Charities in Trouble

[Guest]

Programme director for a charity

 

Six grand less than I earned in the education sector

 

60-80 hours per week

 

The question twas not aimed at you BSP

[Tuscan]

I am frustrated with many of the large charities with substantial overheads.

 

My son in law's father registered a small charity and each year we raise between £3 and 5,000 which is taken to Bangladesh and physically spent directly on books , uniforms etc for children from 3 villages to attend school. The children are selected by the villagers themselves and we increase the numbers each time we have funds for the full learning cycle. For the first time last year we had enough to pay for 2 kds that had gone through school to go on to college to do the equivalent of A levels a first for this area.

 

We do all this for less than a major international childrens charity pays for the house and utilities that accommodates their regional manager

[Little Else]

Ok -

 

but how much do you earn,

 

what job do you do,

 

and how many hours in a week do you work?

 

 

Market researcher, probably about 50hours a week when there is enough work earning about 14 thou. No sick pay, if you can't do the work you don't get paid. When I mangled my finger and hand last year I was lucky that I was still on holiday for the time I was in hospital, I had to cancel one days work when I came home as I couldn't manage that particular job but carried on with my other work. I just couldn't afford the time off. I managed but it wasn't particularly comfortable or easy. A qualified librarian with chartered status working full time at a school, earns considerably less than 25 thou.

25 thou is not an " average" wage at all but a bloody good one.

[jelunga]

I know that but suggesting that charity employees should be earning less than the national average is somehow demeaning their work, in my opinion.

I am not suggesting this. But for the organisation to have this figure as an average then some will be earning a lot highe (as stated in their report)r. And like the executives of CRT, why should it demand a higher salary to be the head of a charity than to run the country as Prime Minister? And he is overpaid!

[carlt]

25 thou is not an " average" wage at all.

Yes it is.

 

£26k (or thereabouts, I can' be bothered to look up the exact amount again) was the UK National average wage last year.

 

Just because you earn less than the national average does not alter that fact.

[Guest]

Market researcher, probably about 50hours a week when there is enough work earning about 14 thou. No sick pay, if you can't do the work you don't get paid. When I mangled my finger and hand last year I was lucky that I was still on holiday for the time I was in hospital, I had to cancel one days work when I came home as I couldn't manage that particular job but carried on with my other work. I just couldn't afford the time off. I managed but it wasn't particularly comfortable or easy. A qualified librarian with chartered status working full time at a school, earns considerably less than 25 thou.

25 thou is not an " average" wage at all but a bloody good one.

 

Then I'm afraid you don't understand the concept or meaning of the word average if you think that.

 

I looked at a couple of salary comparison sites and got it to considerably more on one than Carl got it to BTW, for males any way.

 

 

It just means you earn below the average as does your other example of a school librarian.

[Jerra]

A qualified librarian with chartered status working full time at a school, earns considerably less than 25 thou.

 

Things must have changed a lot over the years. I had a friend who was a qualified librarian in the school where I worked and she earned more than most of the teachers (myself included).

[mayalld]

Market researcher, probably about 50hours a week when there is enough work earning about 14 thou. No sick pay, if you can't do the work you don't get paid. When I mangled my finger and hand last year I was lucky that I was still on holiday for the time I was in hospital, I had to cancel one days work when I came home as I couldn't manage that particular job but carried on with my other work. I just couldn't afford the time off. I managed but it wasn't particularly comfortable or easy. A qualified librarian with chartered status working full time at a school, earns considerably less than 25 thou.

25 thou is not an " average" wage at all but a bloody good one.

 

The fact that you earn less and that you are dissatisfied with what you earn doesn't alter the fact that it is an average wage.

 

If the pay rates in your line of work are no good, why not find something else that pays better?

 

I've got two people working for me who started in the last six months on £21k (rising to £27.5k after 7 years), full sick pay, 27+8 days leave.

 

The roles aren't unduly demanding (administrative, with some basic computer knowledge, customer facing skills and an ability to plan your workload without too much supervision), but each time we advertise these roles, we are lucky if we get 6 applicants.

