Disdain at the Lifeboats Collection Tin

[Babylon]

Getting fish & chips last night I found myself wondering whether to put the small-change in the Lifeboats tin, but - finding myself flooded with negative thoughts about the Institution - I didn't.

Well, what do you make of that?!

 

[MoodySabre]

Pathetic.

 

[KenMcCulloch]

I hope in the interest of consistency you intend to refuse their help even when your life and those of your crew are in imminent danger?

 

[sarabande]

if that reaction is limited to a very small section of the community which might have been influenced by discussion on this and other fora, the the LI has not too much to worry about.

However, there seems to be an emotional perception from other sections of the the community that the LI, like several other large charities, is becoming big business.

My view is that the LI needs to get back to its root status, and restart the highly motivated local collection centres of long ago. There's a reputational issue as well, with public discomfort with large salaries and expensive infrastructure.

It's a difficult job for them. Other charities are equally well organised amd expensively managed, and there is a limited income stream at the public disposal which has to be fought for every inch of the way from tins in chippies, to solicitors making wills.



Were you wrong to turn to another box ? At the street level, charitable donations is as much an emotional decision as a cognitive, academic, one. It's only really when larger sums are at stake that people sit down and weigh up one charity against another - unless of course you have first hand experience of support from one.

 

[Babylon]

Pathetic.

I hope in the interest of consistency you intend to refuse their help even when your life and those of your crew are in imminent danger?

Any more critical attacks on me personally?

What's missing from your 'analysis' of my OP?

PS - Just noted that Sarabande's post got in before mine.

 

[Babylon]

Were you wrong to turn to another box ? At the street level, charitable donations is as much an emotional decision as an affective, academic, one. It's only really when larger sums are at stake that people sit down and weigh up one charity against another - unless of course you have first hand experience of support from one.

I happen to have just come out of the local (on-a-shoestring-budget) office of another charity. It was late in the evening, staff were still there, busy working in an airless room under fluorescent lighting, on the phones, helping and advising ordinary folk in enduringly hapless life situations.

The other thought that crossed my mind was this: did the chippie contact the RNLI to be provided with a lifeboat-shaped collection box - or do the marketing people at the Institution proactively target all fish&chip shops around the country? Fishing-boat, lifeboat, fishing-boat, lifeboat, fishing...

A clash of reason and emotion within my own insignificant self over what to do with 15p.

 

[sarabande]

approx 8500 fish and chip shops in the UK (squidoo.uk), so if each shop hasa lifeboat generating £50 a year, that's nearly half a million a year.


Almost enough to pay for a few executives or a small RIB....

 

[Poignard]

'... what to do with 15p.'

A sachet of HP sauce, perhaps?

Seriously, I know what you mean about big charities and I don't know what the answer is.

I know of a recent incident where a team of collectors from Cancer Research blagged there way into a block of retirement flats on the pretext of visting an old lady who had donated to them before. Once they had got past the security system they knocked at the doors of all the other flats and adopted a very pushy atitude to the residents, trying to coerce them into making donations. Despite being asked to do so, they would not leave until someone threatened to call the police.

I think most people want the impossible from charities - large amounts of money being raised for good causes whilst, at the same time, being run by unpaid volunteers in low rent accomodation. But that does not mean hard-sell techniques such as I describe being allowed.

 

[[70521]]

Oddly, well perhaps not as I am a Scot, I never put money in collecting tins unless its a SNSM one in France as it is not the most tax efficient way of supporting a charity.

 

[chanelyacht]

The other thought that crossed my mind was this: did the chippie contact the RNLI to be provided with a lifeboat-shaped collection box - or do the marketing people at the Institution proactively target all fish&chip shops around the country? Fishing-boat, lifeboat, fishing-boat, lifeboat, fishing...

Most collecting tins are placed by the local lifeboat guilds - even in areas far from the sea, the fundraising guilds (used to be called Ladies Guilds) are the ones who organise the vast majority of the collections - and local fundraising activities.

HQ deal more with national events, online fundraising, etc.

 

[jordanbasset]

Getting fish & chips last night I found myself wondering whether to put the small-change in the Lifeboats tin, but - finding myself flooded with negative thoughts about the Institution - I didn't.

Well, what do you make of that?!

That is your choice, we live in a free country, if you prefer to make a donation to another charity or even no charity that is your decision. It is not for others to stop you, equally if people want to give to the RNLI, that is their choice.

 

[LADY B]

I think most people want the impossible from charities - large amounts of money being raised for good causes whilst, at the same time, being run by unpaid volunteers in low rent accomodation.

I think you have just summed up the whole debate in one sentence...

 

[KenMcCulloch]

Any more critical attacks on me personally?

What's missing from your 'analysis' of my OP?

PS - Just noted that Sarabande's post got in before mine.

Nothing personal, not an attack on you or an analysis of anything, merely an observation regarding the logic of your position. You were asking for responses, I think?

 

[Babylon]

Nothing personal, not an attack on you or an analysis of anything, merely an observation regarding the logic of your position. You were asking for responses, I think?

Fair enough. And I wasn't getting at you or old Moody, just wanted to help roll the ball along.

Thanks for your imput.

