Volunteering

[Guest]

Why aren't you spending time volunteering as Francis Maude has dictated?

[burning dog]

I do volunteer, but by definition it isn't something anyone commands you to do, or even coerces you to do.

It's wrong that some Charities takes forced "volunteers" from the Work Programme. It's often via the Head Office and the local branches hate it.

It's wrong that companies set up exclusively to administer the Work Programme, though they may be "not for profit", are classed a Charities at all


The "Big Society" has always been there, the Gov't want to exploit it.

[Frances_iom]

...The "Big Society" has always been there, the Gov't want to exploit it.

- why pay when the lower classes will do it for nought? -Maggie'd dictum 'there is no such thing as society' is holy writ to Tories as gives a justification to the pig-in-trough society she helped create

[burning dog]

- why pay when the lower classes will do it for nought? -Maggie'd dictum 'there is no such thing as society' is holy writ to Tories as gives a justification to the pig-in-trough society she helped create

I agree

Which is why it's all the more galling when they use that B. S. phrase.
Their view of volunteering appears to be A) Lady Bountiful giving advice and scraps to the poor and B)The unemployed doing forced "voluntary" work like cleaning up the canal path.

[Lateralthinking1]

Thanks. The sheer number of volunteering jobs available is staggering. Take a look at the Do It website and the site of the National Trust to get a flavour. Then contrast with the number of actual jobs on Jobseekers. That is paltry. I realise that the knocking of charity is like criticising motherhood and apple pie. Of course any normal person is supportive of charity's aims. However, I suspect that the volunteering sector needs to question itself more to retain the general public's unquestioning support. It can appear to be getting a bit too big for its boots just like the "private sector". When you read the adverts, it becomes immediately obvious that many roles are ones that were once income supported. A lot of admin stuff is there along with the more practical.

One might be forgiven for thinking that these jobs are paid. "You will be expected to....". "If we consider that you are suited....". Talk about saying "I will receive your kind gift but only if I decide that I want a gift from you". To me, it seems warped. The word "slavery" leaps to the mind. It feels and sounds over the top. And yet is it? Supported by the Government's stances, charities appear to expect that wholehearted giving will come from many who are being given nothing by anyone to sustain them personally into the future. Slaves were ill-treated and given little. The many unemployed who don't qualify for benefits are expected to accept that fact while at the same time giving their all. When Government says that everyone should volunteer, it paints a land where all are financially secure and relaxed. The profile is the well-off, healthy and well-meaning 60-something. That is crackers.

Many have anxieties about simply keeping a roof over their heads. They hardly have the confidence or the stupidity to pretend away their personal situations and go off on a good guy jaunt. Meanwhile, those in work have to cope with fewer colleagues to "improve efficiency". Just to get through five days of organized chaos is knackering. It is said that volunteering, like training, will improve the chances of getting a job or getting promoted in a workplace. But as more people become involved, the more this will be shown to be mythical. I speak as someone who very willingly was the coordinator of volunteering for a large Directorate. This places me in a good position to say that those who run the sector need a dose of reality. Many of them live in a fantasy world.

[Serial_Apologist]

And similar with so-called "job placement schemes". From the growing number of interviews on TV, the large number of these clearly reveal themselves as coming from posh backgrounds... and yet, more and more are saying that they are unable to afford to take "positions" which offer no remuneration for the increasingly prolonged "sinecures" charities, government departments, arts and fashion industries are more and more relying on.

[burning dog]

There's still loads of voluntary work that is helping people in need / with problems, maybe people like yourself but who are emotional less resilient, those with illnessnes that dont get enough support from the NHS - encouragement - advocacy - self help, but not doing physical needs "replacing the state" stuff (or replacing paid private sector work for that matter) a lot of people are running away from state institutions. There are places where the state can't go.
These Charities aren't in a position to turn people away without very good reason, such as failing the CRB check where appropriate. I suggest the Charities you are talking of LT ARE too big for their boots, or the HQs are at least. A lot of voluntary oragnisation don't need much in the way of funds just a few hours help.

[Flosshilde]

Thanks. The sheer number of volunteering jobs available is staggering. Take a look at the Do It website and the site of the National Trust to get a flavour. Then contrast with the number of actual jobs on Jobseekers. That is paltry. I realise that the knocking of charity is like criticising motherhood and apple pie. Of course any normal person is supportive of charity's aims. However, I suspect that the volunteering sector needs to question itself more to retain the general public's unquestioning support. It can appear to be getting a bit too big for its boots just like the "private sector". When you read the adverts, it becomes immediately obvious that many roles are ones that were once income supported. A lot of admin stuff is there along with the more practical.

One might be forgiven for thinking that these jobs are paid. "You will be expected to....". "If we consider that you are suited....". Talk about saying "I will receive your kind gift but only if I decide that I want a gift from you". To me, it seems warped. The word "slavery" leaps to the mind. It feels and sounds over the top. And yet is it? Supported by the Government's stances, charities appear to expect that wholehearted giving will come from many who are being given nothing by anyone to sustain them personally into the future. Slaves were ill-treated and given little. The many unemployed who don't qualify for benefits are expected to accept that fact while at the same time giving their all. When Government says that everyone should volunteer, it paints a land where all are financially secure and relaxed. The profile is the well-off, healthy and well-meaning 60-something. That is crackers.

I'm perfectly happy to volunteer for organisations like the National Trust - it's doing work which I wouldn't expect (or perhaps want) the state to do, and by using volunteers (usually members) it helps get people involved in their work. The main problem is who the volunteers tend to be - which obviously reflects the membership. I volunteer at the Hidden Gardens in Glasgow - http://www.tramway.org/hidden_gardens/ - which is funded from sponsorship & donations. But I do object to the current government policies of cutting (public sector) jobs & expecting 'the community' to take on the work for nothing.

