly this and some are 100% voluntary.  I do ask these days but I now choose more carefully and there are charities I really believe in but am  a bit disappointed in how they achieve so little with such huge support.

Oliver Gregan ● 4648d

You make a good point about excuses. You do hear people saying that the reason they don't give to charity is that so much goes on admin and that always makes me think that they're just stingy b*stards who'd rather spend the money on themselves.

Susan Kelly ● 4648d

I do think the majority of people of the public see adminstration costs as something completely different from what virtually every charity would see as spending on the 'cause'. So people feel their money is being far less well spent than it acutally is.The Charity Commission recently stipulated what is and what isn't admin costs. Admin costs are attributed to functions that don't have a direct impact on the charity's work. For example, the mail room (essential service); the receptionist (essential); and the other back office services are all needed, but do not do the work that the donor is supporting. Since a CEO will always have a direct impact on the work their salary would not be classed as an adminstration cost.Charities are going to have a mountain to climb to overturn this perception of admin costs. No doubt it will give people another reason to hide behind an excuse if they decide not to donate. I am not advocating high salaries, but if you pay people an attractive salary then you will be certain you are going to get the best people applying for the top job.

Ben Owen ● 4648d

I'm pleased to hear it.  When I was trying to find volunteers some years ago I was constantly being asked about how much the pay was.  This is something that seemed to have gone down the generations with children expecting to be paid for anything they did within the home and family that wasn't something of their own choice.As far as charities are concerned I feel that some of the smaller concerns are probably more worthwhile.  Although as Nigel discovered there can be problems.

Philippa Bond ● 4648d

Don't despair about volunteers. At Ealing Lawn Tennis Club where I've played and helped volunteer manage for over 40 years we have 65 volunteers helping run the bar, the catering, the juniors, the teams, the entertainments, the matches, the barbeques, the grounds and the management of the club.Lots of churches, mosques, gudwaras, temples and synagogues in Ealing must collectively have hundreds of volunteers. Add to this local 'chapters' of grassroots groups like Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, 38 Degrees and Save Our Hospital. The Save Ealing's Centre alliance is made up of 26 local residents and community groups all run by volunteers.Finally Ealing Community Network and Ealing CVS, based at Lido House in West Ealing can name over 500 volunteer run community groups active in Ealing.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4648d

It would be very nice to think that these charities could rely on volunteers but I think you will find that this is no longer the case.It is incredibly difficult to get volunteers at all for anything - let alone those with a good enough understanding of the business and political world to promote and lead what have now become charities of international standing.Altruism is hard to find and everybody is now expected to earn and pay tax until they are older than they planned or expected.  Fewer people coming up for retirement now have the pensions that existed in the past.I do agree with your last sentence though but how we ensure that our population gets a good enough understanding of this I don't know.  Media pictures and reports are not enough.With regard to the Charities Commission - that has been criticised quite a lot recently as there is much more sophisticated and international crime being carried out - and whether or not the Charities Commission is up to the job of noticing this and taking prompt enough action has been questioned.

Philippa Bond ● 4648d

It's not that complicated a subject this. The ones that don't get it are clearly morons.If you run the Mafia, a payday loans company, a PFI company, a company that offers zero hours contracts or even a bank then clearly you are rapacious and the 'culture' of your organisation demands that you are paid a large six figure sum.However if you run a charitable organisation which is all about saving lives and helping impoverished people and many of your 'staff' are volunteers it is culturally unacceptable to earn a six figure salary. If you are the kind of person that demands and needs £170,000 per year to live than you have no idea and no genuine sympathy with ill, dying and oppressed people.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4649d

Someone pointed out today that the average salary for charity chiefs is 58k, less than the head of the Charities Commission, who's brought this up, gets paid for his part-time post.I also have no problem with people who are, in many cases, managing thousands of people all across the world being paid properly, just fed up with being harassed by Oxfam on a daily basis. Surely it can only be counter-productive.

Susan Kelly ● 4649d

The best performing charities, from data obtained from the Charities Commission, spend around 10.5- 12% of their income on administration. There are charities which spend far less, some as low as 8% but, as a recent analysis by Giving Evidence showed, these are often not particularly well-run organisations and could raise, and consequently give, far more if they spent a little more or quality staff and systems.It may surprise you how much some of the largest charities spend on administration and fund raising.Children in Need use their Gift Aid income to cover admin costs so for every £1 raised, £1 is spent on good causes.British Red Cross spend around 12.5% on admin and fundraising.  Save the Children 15% and the NSPCC 24.3%!!!This proves little as campaigning organisations naturally spend more on advertising but interesting all the same.

Nigel Brooks ● 4649d

I don't have a problem with six-figure salaries either.  I suspect that quite a few of these people may actually have taken a drop in salary to take up these positions.  So long as they have come from a business background which will enhance the profile and performance of the organisation then that is fine.However there are some "flashy" aspects which I do not think are a good idea and which I think these people should consider carefully as a representative of a charity - as it gives both them and the charity they work for a poor image.It is always said that those who have little give the most so I can understand - and so should those who take these jobs - that those who gain the most respect won't be the greediest ones!

Philippa Bond ● 4649d

I have absolutely no problem with the directors of charities earning six-figure salaries.As money becomes tighter and charitable giving reduces it is incumbent upon the leaders of these businesses, for that it what many of them are, to sweat their assets, reduce their administrative overheads and ensure that the maximum proportion of donations is spent where it is needed. If it takes someone on £100,000+ per year to do this then sobeit. Rather that than some top-heavy administration staffed by 'willing amateurs' who have little clue about survival and good business sense in a fiercely competitive market.Priti Patel should ask what effect replacing the head of such organisations would actually have on the amount spent on the front-line. UK charities are heavily regulated, I speak as a charitable trustee (unpaid) and, save for the high profile cases of blatant fraud, do a fine job.I find it amusing that it is an MP, given their profligacy with our money and their perks, asking the question. Were there a widespread 'problem' the Charity Commission would have made it well-known, They are not reticent in publicising such problems.

Nigel Brooks ● 4650d

Charities accused of bringing good causes 'into disrepute' after it is revealed 30 bosses earn more than £100,000. 14 charities receive more than £1.1bn of public money over three yearsMP Priti Patel says: ‘Hard-pressed taxpayers deserve to know how their money is being spent'Money should be focused on delivering frontline services rather than lining the pockets of charity executives.I just read this article and I am absolutely disgusted. Money we give to help the poor and needy does not reach them but simply lines the pockets of these greedy vulchers, so called directors. They are the lowest of the low. Stealing from the poor and buying themselves BMW's. It is time the govt got involved and took posession of all their luxury houses and cars and yachts and sell them and give the money to the poor.

Asha Smith ● 4650d

That explains why Oxfam have been banging on the door and phoning repeatedly: trying to raise cash for the CEO.

Susan Kelly ● 4650d

Has been a reoccuring news story over the years.  The typical response from the charities is that they are huge businesses with multi-million pound turnover and commonly employ thousands of staff (many voluntary of course...).  Thus they need to pay the "market rate" to attract senior executives of the appropriate calibre. Sounds like the BBC argument to me.  But I can see where they are coming from.

Philip Coe ● 4650d