Need to vent(long) - People who try to make money off others tragedy

[4HppyCamprs]

The Red Cross is also working all over the world and not just in one area.

These organizations are constantly scrutinized which is why the United Way got so much bad press. I have never seen any numbers that show that the Red Cross is frittering money away. Plus since they don't rebuild homes, I can't criticize them for not doing that. I'll continue to donate to them until I see anything concrete.

Look deeper. Their CEO makes nearly a million a year in wages.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

 

[PatMcDuck]

I agree and I can't stomach stuff like this.
You know what I hate even more? The ones who stand outside the grocery store and claim they're raising money. There was a guy outside a grocery store near me a few years ago. He had a handwritten poster that said he's "raising money for cancer" (not cancer research, not cancer victims, not cancer awareness -- just "cancer). Anyway, I knew it was a scam. He would stand out there with a water jug asking people for money. I never saw anything in the jug but maybe a couple of dollars in change.

There were a couple of guys outside another grocery store recently. At least they had the decency to get a sign done at a sign shop. They were asking for money for the "needy". Every time I saw them, I told them I'm needy and to give ME some money. They stopped asking after a while (these were the same guys for the past few years accosting people and asking them to buy candy bars for "youth sports")

Years ago, we had a scam here in central NJ, young teens were being bussed from Newark, Jersey City, etc brought here to Jersey Shore surburbia to sit outside grocery stores to raise $$ for fake charities. These kids were being exploited, of course. The names of the "charities" were vague.

Don't get ME started on the tables outside the stores asking for $$ to send little Johnny to WDW for his soccer team, cheerleading squad, football, travelling fencing team, etc. If you want to push your kids into ridiculous sports competitions at young ages, go ahead, just don't ask ME to help you pay for it. They call it going "canning".

I have no problem with the scouts selling popcorn or GS cookies! Or even with the car washes the high school kids run to raise $$ for the band, or whatever.

 

[Burnedout]

Look deeper. Their CEO makes nearly a million a year in wages.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

That makes me crazy.

But I wonder if I am just missing the fact that this is the going salary for someone with the background to run an organization like the Red Cross. That is he only way I can sort of wrap my head around it.

I know people have issues with the Salvation Army but when we were forced to evacuate our home and the residential treatment facility I worked with they were far superior than the Red Cross. They had the kids bunked within a couple of hours, with entertainment, food and help for us. Because we all were dealing with them and our own.

 

[HeatherFeather]

OP, I agree with you on all counts including not posting about it on FB. I totally get that part as there are often responses I want to make towards other's postings but when I stop and think, "What good could come of this?" and the answer is nothing, I delete and walk away.

On the issue of the jewelry, the breast cancer awareness is an issue near and dear to my heart as I work in a Breast Care Center. We have a few girls that make pink ribbon themed jewelry and have it on display and for sale at the front desk. However, these girls buy the supplies out of pocket and make it for fun and 100% money made from sales goes directly into a program that our hospital runs to provide mammograms for low income and uninsured women in the Tampa Bay Area. The girls don't even take reimbursement for the supplies they use to make the items. There are some good folks out there!

The yoplait thing drives me crazy too. Just say you are donating xxx amount and be done with it. The thought of having to clean, save, and mail foil yogurt lids is ridiculous though I am sure many well-intentioned people do it.

Selling parties...just, ugh. I am so over that. I will never, ever, ever do that to my friends and family. I am sure there are many posters here involved in home businesses that do it and that's fine but it is just not for me.

 

[cats mom]

I posted this on the Community Board the other day, so forgive me rehashing the topic. But since it pertains directly to this subject, I thought I'd post it again. There was a school shooting in February, 2012, at Chardon High School. Over $900,000 was collected by the United Way, but apparently much of it has yet to be distributed, at least thats what I understand the lawsuit to be about. In any case, it certainly made me think about these type of fundraisers. I assumed money collected would go for funeral expenses & unreimbursed medical bills, but I never thought about the rest of the money. Should it only go to the families of children who were killed or physically injured? Or should it benefit kids who were traumatized too? Maybe a scholarship for those kids should have been set up?

It certainly gets complicated doesn't it?

