Nhs

[j.sabourn]

I quoted in another post a couple of years ago that after a Tsumani where Malaysia was affected, 10 members of a. Charitable organisation each took the maxinum allowance of 10,000 dollars out of the country and handed personally to their counterparts for the construction of school edifices. This would be the only way I would give money to those abroad where I was sure there was no overheads. The money as others did who sent personally abroad was through a bank and. Cost 37 dollars for the privilege, no confirmation it had reached the recipient, so will never ever do again. JWS

[robpage]

The Oxfam scandal was quickly followed buy similar problems from Save the Children and now the International Red Cross in Switzerland of admitted that they've just missed 21 staff in 3 years for exactly the same problem . Maybe it seems a long time ago that aid workers went out there to help instead of looking after themselves the trouble is this small minority of sexual tourists give the large majority of good people a very bad name I believe over 7000 people have stopped their monthly contribution to Oxfam . I just look at the published accounts that they all have available through the internet and count off how much goes to the front line and how much goes in administration and how much goes in fundraising when you do that you'll get a great big surprise as to how little some charities get to the front

[John Pruden]

the first thing that is put in a red cross or any other vehicle on humanitarian duty is a bag of money for pay offs at road blocks set up along the way that's how much feeding the starving in their countries means to some we should stop all aid ? help yes with food and medicine but not the way aid is just given out we owe our taxpayers in this country. just my view .jp

[j.sabourn]

Rob I and others are often asked to vote on where charitable monies go. I will always vote that it goes locally. A one just last week was to the local woman’s shelter and someone went out and literally bought 12 beds and bedding and had the same delivered. Cuts out all secondary parties and delivers the goods where they are intended to go. Handing over hard cash sight unseen is very questionable. I always abstain on such a vote. That’s why I am mad as for sending money out of the country not too far back via a bank. Especially as it was a personal gift and could have gone to a charity nearer home. JWS

[John Pruden]

i always give to cancer even though i thing most does not go to were it should? jp

[robpage]

Dozens of charity CEOs are still earning huge salaries, with many pulling in more than £200,000 a year.

The chief executive of Cancer Research UK, Harpal Kumar,*earns*up to £240,000 a year, while Peter Wanless, CEO of the NSPCC, earns £162,000.

Amnesty International head Salil Shetty is paid up to £210,000 a year, and Tom Wright of Age UK earns up to £190,000. Indeed, according to figures from*Third Sector magazine, there are now 12 charity bosses earning more than £300,000 and and 32 getting more than £200,000.

Most of the really high earners are in the health sector, with Nuffield Health, the hospital and fitness centre provider, paying up to £780,000 in a year - although this does include redundancy payments. Chief executive David Mobbs made more than £640,000.

The highest earner in the survey was an unnamed person at the London Clinic who was paid more than £850,000, although this included contractual payments in lieu of notice.

However, Oxfam and Christian Aid both paid less than £125,000 a year, as did Sightsavers and the RSPB. And pay is still generally way lower than for CEOs in the private sector: corporate services firm the Hogg Robinson Group and Save the Children both turn over around £341 million a year, but while the former pays its chief executive £594,000, Save the Children pays under £14,000.

A recent survey by consultancy*nfpSynergy*found that more than a quarter of people believe that charity bosses should probably or definitely not be paid.

[j.sabourn]

One of your biggest if not the biggest charitable organisations in the world Rob is Masonic. Put a post up a couple of days ago thatthe latest figures given for North America was 1.5 million dollars a day mostly to children’s hospitals. There are an estimated 4 million Freemasons world wide so apart from running around with a trouser leg rolled up they do a lot which is not publicised, that wouldn’t do for the media as they like to keep them lurking in the background so they can bring them out every so often to point the finger of suspicion at. They don’t seek plaudits they just do the job without all the film star wages. I will put coins in a box for the Salvation Army if a box is rattled under my nose as think they are hands on performers, most of the others I have my doubts. Cheers JS....

[Keith Tindell]

I donate monthly to Medicine frontiers, any catastrophe in the world it seems their doctors and nurses are first on the scene , the other charity is KIVA, 1 put 200 dollars in to them, and they loan it out to the people you instruct them to, usually in 25$ lumps, they then tell you when the recipients have paid the loan back, i still have most of the $200 left, and you can take your money back any time you wish, kt

[cappy]

I donate monthly to Medicine frontiers, any catastrophe in the world it seems their doctors and nurses are first on the scene , the other charity is KIVA, 1 put 200 dollars in to them, and they loan it out to the people you instruct them to, usually in 25$ lumps, they then tell you when the recipients have paid the loan back, i still have most of the $200 left, and you can take your money back any time you wish, kt

##nice to see good deeds keith such a pity there is always the takers from the charitable causes.....perhaps hanging a few out to dry ....ie naming names may be some incentive ....as opposed to trying to hide these folk from public view.....which is certainly coming to the fore now ......cappy

[robpage]

Senior executive salaries
The highest salary in MSF UK is our executive director, Vickie Hawkins

Vickie is eligible for an annual salary of £79,716 (as of April 2017). There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments.

This amount excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary.

Doesn’t MSF UK have a 3:1 ratio between highest and lowest salaries?
MSF UK has traditionally paid the most senior member of staff, usually the Executive Director, no more than three times the pay of the lowest paid UK-based staff member.


MEET OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
VICKIE HAWKINS

However, in 2014 the MSF UK board decided to hold a long-overdue review of pay grades and benefits for all UK-based staff, and as part of that review the board reviewed its policy on setting the Executive Director’s pay.

The board decided in future to treat the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rule in order to avoid a possible tension between either underpaying the Executive Director compared to equivalent roles, or being forced to pay more for junior roles than is appropriate.

For the record, the director’s current salary of £79,716 is 3.3 times the lowest current MSF UK salary of £24,462.

How did the board set the Executive Director’s salary?
In considering the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board observed that a gap had opened up between what MSF UK was previously paying and what other parts of the MSF movement and London-based NGOs were paying their Chief Executives.

In setting the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board sought to set the salary at a level that was broadly competitive yet still modest, in keeping with MSF’s focus on maximising the use of funds for frontline work.