RNLI amended constitution

[Firefly625]

Hey, Dude, if it's so easy to get these jobs how come you never got one?

Fact is, it takes real talent to lead, manage and be accountable for large organisations. Charities aren't easier to run because they aren't 'proper businesses'; in reality they ARE businesses, and often more complex, with more than just profit to make - there is more than one 'bottom line' to operate (ie a financial bottom line as well as an 'added value' bottom line).

I know, because I have spent the last dozen years in various roles in the third sector as a Chief Exec and in some roles as an (unpaid) Board Member;, and - no - as a full time (salaried) CEO I am not overpaid for the nine-day weeks I put in to get value for money for those who donate and earn for the charities I lead.

Maybe you've suffered cr*p leaders in your sector (in which case I sympathise, there are too many of them about), but please don't puke us all up into one trough, so to speak.

The RNLI is a fabulous charity, the envy of the world, with not one penny from the state (other than in terms of Gift Aid and other fair tax benefits). The CEO - who I know personally - went through a massive competition to get his job (as we all have to do to run major bodies).

The Board that selected him is unremunerated; if you were on that Board, responsible in fiduciary terms for what goes on, you'd search for and pay for the best too. It's the right way both to run a high-performing organisation and to stay out of jail for transgressing laws on such matters as tax, HR, H&S etc etc. Compliance is an essential part of day to day housekeeping; you can't have a great lifeboat service run by a slack-alice or a johnny-com-lately.

The fashion recently to denigrate anyone who has succeeded in reaching the top of their professional life is a corrosive influence; the politics of envy. Time to re-balance the perspective.

Now, if you want a really good rant, I'll join you on the subject of bl**dy bankers; now there's a sector that is led by some truly overpaid peeps!!!!!

I was hoping someone like you would respond. thank you

 

[BabySharkDooDooDooDooDoo]

The main change in that section seems to be the 'without limitation'. Am I being over sensitive to wonder if this might presage increasingly hectoring tone or aggressive stance about safety issues?

It does seem a rather odd term to use in that context, so I don't think your are being over sensitive.

 

[E39mad]

Thank you Greenwichman for restoring my faith

 

[BrendanS]

I was at a seminar by an ex CEO of a major charity. He told how when he started, he was hounded by the press and volunteers at some of the changes he planned. They were simply business led changes. All the hundreds of charity shops for the organisation were making a loss, despite being staffed by volunteers, with the merchandise free, and the rents on the properties very cheap. Each and every shop was run as a separate company, and the accountancy expenses for that alone were vast.

He spent a fortune having all the shops run under the one company, so one set of accounts, the volunteer staff weeded out and given some basic training, standards on what was sold in the shops, rather than everything including clothes with holes in it, and most importantly, had the shops professionally outfitted with lights, carpets and and shelves, so they looked appealing.
The shops, rather than a drain, became a source of revenue. But only after some major investment and changes.
That requires a manager with real business experience, not a well meaning volunteer, and you have to pay for such people. He really took it in the neck while he was making these changes too.

 

[ditchcrawler]

Well spoken Greenwichman.I would have struggled to have replied in such a concise way.I support the RNLI as a Governor as they are in my eyes the best in the world at what they do.Can you imagine what the Civil Servants would do running this organisation.It is not perfect but what/who is.

 

[Ubergeekian]

Well spoken Greenwichman.I would have struggled to have replied in such a concise way.I support the RNLI as a Governor as they are in my eyes the best in the world at what they do.

There have been some interesting comparisons with the French lifeboat system posted previously.

In my experience, some large charities are well run while some are appallingly managed by members of a cadre of professional third sector managers who see the lack of shareholders as an excuse for outrageous inefficiency. There is one well known development and relief charity, for example, to which I will not under any circumstances donate because I know just how inefficient they are.

There are others, of course, which are well run and do a wonderful job. I have heard nothing but good about Water Aid, for instance.

Finally - sorry, this post is a bit rambling and disjointed - I would suggest that if you can find a CEO candidate for a charity who has a real feeling and passion for the work of the charity, they will be willing to earn substantially less than they might for running a comparably sized organisation in the commercial sector. Otherwise they're just mercenaries, and using mercenaries rarely works out well.

 

[RNLI]

Have just received notice of the RNLI AGM to be held in May. The main item is a change to the Institution's constitution. In view of the heat sometimes generated on this forum by the perceived activities of the RNLI I thought there might be interest in the main claus to be changed, as follows:
'Delete Article 3 and substitute "The object of the Institution shall be to save lives at sea and on inland waters. In order to achieve that object, the powers of the Institution shalll without limitation (my italics) include the following:
3.1 to promote safety and provide relief from disaster at sea etc etc

The main change in that section seems to be the 'without limitation'. Am I being over sensitive to wonder if this might presage increasingly hectoring tone or aggressive stance about safety issues?

Hello all - Just a quick reply to the OP who was interested in the proposed change to the RNLI Charter. The main reason we are hoping to make this change is actually to simplify the wording - if you look at the current charter you will see it's very wordy and hard to understand.