When you see something horrific in the news of course you want to make a donation that will directly help those people. But after following up on several cases where donations were earmarked for a specific tragedy, I've decided I'm more comfortable donating to a charity that has a general fund and hoping my donation gets to someone in immediate need, even if it has nothing to do with whatever is in the news at the moment. That's just me.

Along those lines, I think you have to be very careful when it comes to all the personal fundraising sites online. Yes, the money gets out there directly. But it's quick and easy to set up a campaign, the money is immediately available, and there's no accountability. The CEO at one fundraising site says it's policed by the internet and that's more effective than any agency could be. I say he doesn't realize or doesn't care how convincing some scammers can be and/or how gullible some big hearted givers can be. Since that CEO projected pages set up for OK tornado victims on his site alone are on target to raise more than 3 million dollars, and his cut is 3% to 5% off the top (depending on type of account), I may have to go with he doesn't particularly care about accountability or policing. JMO

I agree OP, I'm not a fan of people making a big show of the wonderful thing they're doing for charity when they're actually making a profit on the endeavor. It seems disingenuous to me. Be honest and say X% of the profits will be donated to charity and let people decide if that's something they want to support or not.

 

[eliza61]

Look deeper. Their CEO makes nearly a million a year in wages.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

so? He should work for free? have you any idea how hard a job being a ceo is? Red cross is a huge operation.

Why do people think because you work for a non profit you should be doing this for free or for 20K a year? Are you kidding me?

A million dollars is ridiculously low on the ceo compensation scale.

 

[Burnedout]

so? He should work for free? have you any idea how hard a job being a ceo is? Red cross is a huge operation.

Why do people think because you work for a non profit you should be doing this for free or for 20K a year? Are you kidding me?

A million dollars is ridiculously low on the ceo compensation scale.

Well if the pay scale hasn't changed in ten years when a friend was applying for a job with them the organization doesn't pay the front line people with the same guidelines. That is my issue with. I suspect that there would be someone with the same talent and skill for half the amt rather like they pay the small guys.

 

[Sevey13]

Look deeper. Their CEO makes nearly a million a year in wages.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

As a worker in the non-profit industry, I can tell you that this mentality is, frankly, what kills charities. So the CEO of the Red Cross makes a million dollars a year. When you consider his responsibilities and that number of people impacted by the services, then stack that up against CEOs of Fortune 500 companies that run on a similar national scale, his salary is a fraction of what other people with his experience, background, and job description make. If anything, non-profits should be paying their best people more than they are. When a private-sector company wants to attract talent, what do they do? They offer them a pay and benefits package that can’t be beat (by benefits, I include job-satisfaction, which considering the current pay for many non-profit workers, is really the driving force). If a non-profit were to try that, donors would be screaming for blood and hitting the press circuit to ‘expose’ the corruption and backhanded deals going on in a charity. If you were to offer a fresh graduate from Harvard Business School, brimming with enthusiasm and ideas that any organization needs to stay fresh and relevant, two positions, one working for a non-profit for barely 35K a year and one working in the private sector for over 60K (easily attainable for someone with that pedigree), which do you think he or she would pick? Yes, in order to work for a non-profit, you are going for “more than the money.” I sure am. I work for my program because I fully believe it offers Youth the best opportunity to grow into leaders and contributing citizens. But I do the same work in relationship building, marketing, recruiting, and, dare I call it ‘selling’ of my program to the public that someone working for a private company does.

Non-profits are businesses, we have to run in the green to continue growing. We have to hire and fire and cut fat and make processes more efficient just like any other company. I don’t think people in the private sector really understand this. We are companies, it is just that our ‘product’ is helping people. You see this most double-standard most reflected in what I call ‘investing.’ Say a private company launches a well-researched and planned new product or service and it flops. That company’s investors say, “Oh well. You tried. Your plan seemed sound but something didn’t click with the public. Here’s another $1 mil to try something different.” But in the private sector if you want to try a fundraiser that isn’t an auction, golf tournament, or breakfast/lunch, you are on your own. If that fundraiser loses money, you have donors calling for your resignation over mishandling their funds. How in the world does that encourage creativity? Abe Lincoln famously failed in several business ventures and jobs before finding a place in law and public administration. The reason he could get back into business was because people saw potential in him and kept supporting him. That attitude doesn’t exist amongst people who give to charities about the programs they give to. I wonder how he would have fared in the non-profit industry.