 

[snowleopard]

I know of a recent incident where a team of collectors from Cancer Research blagged there way into a block of retirement flats on the pretext of visting an old lady who had donated to them before. Once they had got past the security system they knocked at the doors of all the other flats and adopted a very pushy atitude to the residents, trying to coerce them into making donations. Despite being asked to do so, they would not leave until someone threatened to call the police.

I wonder if they were on commission like the high-street 'chuggers'. It is illegal to ask people for contributions in the street but I don't know how the law applies in door-to-door collections. I did once point out to a young woman who was aggressively asking for contributions in a station queue that what she was doing was illegal. Her attitude was 'so what, it's for a good cause'. Generally collectors for charities are aware of the law and stick to it but the few who don't give the others a bad name.

 

[A1Sailor]

Getting fish & chips last night I found myself wondering whether to put the small-change in the Lifeboats tin, but - finding myself flooded with negative thoughts about the Institution - I didn't.

Well, what do you make of that?!

Get Pizza & Chips - then you can continue to ignore the tin without bareing your soul on here.

 

[maxi77]

I wonder if they were on commission like the high-street 'chuggers'. It is illegal to ask people for contributions in the street but I don't know how the law applies in door-to-door collections. I did once point out to a young woman who was aggressively asking for contributions in a station queue that what she was doing was illegal. Her attitude was 'so what, it's for a good cause'. Generally collectors for charities are aware of the law and stick to it but the few who don't give the others a bad name.

I think a lot depends on whether they are professionals who earn a living by getting contributuions or amateurs who do it because they really believe in the work the charity does. The latter are almost always polite respectful and a delight to give to, the others I avoid like the plague. Regratably all to often these days it is the former you see in the high street.

I have done my time standing on street corners shaking the collecting tin and it used to be a pleasure, since the arrival of the chuggers on the scene I suspect it is less so now.

 

[Greenwichman]

Charity as social business .......

I think you have just summed up the whole debate in one sentence...

It is hard to believe the tenor of the RNLI debates that this forum has supported these past few days. The quality of the argument has been variable, but at least the passion has been impressive.

As someone who has been CEO of three quite different charities over the past 12 years I'd just like to record my total support for every single person who takes the time to help make these charities - social businesses - work well.

Whatever the charity, it's people who make them work. Quality people. People who don't come cheap.

Charities vary, but all have to wash their faces and deliver value. Most depend on volunteers, but all need cash flow. Few provide services on the scale of the RNLI.

The RNLI is a major logistics organisation. I have visited the HQ in Poole and observed the engineering stores, for example, where pride is taken in providing spares very rapidly for engines and systems in boats right across the UK (and Ireland).

A lifeboat out of action is a major red card; the teamwork and systems needed to rectify defects promptly are a world-class example of the best possible lifeboat service.

Sure, there may be others. But, c'mon guys, let's cut the carping. The RNLI is one of the best charities of its kind. It does a fabulous job for us and it sets a paradigm for the world. It's worth 15p in fish and chip shop! And more.

As a Governor of the RNLI I get no perks at all. But I pay my dues, read the accounts and have an option to attend their AGMs.

As a charity CEO I take a salary similar to that of the RNLI CEO and - like him - if I don't do my job well my livelihood is at risk. I wouldn't do what I do for less; and I wouldn't look for anyone's charitable sympathy if I cock it up.

Market forces are such that if I took a "proper job" I could earn far more.

Charities I work for get good value (imho!!). So does the RNLI, and the truth is these social businesses need real talent in a wide range of senior roles. All these execs earn their keep; or good CEOs should boot them out.

Hands off the RNLI. We are lucky to have them. Next time one of us radios a "Mayday" I hope we think of that!

 

[AndrewB]

I share Babylon's uncertainty. Collection tins do not seem a really appropriate way of funding a vital rescue service. There's no obvious relationship between what they raise and what they need. Moreover, they are not directly accountable for how they spend it. Some people here seem to think they need everything they can get, others that they are an over-wealthy organisation given to extravagance.

We don't core-fund other rescue services such as ambulance, fire, this way; so why lifeboats?

(P.S. While ambulance and fire are not volunteer services in the UK, public funding does not preclude a volunteer service: this is the norm for the fire service in many countries).

 

[halyardmonkey.]

This is a very interesting debate.

At ll costs you should protect the RNLI's independent status. In doing so, you may well have to put up with a well paid management structure to protect this. The reason is thus:

Once upon of a time. The voluntary sector was a vibrant independent and responsive sector. Able to evolve and change to the needs of their client base. Unfortunately, something changed. It accepted state money and contracts and in doing so lost some of its independence. These days it is much more target driven. Accepting a contract such as the ambulance service will then involve a target driven approach which will distort the real work of what is required and their focus will be diverted to meeting the needs of their paymasters. No longer will the RNLI respond to real difficulties on the water but will then need to meet a fictitious need deemed in their contract with who ever.

I suspect the anxiety about donating in the box has much to do with the RNLI's silly viewpoints on a few things recently. If they remain independent we will be able to influence them. If they went the other way, only their funders will be bale to.

Put money in the jar, fill out a direct debit and lobby them hard about what you don't like........