 

Of course, an inability to understand what "average" means might NOT improve your chances of landing such a job.

[alan_fincher]

I know that but suggesting that charity employees should be earning less than the national average is somehow demeaning their work, in my opinion.

I wasn't suggesting that, (not that you are saying I was!), just extracting the numbers that Athy said he could,'t see.

 

In fact the numbers are split between those working for the "charity", and those working for the "group".

 

Those working for the "charity" average more like £32K, so well above national average, which is generally quoted very much closer to the circa £26K of those working for the "group".

 

I'm not making any point beyond that, nor have I delved into which categories of workers is likely to be included in each number.

 

Far more controversial to me seems to be the huge disparity between average male earnings and average female earnings once you start looking into such things, (not at the charity - I mean across our great nation).

 

I am not suggesting this. But for the organisation to have this figure as an average then some will be earning a lot highe (as stated in their report)r. And like the executives of CRT, why should it demand a higher salary to be the head of a charity than to run the country as Prime Minister? And he is overpaid!

As you have linked to the Help for Heroes annuual report, you need to read it more carefully I think.

 

It shows that 2 staff were paid in the range £80K to £90K, and a further three in the range £60K to 70K

 

The Prime Ministers salary seems to be generally quoted at over £140K, so there is no evidence anyone here comes close to that number.

[Nine of Hearts]

Far more controversial to me seems to be the huge disparity between average male earnings and average female earnings once you start looking into such things, (not at the charity - I mean across our great nation).

 

Huge disparity? Quoi? You've been fed too much propaganda, Alan. the Dog House's graph would be more accurate if the bars were titled "Full time workers" and "People who've chosen to jack their jobs in to spend time with their kids".

 

Female wages outstrip Male wages up until the point women choose to give up work. Not a lot of people know that. I wonder why?

[Guest]

Female wages outstrip Male wages up until the point women choose to give up work. Not a lot of people know that. I wonder why?

 

Evidence please...it's an assertion I have certainly never heard before and am curious now.

[alan_fincher]

Evidence please...it's an assertion I have certainly never heard before and am curious now.

 

Look at

 

Office For National Statistics - 2011 Annuual Summary of Hours and Earnings.

 

Then look at table on Page 20 "Gender pay difference for median hourly earnings, excluding overtime, by age"

 

It shows that between 22 and 29, the disparity is 3.8% in favour of women, (although to be fair between 18 and 21 id is 4.4% in favour of men, so it is not entirely clear cut I would say)

 

As NOH says, only after about aged 40 do the men start to stride away with the advantage, bu which time the average time they will have been in full time employment will of course be far higher than for women.

 

I'm always happy to learn something new on here, and I stand corrected!

[lynalldisocvery]

Im sure the figures quoted as average above are correct, but in the real world i dont actually know anyone who earns much more, most people in my game earn approx 25 to 32k not incl overtime

Looking at the chart below and seeing the amount of people earning over 100k will give you the averages quoted.

Chart from wikapedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

range number of taxpayers

£4745 to £6000 1,440,000

£6000 to £7000 1,160,000

£7000 to £8000 1,590,000

£8000 to £10,000 2,950,000

£10,000 to £12,000 2,760,000

£12,000 to £15,000 3,650,000

£15,000 to £20,000 4,950,000

£20,000 to £30,000 6,000,000

£30,000 to £50,000 4,090,000

£50,000 to £70,000 859,000

£70,000 to £100,000 410,000

£100,000 to £200,000 300,000

£200,000 to £500,000 89,000

£500,000 to £1 million 16,000

Over £1 million 6,000

[FrigateCaptain]

Market researcher, probably about 50hours a week when there is enough work earning about 14 thou. No sick pay, if you can't do the work you don't get paid. When I mangled my finger and hand last year I was lucky that I was still on holiday for the time I was in hospital, I had to cancel one days work when I came home as I couldn't manage that particular job but carried on with my other work. I just couldn't afford the time off. I managed but it wasn't particularly comfortable or easy. A qualified librarian with chartered status working full time at a school, earns considerably less than 25 thou.