To wrap it all up, I just want to encourage anyone out there to take a moment and think through what they want their charitable donations to do. The answer is, invariably, to help people (or animals or trees or whatever you support). But that doesn’t mean that the BEST way for an organization to help, say, homeless populations in a city is to just buy a bunch of clothes and walk around handing it out to people living on the street. No. That org needs to attract quality talent who can be movers and shakers, who can energize volunteers so that they have more hands to help and who can build relationships with donors so that the organization can raise more funds. They need to spend money on marketing so that people actually know about their services, both potential volunteers and donors, and the homeless they serve. They need to have some liberty to try and find creative solutions to the homeless problem. By doing these things, the charity can grow to serve more people and involve more members of the community. But so many non-profits are restricted by the fear of making a misstep and losing all support.

 

[bankgirl05]

So I haven't read all of the replies to this thread, but I have a related question/scenario for you:

I am starting my own (crafting) jewelry business. I am making paper beads, and jewelry from recycled material, sea glass etc. I am also creating beads from park maps, as well as Photo frames. I may do Tie Dye "mouse" shirts as well.

My plan is to sell these at local fairs and bazaars, eventually starting an Etsy shop. I plan to advertise (with a sign on the display)that $1 of each sale will go towards a specific charity. My "theme park" items will generate donations for kids charities like "make a Wish" My recycled items, donations to our local zoo and my "patriotic" items, to Freedom Fighters. (an organization that sends care packages to our troops.)

Is this acceptable in your minds? I am still making a profit, but plan to share part of my profit with charities that are near and dear to me. I do not look at it as I am profitting from others misfortune.

 

[Stitchfans]

I agree, Red Cross is actually reputable, 8% is low for overhead cost. From what I have read the United Way has a much larger percent they keep, and has too much management. I shy away from donating to them, but Red Cross is good.

At least those companies are in the business of charity- Arbonne is in the business of selling products.

Only read up to here. When I heard that the CEO of United Way pockets over $1000.00 a year I stopped donating to them right away. As someone else said, I donate directly to the cause and leave the middle man out. It is so disgusting, I agree how others make money off others grief and misfortune.

 

[ariel71]

Look deeper. Their CEO makes nearly a million a year in wages.

Well if the pay scale hasn't changed in ten years when a friend was applying for a job with them the organization doesn't pay the front line people with the same guidelines. That is my issue with. I suspect that there would be someone with the same talent and skill for half the amt rather like they pay the small guys.

You're talking about an organization with billions (yes, with a B) in revenues and expenses each year. The IRS has requirements regarding executive compensation; these salaries aren't just pulled out of thin air. $1M actually seems pretty low to me. You don't just find someone with the "same talent and skill" for half-price. I spent many years auditing some well-known national not-for-profits, and I can tell you that it's a high-stress environment on par with many public corporations. I don't begrudge them a reasonable salary commensurate with their role; I certainly wouldn't want to be responsible for billions of dollars and thousands of employees just for the fun of it.

 

[Burnedout]

Eh, just because you can get 1 million doesn't mean you ought to take it. As I said if all of their salaries were commiserate with difficulty, skill, education as others with similar qualities I'd be more inclined to agree.

There are many CEO qualified people out of jobs. I bet they could find someone equally talented for less.

 

[Burnedout]

I'm not saying that well. I've worked for a lot of non profits, sat on boards, etc. There is an expectation that one is not going to be paid the same as the private sector. It is what it is.

 

[Lisa71]

Red cross is a great charity and I am picky but lots of my friends have had wage cuts and furlough days and I have no problem with them getting another job selling anything. Why is it ok to buy a coach purse but not a grace Adele bag? There is no pretense you know what you are on for so don't go. People need to make ends meet and cleaning houses, selling pampered chef, hey whatever you need to do.

 

[ariel71]

Eh, just because you can get 1 million doesn't mean you ought to take it. As I said if all of their salaries were commiserate with difficulty, skill, education as others with similar qualities I'd be more inclined to agree.

There are many CEO qualified people out of jobs. I bet they could find someone equally talented for less.

