Gail Kelly is a legendary woman in Australia. She rose through the ranks at the old St George Building society and when it merged with Westpac bank, she finally emerged as the CEO of that colossus - with a salary of thirteen million dollars a year. She plans to retire in February.
Many people bumping along on the minimum wage will wonder what anyone can do to be worth a salary of that magnitude. Westpac posted a profit of $ 7.6 billion last year - but then the other three members of the "Big Four "posted similar profits. Just four banking institutions have a monopoly stranglehold on banking in Australia and the rules allow them to set the prices they charge for services at their own discretion. In recent times, the gap between the top and the bottom of pay scales seems ever widening - and this is now being questioned by many.
It is also disturbing that one of our leading charities is proposing to take money out of the donations pool to reimburse the directors that sit on it's board. Diabetes NSW has nine directors and there is a proposal to change the constitution to allow $ 300,000 to be allocated to directors fees. Considering that these nine people contribute between 30 and 120 hours a year to governing the charity body, that works out at a compensation rate of between $ 280 and $ 950 an hour.
It also raises a red flag in the minds of the public that generously support the charity spectrum with their donations. Many are offering money they can ill afford in the hope of easing suffering and providing the research to stem chronic diseases. In the past, becoming a director of a hallowed charity was a badge of honour and the sort of thing mentioned in the attributes delivered after the death of what would be considered a "civic leader ". Serving on such a body was considered a "duty " - for which recognition was usually made in the annual honours list.
There is an old saying that "if you pay peanuts - you get monkeys "! Politicians are fond of quoting that to justify their generous pay and allowances, but it seems that the avarice of the commercial world is invading the realm of worthy causes. Just how many cents in a charity dollar gets to the coal face where research is carried out - and how many cents get hived off to pay generous salaries and provide luxury cars for the team managing that charity ?
Many people are suffering "charity overload ". The number of letters in the mail soliciting a donation is ever increasing, as is the use of overseas call centres to use the telemarketer approach - and it is presumed that the operator who successfully coaxes a contribution is rewarded as part of that money gained. Powerful advertising agencies are involved in structuring the advertising message used. Some get out the violins and go for sympathy appeal. Others try and shame the donor into making a contribution - and in recent times the approach contains a small gift intended to saddle the recipient with a sense of obligation to donate. The same principle in selling goods to the public is involved in devising the approach to extracting a charitable donation.
When we shop at a supermarket, the seller is now required to provide a price comparison per unit to allow customers to make a comparison that is not influenced by extended packaging to give the impression that it contains a bigger amount. That is an approach that would be welcome if extended to the charity spectrum.
It should be a requirement that all and every charity present their books for an annual audit and the results of that audit determine the ratio of cents in the contributed dollar actually applied to charitable activities - and the percentage used in "administrative costs ". It should be a requirement that this comparison should be prominently displayed on all promotional material.
The government uses it's powers to make sure that retail customers can discern that they are getting value for their shopping dollar. That is a principle that would be welcome if applied to the vast charity industry !
No comments:
Post a Comment