If I were an RNLI donor I would not be happy.

[reginaldon]

Then, perhaps you could explain just what your problem is with the RNLI?

Is it the management pay scales? I wish I earned £60k+, but in this day and age it's a pretty low salary for a management position, especially without bonuses, profit-sharing, or similar perks.

Are the RNLI management incompetent? I haven't seen any example given where they are.

As far as I can see, (cost of boats notwithstanding) the only complaint anyone has been able to make is that the organisation has a lot of money.

How many times does one have to say that competance is not being impugned?

but they seem to spend their money in a spendthrift way because they are able and in common with far too many charities, they are not shy at rewarding themselves with money that many have often done without in order to be charitable.

 

[Chrusty 1]

How many times does one have to say that competance is not being impugned?

but they seem to spend their money in a spendthrift way because they are able and in common with far too many charities, they are not shy at rewarding themselves with money that many have often done without in order to be charitable.

An example would be?

 

[Litotes]

i have not seen a single post knocking the search and rescue element of the rnli. and those accused as knockers are questioning rather than knocking.
it is the pro-lobby who are aggressively defending their corner but in the end they will understand that resistance is futile.

I think questioning usually implies some element of seeking for information. On the whole that is not what is happening here. Most of the "questioning" posts are, in fact, nothing more than assertions, generally unsupported by any examples or evidence, of "top heavy management" and profligate use of funds. In the main, they seem to be more influenced by the posters' prejudices than by any real information of knowledge about the inner workings of the RNLI.

This conspicuous lack of knowledge or curiosity is also reflect in the tendency of the "questioners" to insult those who are not so impressed by these assertions, characterising them in almost laughably sweeping generalisations as stick-in-the-mud, closed-minded chauvinists. This is a familiar internet ploy and a dead givaway for weak and empty arguments.

Incidentally, congratulations to the RNLI engineering department on winning the inaugural Maritime Safety Award from the Royal Institute of Naval Architecture and Lloyds List for the excellence of its development of composite materials, in the field of crew safety and on the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its building programme.

No doubt the "questioners" will turn out to decry this achievement. For myself, I am the last person to subscribe to the mindless "British is best" philosophy and have always advocated the need to learn from other nations. (I also happen to earn my living as a Director of a small, successful company that I founded 20 years ago) But I am also willing to acknowledge excellence wherever it can be found - even in Britain! And I am proud that the RNLI is, indeed, a world leader in its field. I have no doubt that it is open to criticism, like any large and complex organisation. Accurate, constructive criticism is fine. Ignorant, destructive assertion is not.

My young nephew has just finished his PhD in Economics and taken up his first post at Warwick University. His starting salary? £60,000 p.a. Go figure.

 

[duncan99210]

Like it or not the RNLI is a multi million £ business that happens to be funded on a charitable basis. Whilst the managment is not above criticism, that criticism should be accurate and constructive: ie, what are they doing wrong and how should it be changed. So far in this thread, I have not seen this. All I have seen is envious people who cannot get their heads round the idea that when running a business you have to pay for the expertise to run that.

If those who criticise would offer suggestions as to how the RNLI could be improved (and please don't say replacing paid staff members with volunteers, that really won't work) and how their procurment system could be bettered then let's hear it.

And if you're really concerned not just 'indignent of Bournemouth' then you should join the RNLI at the right level, get to the AGM and air your concerns and try to get whatever it is you don't like changed. Good luck.

 

[Bru]

On the subject of multiple charities, it has to be that way by law - trading arms must be seperate entities from the charity itself, although their "profits" are usually covenanted back

Minor correction of detail ... that used to be the case in years gone by but is no longer. Since the early 2000's, (I can't recall exactly when) charities have been permitted to trade directly.

However, there are often still good businesses reasons for operating subsidiary trading companies (VAT for one, risk management for another etc)

 

[Sailfree]

Why people feel the need to knock the RNLI I do not know, but I suppose there is a trend to attack success in this country.

I am not sure anyone started off wanting to knock the RNLI. Sybarite raise a simple question comparing the cost of French lifeboats and UK ones.