Do you have experience with the executive compensation process of not-for-profits? Just because you think there are soooo many unemployed CEOs running around out there doesn't make it so. I would never tell you that your salary should be cut in half, because even if I knew your field, I would have no idea what is considered appropriate.

On what would be considered the "tax returns" for NFPs, the IRS specifically asks if "the process for determining compensation of the following persons include a review and approval by independent persons, comparability data, and contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision?" So yes, NFPs already have to justify their compensation strategies, including with external reference data.

No governing board is going to terminate a well-performing, experienced CEO for a few hundred grand, especially at such a high-exposure entity. The qualitative cost to the organization of a change at that level would be far greater than you think.

 

[Burnedout]

The fact is that when I work for a non profit my salary is cut in half. You don't have to suggest it may or may not be appropriate. As I said it is what it is.

I think many people in upper management are over paid. Whether in corporate situations, or more importantly in government and nfp positions. People don't donate to support an exorbitant salary and no one wants their taxes going for them either.

I don't work with anything above our state level, and have no desire to, lol!

 

[vicki_c]

Eh, just because you can get 1 million doesn't mean you ought to take it. As I said if all of their salaries were commiserate with difficulty, skill, education as others with similar qualities I'd be more inclined to agree.

There are many CEO qualified people out of jobs. I bet they could find someone equally talented for less.

Right, and the highly qualified CEO they offer the $1M job to should say, "great, but why don't you pay me $500k instead."

How do you know what the difficulties in running a huge non-profit organization are? Are you suggesting that for profit CEO jobs are harder or require smarter people? There aren't tons of qualified CEOs out there needing jobs, if there were, the ones that are qualified couldn't command such high salaries, profit or Non-profit.

The CEO of my company (market cap $5B) makes $14M.

 

[eliza61]

Eh, just because you can get 1 million doesn't mean you ought to take it. As I said if all of their salaries were commiserate with difficulty, skill, education as others with similar qualities I'd be more inclined to agree.

There are many CEO qualified people out of jobs. I bet they could find someone equally talented for less.

why should they? you're logic is flawed. what you are saying is that becasue it's a not for profit evidently the people should work for peanuts. I find that very typical here on the budget board. We set some imaginary limit to compensation then justify it with "well there are people out ther who willwork for cheaper". Sure they is always someone out there willing to fill in the position.
That's ridiculous.
Why shouldn't he take the salary. I come to my job with a specific skill and talent set. You want to hire me, you pay my salary that I negotiate. Why should I take less because "there is a college student willing to take less".



This is the only place I know on where getting paid alot is a bad thing.
I know an accountant for a non profit and believe me they routinely gets paid out the wazoo. You want his expertise in corporate accounting, you pay him what he feels he's worth. You want some one at 1/3 the salary yes I'm sure there are millions of folks who would take the job, just don't get mad when that bargain turns out to be not so much of a bargain.

 

[eliza61]

The fact is that when I work for a non profit my salary is cut in half. You don't have to suggest it may or may not be appropriate. As I said it is what it is.

I think many people in upper management are over paid. Whether in corporate situations, or more importantly in government and nfp positions. People don't donate to support an exorbitant salary and no one wants their taxes going for them either.

I don't work with anything above our state level, and have no desire to, lol!

people donating doesn't have any thing to do with it.

supply and demand does. of course you think upper salaries are over paid, you're not making it. If you ask those folks in upper management I'm guessing you get a very different answer. I think atheletes salaries are ridiculous but I have no problem with them getting it. You want Kobe bryant, dwayne Wade or Ryan Howard on your team, then you pay them their price. You want some one at 1/3 the salary, you can get that to.

 

[iheartdisney]

Sorry to burst your bubble, OP but it isn't just your friends. Most charities exploit tragedies to raise money. Most PPs here mention the Red Cross. They are allowed to hold HUGE fundraisers to collect your money in the name of a particular tragedy, and then only use a percentage of the funds raised for that tragedy. The rest goes into their general fund. Pure exploitation! I quit donating to the Red Cross after 9/11 when that practice became public knowledge.
I prefer local responses- buying an actual case of water or blankets or hygiene kits that are going on an actual truck to take actual assistance to the victims.