"One might be forgiven for thinking that these jobs are paid. "You will be expected to....". "If we consider that you are suited....". Talk about saying "I will receive your kind gift but only if I decide that I want a gift from you"."
If volunteers are to be effective they need to have their skills matched to the tasks - there's nothing worse for an organisation than having people come along 'to help' but who can't actually do what's needed. Volunteers also need to be comitted to turning up regularly, on time, & fulfilling what they are there to do - all the skills required of someone in paid employment.

[burning dog]

- there's nothing worse for an organisation than having people come along 'to help' but who can't actually do what's needed.

That's true, but there can be jobs like making tea, moving tables or sweeping up in some organisations, if thats "beneath" them they won't come back.

[Lateralthinking1]

Well, yes, burningdog. Many of them act like they are three or four people. If they were that, you could understand the methods but generally it is those smaller organisations which ironically have modest egos. It isn't just that very wealthy charitable organisations expect ordinary folk to give freely. It is their hierarchies. Look at the salaries for their Directors of Communications or whatever. Totally ludicrous. The structure should be entirely different. Very little differential. A little sum of money for all. I also dislike the hard sell - the street canvassing, cold calling etc. The advertising. Their celebrity advisers. The Executive Boards. And I really don't like the huge amount of volunteering work that has clearly dropped out of the local authorities' remit. As the fat cats in the public sector and their consultants rake it in, the lowly paid jobs are going to be done by volunteers with no income.

I don't like CRB. It is unhealthy for a society to treat all of the population as if it is potentially suspect. That is worse when it does so particularly with people who are giving and constructive. It says far more about those who work in that structure than the applicants. I see it as an aggressive sledgehammer to deal with a peanut. The problems in society it seeks to address have been overstated, largely hyped up by the press. I would be quite content for the requirement in a small number of areas to be on applicants to obtain and present a legal document. However, it seems to me to be entirely wrong that employers of no doubt variable character obtain those records and that it is a private organisation which provides them.

There is no political accountability. It is also dishonest because it is about money rather than others' welfare. The Government has no real interest in protecting citizens. It wants to protect organizations from lawsuits. Otherwise, everyone who walked down the street would be required to carry documents. For this lunacy, we are all placed in the position of having to prove our innocence rather than being presumed innocent. I find that illogical given how the law stands generally and also invasive. I am just not prepared to go through that nonsense when I haven't got a clue whether those undertaking the scrutiny would meet the standards I would expect of them. For this I would be seen as bloody minded but it seems to me that reason is on my side.

[burning dog]

LT
I don't think it's about 'good guy jaunts' and am suspicious of people who are overly messianic unless it is a campaining charity and their motivation is personal or family related. Getting out and about, meeting new people, keeping busy are good reasons while doing something useful without making someone else rich is a bonus. The importance of attending on time and being reliable is important, but it is rarely a problem with the older voulnteer. I don't like to be ageist but it seems to be the case.

edit - Cold calling and especially "chuggers", I find appalling and though they raise money are a PR disaster in many ways. It's odd that this "Chugging" is allowed while it's against the law (or maybe local by-laws) to shake a collection tin!

Message In a Bottle (Medical Information Pots)
Not my charity but I have benefited from this (and distributed many since) as I got the right medication when rushed to hospital. It works for couples or larger households if you all have your DOB /Gender and/or picture in the pot. It needn't be just for vulnerable single people as there is often panic when someone collapses. I'm not sure it's available in pharmacies or GP's nationwide but all 'Lions' people have them.

http://www.lions105sw.org.uk/assets/MiaB/MIAB.htm

[greenilex]

I enjoy my voluntary job but am quite clear that I'm keeping myself occupied and functional, not doing anyone any favours.

There is a big difference between the co-op ethos - people working to create wealth and maintain independence - and the charity mindset of Lady Bountiful Bignose and her friends setting the world to rights. I know which I want to foster.

[MrGongGong]

I was thinking of volunteering either as a hornplayer in the RPO (well everyone else seems to have been in it )
or
I do quite fancy a go at neurosurgery

[Flosshilde]

edit - Cold calling and especially "chuggers", I find appalling and though they raise money are a PR disaster in many ways. It's odd that this "Chugging" is allowed while it's against the law (or maybe local by-laws) to shake a collection tin!

A slight diversion, but I think charity collections in town centres etc have to be licenced by the local authority, & there's a limit to the number allowed each day/week. There was report recently that the British Legion (in Liverpool, I think) wasn't allowed to collect on the days that were especially significant for them becuase a couple of other charities had already booked those days. There was the predictable 'outrage' directed at the council & the other charities by the tabloids. The other charities were quite happy to give up their slots when they realised the situation. I assume that the big charities are well organised & book their slots well in advance.

[B]Message In a Bottle (Medical Information Pots)

My father had this - I think it was organised by his Macmillan nurse, or his GP.

[Lateralthinking1]

Flosshilde - I should have said thank you for your posts. The one thing I would slightly question is your observation that:

"volunteers also need to be committed to turning up regularly, on time, and fulfilling what they are there to do - all the skills required of someone in paid employment".

While I fully understand where you are coming from on this - I really don't like disorganization - it seems to me that there should be scope for people to turn up to these things whenever they want.

"What do you want me to do?" one might say. Someone - anyone - would reply "Thanks, if you can be getting on with x that would be useful".

Why doesn't this happen? My feeling is that it is just in case someone slips on a floor or falls off a ladder.

All the circus involving advertising, The concept of "volunteering jobs". It is generally a load of baloney to make sure that the organizations minimise the possibility of lawsuits.