It should have been responded to by logical posts pointed out the different requirements instead Sybarite was attacked and villefied.

This caused others to respond with wondering why no questions can be allowed about the RNLI with no one ever casting any criticism of the brave crews that actually do the good work.

I suspect this thread has left a number wondering whether the senior management are top heavy or generously paid and whether it could be more cost efficient as they appear to be a v well supported charity with little if any cost constraints.

all IMHO!

 

[Koeketiene]

If those who criticise would offer suggestions as to how the RNLI could be improved (and please don't say replacing paid staff members with volunteers, that really won't work) and how their procurment system could be bettered then let's hear it.

You don't have to be a tailor before you're allowed to say that the emperor is naked.

The point I made in post 51 in this thread is still valid.

If no-one gave the RNLI a single penny over the next 3-4 years, they could still carry on as they are now.
A charity has financial reserves of 550mil - that's over half a billion - and does not pay tax.
In the mean time, Coast Guard stations are being closed all over the country.

 

[Chrusty 1]

You don't have to be a tailor before you're allowed to say that the emperor is naked.

The point I made in post 51 in this thread is still valid.

If no-one gave the RNLI a single penny over the next 3-4 years, they could still carry on as they are now.
A charity has financial reserves of 550mil - that's over half a billion - and does not pay tax.
In the mean time, Coast Guard stations are being closed all over the country.

If people who give their donations to the RNLI started to think like some seem to do on this thread that the RNLI is some sort of business or corporate monster, the RNLI's source of revenue would very quickly dry up.

Do any of us who go to sea actually want that to happen? Do any of us want the crews who selflessly put themselves on the line on our behalf, to put to sea with "cost restraint" vessels and equipment?

There are far to many smart ass business heads contributing to this thread that think in terms of bottoms lines. It just wont do gentlemen!

 

[dash300]

You don't have to be a tailor before you're allowed to say that the emperor is naked.

The point I made in post 51 in this thread is still valid.

If no-one gave the RNLI a single penny over the next 3-4 years, they could still carry on as they are now.
A charity has financial reserves of 550mil - that's over half a billion - and does not pay tax.
In the mean time, Coast Guard stations are being closed all over the country.

Arriving rather late on this thread and not wishing to trail through 40+pages of comment, I have posted in the past that the
RNLI cash reserves are so vast that they are in danger of losing their charitable status and have been looked at by the Charities Commission several times in this regard. As a paid up member of the organisation would indeed like to see the RNLI
take over the |Coastguard role with the existing base of volunteers.
Apologies if this has already been debated. If it has I will trawl back through to see the arguements.

 

[Koeketiene]

If people who give their donations to the RNLI started to think like some seem to do on this thread that the RNLI is some sort of business or corporate monster, the RNLI's source of revenue would very quickly dry up.

Very quickly? With reserves of 550mil?

Do any of us who go to sea actually want that to happen? Do any of us want the crews who selflessly put themselves on the line on our behalf, to put to sea with "cost restraint" vessels and equipment?

People seem to expect it of the military.

'The rifle you are holding and the body armour you are wearing have been made by the lowest bidder' and all that.

 

[Sybarite]

An example would be?

The SNSM.

 

[Sailfree]

There are far to many smart ass business heads contributing to this thread that think in terms of bottoms lines. It just wont do gentlemen!

No you are as always wrong.

This forum is so good as there are many sucessfull businessmen and experts in many fields ranging from law to medicine with nearly all the professions in the middle as well.

They are all so sucessful they can afford to own and run a yacht or motorboat (many of them very expensive) and that puts them all in the top % of the population for ability and intelligence. As such their opinions are usually always worth considering and your denigration of them as smart asses shows your own limited thought processes. I also note that unlike the factual and informative responses by many yours only contains emotional rants that adds nothing to anyone trying to decide on whether sybarite (and a few others) are raising serious points regarding the RNLI that deserve serious consideration.

 

[Litotes]

You don't have to be a tailor before you're allowed to say that the emperor is naked.