This section of the charter talks about our 'aim' and our 'powers'. Our 'aim' is to save lives and our 'powers' are how we go about achieving that aim, i.e. we provide a maritime search and rescue service, a flood rescue response, give safety advice and education etc. The reason that these are ‘without limitation’ is because we don’t want to impose limits on how we might be able to save lives.

The word 'powers' may be misleading - it doesn't mean we have or want powers over other people (as we are not an enforcing authority)- it simply refers to how we go about saving lives. It's actually a legal term that we have to use in the context of our charter.

In case you are interested, these proposed amendments have been approved by relevant charity regulatory bodies in the UK and Ireland. And more information on the proposals and details of the existing charter can be found at www.rnli.org.uk/agm. Or if you have any specific questions feel free to PM me and I will endeavour to reply as soon as I can.

Isla Reynolds
RNLI

 

[Bru]

Speaking as a former trustee of a large charity and a current director of an NFPO, I'm with Greenwichman on this

Running a large charity is actually more difficult in many respects than running a commercial business. There is the additional burden of law, the diverse expectations of the membership (shareholders are a lot easier - they're happy if the share price is strong and the dividend healthy!) and the never ending difficulties of raising sufficient funds etc.

"Charity" is also something of a misnomer in many cases and in fact the Charity Commission has for some years been taking a much tougher line on what is and what is not a charity. Many existing registered charities would not now, if they were newly founded, qualify for charitable status and would now be NFPO's (Not For Profit Organisations)

Registered charities and NFPO's are usually (but not always) registered Companies Limited by Guarantee. In most respects they are no different to any other registered limited company. They must comply with company law and one of the legal requirements is that the company constitution must state the Aims of the company and the Powers of the directors (or trustees who in company law are the directors) i.e. what the directors are empowered to do on behalf of the company

(Without Powers, the directors would have to refer every decision right down to whether to buy a pack of envelopes to the shareholders or members of the company)

It is these powers that (I assume) the RNLI is amending. "The Powers" in a company constitution have to be very carefully worded as the directors (or trustees who are, in company law, the directors of a trustee based company) can be held to account in law for exceeding them. The phrase "Without limitation" leaves the directors room to maneuverer (whilst still being accountable to the shareholders or voting members)

As for the age old employee versus volunteer debate ...

Few large NFPO's can operate entirely with voluntary labour. In fact, I don't know of any that do (but there may be one or two although I doubt it). The administration of a large NFPO is complex and time consuming requiring professional skills in finance, company law, etc. Sometimes these skills can be provided by suitable skilled and/or qualified volunteers but such people with time to give are a rare commodity.

If you employ people in a role, you have to provide an adequate remuneration package. More often than not, the so called "third sector" pays far less than the commercial sector even though salaries may seem high - if you want a top notch chief executive (and a really good CEO is just about worth his or her weight in gold in any business) you have to offer an attractive package to recruit and retain them. Likewise staff at all levels - people may be prepared to work in the third sector at below the commercial going rate but they won't stick around if you really take the p*ss!

And if you fall within the relevant legal requirements you have to make pension provision for your employees. Matters not whether you are a charity, a NFPO or a commercial company. Likewise you are legally obliged to comply with workplace laws and regulations and so on. Being a charity or NFPO does not cut you any slack

Now don't get me wrong, there are people who take liberties with this. There are charities which should not be charities, NFPOs which are not for profit in name only and organisations of both types which are run more for the benefit of the directors and/or executive than for any genuine worthwhile cause but most such organisations are run with the best of intentions (whether or not with the best of results is a separate debate!)*

* Note that this is a broad general statement and not a reference to any specific organisation and specifically that it is not a reference to the RNLI whose work I greatly admire

 

[Searush]

(snip)
In case you are interested, these proposed amendments have been approved by relevant charity regulatory bodies in the UK and Ireland. And more information on the proposals and details of the existing charter can be found at www.rnli.org.uk/agm. Or if you have any specific questions feel free to PM me and I will endeavour to reply as soon as I can.

Isla Reynolds
RNLI

Thanks for that, Isla. There are a few on here that are deeply suspicious of the RNLI - perhaps they think you can't get "owt for nowt". I suspect they might one day be only too happy to accept your assistance in some form.

 

[oldmonsty]

Some of the comment on here almost makes me ashamed to be a member of this forum and challenges my non judgmental attitude developed over many years as a crew member of a south coast lifeboat. As an volunteer executive with a social welfare charity it always amazes me that those that know the least shout the most. The main framework for charitable activities has after all only been going since 1601, hardly time to soak into their thick skulls.

 

[haydude]

Hi, Please dont make judgements untill you understand why UK charities operate the way they do.

Wow! This is the first time it happens to me to get an explanation. Normally I am the one giving them when Brits make ill informed judgements about my country.

 

[haydude]

There are volunteer crew members & volunteer fundraisers whose commitment is much less than full time, and it allows them to hold down ful-time paid jobs. But full-time mechanics, administrators, managers etc have to be paid. As you noted yourself, you wouldn't work for nothing would you, so why do you expect them to? .

