Submitted 2 weeks ago by FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/31dd721c-7011-4b22-ab8c-c4fcb37045c8.webp
I was planning to donate the couple bucks I had left over from the year to the charity called “San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance”, I was doing a background check on CharityNavigator and they gave the charity full ratings so it seemed good.
Then I stumbled upon the salary section. What the fuck? I earn >20k a year and was planning to contribute to someone’s million dollar salary? WHAT.
It’s not exactly the charities fault.
The real issue is that for profit companies can pay their CEOs this much, which means charities have to compete if they want a good CEO too.
In reality we should be cracking down on companies hoarding wealth towards to their CEOs at exorbitant rates, that way charities won’t have to pay a wage like this just to function and even hire a CEO.
They don’t have to do this. They’re choosing to. It’s not like these guys can just walk into the unemployment office and say “I’d like one CEO job please”. There’s more people interested in executive positions than there are positions available. Why is it only acceptable to use that knowledge to negotiate lower wages for lower ranking positions?
Fundamentally good CEOs expect a wage based on the market.
There’s tonnes of high paying positions so, no, non profits truly will struggle to find an actually good CEO if they dont offer a competitive wage.
It’s not their fault, it’s the lack of regulation on all the for-profits and the fact they can funnel so much money up to CEOs unchecked.
If for-profits had regulatory checks that made them do that less, then non-profits wouldn’t have to compete with nearly as insanely high wages.
IE if there was a law that CEOs couldn’t be paid more than 10x their lowest paid worker, this problem would be a lot less insane.
I think they want someone with some experience. There aren’t that many of those.
Who is this “we” cumquat? It really only impacts the investors or owners of the company.
Unless you are directly tied into a company it doesn’t really matter.
How do they get a salary if they are non-profit? Does the donation money just go to them?
The org is non-profit, the people working for it very much would like their profit.
Non-profits pay fixed salaries. Instead of having an owner who “profits” all the extra money left over.
Fixed to THAT much is a crime! Lol.
Does your bank accept payments of $0? Or the grocery stores? Even if your organization doesn’t generate profits, people still need an income to survive…
I meant a big salary like that. If you read my other comments. This was a genuine question. OP had good point.
Because there aren’t volunteers?
Damn, my work at a non profit yields me free coffee and water. I think I’m underselling myself
That’s why I’m very picky about donating. When I was at my very first job, pushing 1200 packages an hour at UPS for hourly wages, I donated to the United Way via payroll deduction. I was listening to the news in my car when I heard the CEO of United Way took his family on a $2M vacation. I had that payroll deduction removed on the very next shift.
It’s a zoo based on torturing and exploiting animals. What did you expect?
Do you live in San Diego? It’s incredibly expensive to live there; that said, these pays are far to fucking high even for SD.
It really depends on a few things. First, where do they live? The cost of living is different depending on where you are at. Second, what is there background and education? Some high level positions pay very well because there are not that many people that can perform the role. Lastly, what percentage of the budget is going to the leadership? Most of it should be going to the cause.
Where in the world does it cost 1.27 million dollars a year to live?
If you need to attract talent away from somewhere else. Cost of doing business,. Or in this case non profit.
Is there a site which documents all charities and flags misuse of funds and such?
How do we know donations will go where expected?
givewell.org does kind of the opposite. It ranks charities by their ‘efficiency’ and offers multiple funds for bundled donation according to their constantly updated ranking.
Charity navigator is generally a good source.
If they rate highly there I’ll just search up the organization’s controversies and make sure nothing is currently going wrong.
At the end of the day there’s no guarantee regardless so just donate and feel good about it knowing you did your research.
Wow, no wonder they don’t make a profit 🙃
A guy that came in as an LPO to a company I worked for used to brag about his last job. He worked for a non-profit and his whole entire job was to find ways to make money off of it. Tax loopholes, legal scams, etc. He said it was his favorite job because it was like solving a puzzle every day.
So gross.
Anyway, the top brass really liked him and followed all his plans for our company. Now it is in Mexico and the main facilities are shut down.
If paying a CEO $200k more makes the charity $2 million more, it’s a no-brainer. Billionaires love to give to animal-related causes, so that’s easily plausible.
In reality of course, predicting the amounts of money a CEO will bring in, so it becomes a nepo-baby-fest like everything else. People with rich connections are in high demand at pretty much every entity that has a need to raise money, so they cost a lot.
Then of course you have the problem that in the wider scope, this reality creates an arms-race between charities for fundraising potential that diverts from the causes themselves. The only real solution to that problem is to punish charities that pay their officers too much by not giving them money.
To me this is par for the course. Corpos steal from you before you get it (wage theft), and “charity” manipulates you into the same, but you’re a “willing” participant in the process of having your money taken.
Pretty much everyone who is classifiably “rich” has gotten there by taking a small amount from a large number of people, usually on an ongoing timeline. The formula hasn’t changed. If you don’t have a hundred people giving you a small amount consistently, you’re probably not going to become rich.
I earn <20k a year
Could I ask what you do for a living or what field of work you’re in?
A quick Google shows there expense ratio is 86% which I think isn’t horrible.
Same in the UK - and in part it’s encouraged by the regulatory body, the Charity Commission to ensure competent senior staff. (Not usually as high as the example you give, but certainly most large charities pay senior grade around £100k and upwards.
You can kind of see that point, but most people would be shocked and dismayed to know how little difference their individual donation makes.
I always encourage people to check this information as you’ve done for your country before donating. Many charities can do a huge amount of good with small donations, but it’s the big ones that can make effective change through lobbying.
But the more cynical amongst you will realise that charities exist on paper to solve problems. There is an inherent contradiction that if they do solve those problems, everyone that works for them is suddenly out of work.
I’d like to be “chief philanthropy officer” as well.
Donating is idiotic. End of story. If you donate to anything, you’re a moron.
Joker moment
PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Wow, that’s crazy. I just checked out my local zoo and there are only 2 executives with a pay package of $200k. The rest are unpaid trustees.