You might reasonably be asked to show some evidence, though. And maybe show some evidence for post 51 into the bargain?

 

[Koeketiene]

You might reasonably be asked to show some evidence, though. And maybe show some evidence for post 51 into the bargain?

Click on the link in post 51.

 

[mikefleetwood]

Truth be known, the RNLI is awash with money and needs to 'waste' large sums of money (expensive launches, posh HQ, large numbers of salaried staff, ...) or risk losing its charitable status.

You say the point you made in this post is still valid - which point?

"The RNLI is awash with money" - this may be true, but why is it a bad thing? Is there a certain size, above which a charity ceases to be a good thing, in your view?

"... and needs to 'waste' lararge sums of money..." - this allegation is totally unsubstantiated, and is not supported at all by the link you so kindly provided.

Elsewhere, you link the level of the RNLI's reserves to closure of coastguard stations - again, there is no connection. Even if all donantions to the RNLI ceased, not one coastguard station closure would be prevented.

As far as I can see, your main argument centres on the fact that, like all charities, the RNLI does not pay tax on the "profit" it makes. Do you have a problem with all charities not paying tax - or just the RNLI? Incidentally, the link you provided shows "profit" of about £8M - roughly 5% of income.

 

[Searush]

Your wasting your breath Mike, none of these characters have the least intention of listening to sensible comment, or facts rebutting their unsubstantiated complaints. They just keep repeating the same old predjudices regardless of the facts presented that prove otherwise.



So it goes.

 

[Koeketiene]

You say the point you made in this post is still valid - which point?

"The RNLI is awash with money" - this may be true, but why is it a bad thing? Is there a certain size, above which a charity ceases to be a good thing, in your view?

Once you have your operating and investment costs covered... Why the need to build a humongous surplus.

"... and needs to 'waste' large sums of money..." - this allegation is totally unsubstantiated, and is not supported at all by the link you so kindly provided.

The RNLI have been 'looked at' by the Charities Commission several times. Charitable (hence tax-free) status is not really compatible with 550mil in the piggy bank.

Elsewhere, you link the level of the RNLI's reserves to closure of coastguard stations - again, there is no connection. Even if all donantions to the RNLI ceased, not one coastguard station closure would be prevented.

No, but if the RNLI (excessive) surplus were to be taxed that money could be used to keep several Coast Guard stations open.

As far as I can see, your main argument centres on the fact that, like all charities, the RNLI does not pay tax on the "profit" it makes. Do you have a problem with all charities not paying tax - or just the RNLI? Incidentally, the link you provided shows "profit" of about £8M - roughly 5% of income.

The bit you (conveniently?) missed was:

Total Funds £550.4m

 

[Sybarite]

Total funds of £550m was for 2010. By 2011 it had increased by £29m to £579m

 

[Rigger Mortice]

The RNLI have been 'looked at' by the Charities Commission several times. Charitable (hence tax-free) status is not really compatible with 550mil in the piggy bank.

Any evidence to support that?
Presumably, as the RNLI is still going, the Charity commission is happy with the present arrangements.

 

[Chrusty 1]

No you are as always wrong.

This forum is so good as there are many sucessfull businessmen and experts in many fields ranging from law to medicine with nearly all the professions in the middle as well.

They are all so sucessful they can afford to own and run a yacht or motorboat (many of them very expensive) and that puts them all in the top % of the population for ability and intelligence. As such their opinions are usually always worth considering and your denigration of them as smart asses shows your own limited thought processes. I also note that unlike the factual and informative responses by many yours only contains emotional rants that adds nothing to anyone trying to decide on whether sybarite (and a few others) are raising serious points regarding the RNLI that deserve serious consideration.

As usual, I will treat most of what you say with utter contempt, there is no intellectual discussion required, the RNLI works, the RNLI does a good job for all sailors, the RNLI is the best in the world at what it does.

If you want to change it, join at governor level and go along to the meetings and shoot your gob off there, because shooting it off on here is totally ineffectual.