Searush, what I believe is wrong is that:

1) the RNLI is named as a "charity". For as long as there are managers getting salaries of hundreds of thousands, they are a non-profit organization. Perhaps legally in the UK they are a "charity" (unfortunately because of the multi-origin nature of the language the etimology of the word gets lost in English), but morally for me that is not a "charity".
2) RNLI managers get paid hundreds of thousands. I do not know you, but I believe that you could do the same job and maybe even better, and since you are a good man you would feel guilty getting paid more than an average salary.

 

[haydude]

Hey, Dude, if it's so easy to get these jobs how come you never got one?

Mmmh ... perhaps because I am a foreigner and I live in the UK? We are normally the first to be made redundant and the last to be promoted aren't we?

 

[Searush]

Mmmh ... perhaps because I am a foreigner and I live in the UK? We are normally the first to be made redundant and the last to be promoted aren't we?

That's a jolly big chip on your shoulder there, mind it doesn't block your view of promotion opportunities.

 

[Searush]

Searush, what I believe is wrong is that:

1) the RNLI is named as a "charity". For as long as there are managers getting salaries of hundreds of thousands, they are a non-profit organization. Perhaps legally in the UK they are a "charity" (unfortunately because of the multi-origin nature of the language the etimology of the word gets lost in English), but morally for me that is not a "charity".
2) RNLI managers get paid hundreds of thousands. I do not know you, but I believe that you could do the same job and maybe even better, and since you are a good man you would feel guilty getting paid more than an average salary.

I'm sorry, but you seem you have fixed ideas that do not allow you to accept the facts you have been told. It would be a waste of energy to continue this discussion.

 

[webcraft]

Only a problem if they are authorised to take over from the Coastguard ...

You think you are joking? This is the Big Society remember . . .

- W

 

[webcraft]

I'm sorry, but you seem you have fixed ideas that do not allow you to accept the facts you have been told. It would be a waste of energy to continue this discussion.

You are talking to the same man who believes we shoudl seek out and destroy fishing gear. Rational discussion with Haydude is not an option.

- W

 

[Greenwichman]

Hello all - Just a quick reply to the OP who was interested in the proposed change to the RNLI Charter. The main reason we are hoping to make this change is actually to simplify the wording - if you look at the current charter you will see it's very wordy and hard to understand.

This section of the charter talks about our 'aim' and our 'powers'. Our 'aim' is to save lives and our 'powers' are how we go about achieving that aim, i.e. we provide a maritime search and rescue service, a flood rescue response, give safety advice and education etc. The reason that these are ‘without limitation’ is because we don’t want to impose limits on how we might be able to save lives.

The word 'powers' may be misleading - it doesn't mean we have or want powers over other people (as we are not an enforcing authority)- it simply refers to how we go about saving lives. It's actually a legal term that we have to use in the context of our charter.

In case you are interested, these proposed amendments have been approved by relevant charity regulatory bodies in the UK and Ireland. And more information on the proposals and details of the existing charter can be found at www.rnli.org.uk/agm. Or if you have any specific questions feel free to PM me and I will endeavour to reply as soon as I can.

Isla Reynolds
RNLI

Hi, Isla, welcome to the wacky world of the YBW forums. It is great to have the RNLI posting here; give or take the odd troll we are mostly on side and very very grateful for the work you do. Always hoping you have to do it for someone else, of course.

There have been some earlier threads where concerns have emerged that the RNLI should focus on the saving of life; and that the freedom we enjoy to sail should not be compromised by nanny, however well-intentioned!

As a Governor I shall be turning up to the AGM and will be pleased to vote in support of the changes being proposed.

Best wishes ... and many thanks for joining in.

 

[NormanS]

Perhaps Isla, or someone else from the RNLI would care to explain why I, and many like me, will be excluded from the vote, simply because we live too far away from London?

Surely in this day and age they could use a voting system which doesn't require ones physical presence at the AGM.

 

[rotrax]

Searush, what I believe is wrong is that:

1) the RNLI is named as a "charity". For as long as there are managers getting salaries of hundreds of thousands, they are a non-profit organization. Perhaps legally in the UK they are a "charity" (unfortunately because of the multi-origin nature of the language the etimology of the word gets lost in English), but morally for me that is not a "charity".
2) RNLI managers get paid hundreds of thousands. I do not know you, but I believe that you could do the same job and maybe even better, and since you are a good man you would feel guilty getting paid more than an average salary.

Yup, two countries separated by a common language! True knowlege is the product of direct experience. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. I can come up with more relevant sayings but whats the point-you have made up your mind and find it hard to look at it in a logical way. The guys who risk their lives for others are unpaid, exept in most cases the engineers. But who gets their oilies, pays for the diesel, books the courses they must attend from time to time and so on. Admin staff, thats who,and they have families who need feeding and like the rest of us like the odd taste of the good things in life,like nice holidays. Over to you.