25 thou is not an " average" wage at all but a bloody good one.

 

Just as a comparison...

 

End of life and palliative care worker

 

Approx 50 hours per week

 

Annual pay just over 17000

 

Low wage but I love my job, I'd suggest if you want more money change jobs

[Guest]

Look at

 

Office For National Statistics - 2011 Annuual Summary of Hours and Earnings.

 

Then look at table on Page 20 "Gender pay difference for median hourly earnings, excluding overtime, by age"

 

It shows that between 22 and 29, the disparity is 3.8% in favour of women, (although to be fair between 18 and 21 id is 4.4% in favour of men, so it is not entirely clear cut I would say)

 

As NOH says, only after about aged 40 do the men start to stride away with the advantage, bu which time the average time they will have been in full time employment will of course be far higher than for women.

 

I'm always happy to learn something new on here, and I stand corrected!

 

It is interesting and I'm still trying to get my head around why it should be so, I would have expected pay parity at the least up until the age a lot of women are returning to work following child care responsibilities, but not what those figures are showing.

Edited December 10, 2012 by The Dog House

[Nine of Hearts]

It is interesting and I'm still trying to get my head around why it should be so, I would have expected pay parity at the least up until the age a lot of women are returning to work following child care responsibilities, but not what those figures are showing.

 

The reason you haven't got parity is because the propaganda clearly states that women get paid less than men. To say otherwise, even when backed up by hard facts, is heresy. So we have programs and initiatives to correct the non-existent disparity, which result in creating a real one.

[alan_fincher]

It is interesting and I'm still trying to get my head around why it should be so.......

Given the apparent advantages that the males seem to have up until 21, but that the females then overtake, would it be too controversial to suggest that the women quickly establish themselves as better or harder workers, so progress up the ranks more quickly, and only start to lose that position because of child-bearing?

 

It's very hard for any of us to look at an overall picture here, I guess, because we will all bed familiar with how we think things were in jobs we have done ourselves, or industries we have gained some familiarity with, but I guess will generally be fairly ignorant of the overall picture. Interesting though, so thanks to NoH for making me look a bit deeper.

[carlt]

Im sure the figures quoted as average above are correct, but in the real world i dont actually know anyone who earns much more, most people in my game earn approx 25 to 32k not incl overtime

The fact that most people in your game earn around the national average is surely to be expected.

 

Shouldn't most people be earning around that amount, in order to make it the average?

 

This is surely reinforced by the figures you've quoted which show that the most people (over 6 million) fall into the average wage group.

[Little Else]

Just as a comparison...

 

End of life and palliative care worker

 

Approx 50 hours per week

 

Annual pay just over 17000

 

Low wage but I love my job, I'd suggest if you want more money change jobs

 

 

You are very lucky you love your job, I wasn't saying I wanted more money although sick pay, holiday pay and a pension would be nice, I was just trying to point out that an awfull lot of people earn nothing like the national average. I suspect a lot of people earn less than the national average while the few who earn a hell of a lot more bump up the average figure.

[Little Else]

The fact that most people in your game earn around the national average is surely to be expected.

 

Shouldn't most people be earning around that amount, in order to make it the average?

 

This is surely reinforced by the figures you've quoted which show that the most people (over 6 million) fall into the average wage group.

 

I think you are confusing the mean with the mode.

[carlt]

I was just trying to point out that an awfull lot of people earn nothing like the national average. I suspect a lot of people earn less than the national average while the few who earn a hell of a lot more bump up the average figure.

But if you look at Lynall's figures the biggest number, by some margin, earn the national average, or thereabouts.

 

I think you are confusing the mean with the mode.

No I'm not.

[Guest]

But if you look at Lynall's figures the biggest number, by some margin, earn the national average, or thereabouts.

 

 

I wonder why that is?

Edited December 10, 2012 by The Dog House