Sat-Nav Units for The RSPCA - Possible PH Campaign?
Discussion
imbecile said:
Doesn't it strike you as fundamentally wrong to be entering a disaster area and (presumably) getting in the way of people striving to improve things for the remaining people?
I suppose it could be argued that they're stimulating the local economy by being there, but I think that would be equivocating somewhat.
You clearly have not been to their website to read about the projects and support they gave during that time, or now.
No, it does not strike me as fundamentally wrong - they didn not "get in the way"
hordes of people did NOT arrive in a disaster zone and ignore 'people' in favour of animals as you infer. Support was in the form of finances, medical aid, veterinary drugs & equipment to help sick or injured animals, as someone has rightly pointed out, in order that the locals can resume their farming & economy.
I very much support the work of the RSPCA as well as several other animal and people charities which exist to further important (IMO) causes which our government or lottery system does not. Animals and Children don't have power or voice and that is why they get my support. They campaign to improve the quality of lives of animals being mis treated by ignorant and/or greedy people - in areas such as; Farming (Farming Animal Reforms) Pig and Chicken welfare, Research (reducing chemical testing), Wildlife (illegal tortiose trade and badger culling), Animal Transport, etc. etc. they do a good job in raising the issues around animal suffering and changing policies and standards. They work with local and national government both in the UK and Europe, to influence and inform policy, (eg dangerous dogs). This is above their fantastic helpline/cruelty line which I've used previously and seen their immediate and excellent work (as the OP details).
Give me one good reason why the RSPCA should not support animals left suffering after a disaster. Do you understand how charites work? what their constitution is and what their objects are?
If you're going to knock them, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion, at least understand their work before you do.
I have no problem donating to the RSPCA and fully expect them to manage my donation effectively and impactfully with a professional management team including directors, accountants, fundraisers, marketing etc etc. - of which I have no problem part funding from my donation. 'Management' costs also include Vets, Vet Nurses, Animal Assistants etc. All of these people need job security (ie a regular monthly salary!) and pensions just like any organisation! Anyone wishing to donate and exclude these costs can make what is known as a 'restricted' donation which will go soley to the project of their choice.
Edited by parakitaMol on Wednesday 16th May 09:38
I donate to a number of charities - the RSPCA isn't one of them.
They are very wealthy, and on the odd occasion I have asked thm for help when finding a stray they have done nothing at all.
They do, however, pay their executives very well indeed.
I am sure they do good work, but when Great Aunt Maud dies and leaves a couple of grand to help the cats and dogs she probably doesn't expect it to be spent leasing nice company cars or on a fabulous headquarters...
All of which I wouldn't mind so much apart from what said earlier - a couple of times now I have found stray cats and they simply weren't interested and were no help at all. I ended up having to keep one, and the other time I found a small private sheltar miles away that agreed to take it after I made a sizeable donation...
They are very wealthy, and on the odd occasion I have asked thm for help when finding a stray they have done nothing at all.
They do, however, pay their executives very well indeed.
I am sure they do good work, but when Great Aunt Maud dies and leaves a couple of grand to help the cats and dogs she probably doesn't expect it to be spent leasing nice company cars or on a fabulous headquarters...
All of which I wouldn't mind so much apart from what said earlier - a couple of times now I have found stray cats and they simply weren't interested and were no help at all. I ended up having to keep one, and the other time I found a small private sheltar miles away that agreed to take it after I made a sizeable donation...
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I wouldn't try and convince anyone to suppport an organisation they didn't want to - giving to charity is about feeling good about something you are passionate about.
If I found a stray cat I would contact 'Cats Protection' first & foremost. But I'm genuinely shocked they were not intersted.
They came out within half an hour when I saw 5 very tiny kittens in the back yard of a pub (next to a main road). They spent a time helping the owners understand basic kitten care and their safety (they were too young to be out un innoculated) and then reported back to me the actions they had taken after my call. I noticed the pub owners immediately took action to secure the yard and keep the kittens indoors for another month or two, as ignorance had been the reason for their neglect. Education is a large part of what the RSPCA do. P.S. Being a 'wealthy' charity would not put me off donating, it's the value of their work and impact it has upon the area I am concerned with that I am interested in.
Edited by parakitaMol on Wednesday 16th May 09:45
Now I'm going to wade in here with my opinion, and to a degree, some of the facts:
Without studying the details of their accounts and employee spread, I would hazard that they are a fairly major employer, with thousands of employess across the country.
Hell, I'd even go so far as to say that they would be considered as a fairly major business.
And this is where the boundries blur.
A lot of people seem to have this impression that charities should lurch from day to day not sure where the next penny comes from and always having to fundraise constantly for money.
Well to a degree, the branches do this - they have fixed budgets, and if they want a specific additional capex purchase, they tend to look to raise the money locally to do so.
However it's to be considered that as a large emplyer, the business will have overheads to be expected of a large organisation, and additionally they need to consider the recompensation schemes for the staff they employ. As much as we all hope that RSPCA staff do it out of the goodness of their hearts, most have families and homes to provide for:
Like my missus.
Now shes worked with the RSPCA for three years and has just been given a rise in line with her experience, training on top of her CPD requirement, and quite simply, if she hadn't had got that, she'd have gone somewhere else that would. Just like everyone else.
Now coming to my point: Where has £10million gone a year? I don't know, but I can suggest a couple of options:
1. They are simply saving - remember how expensive Foot and Mouth was to the economy, well I'm sure that the RSPCA took a HEAVY hit with respect to that - not directly mind, but indirectly through loss of staff, increased support costs dealing with public worries etc. I would be surprised at a business that does NOT ensure that it holds funds back for a 'rainy day' as it were - you simply don't know what the next 'big thing' is going to be
2. The RSPCA took a heavy hit in the stock market - they invest in the stock market to maximise return on their contributions, and if I am correct from what I was told, about ten years ago they were hit very hard - additionally I know that 9/11 didn't do them any favours. So again, they will be ensuring that they cover thier reserves, and I would imagine they perhaps have debts they need to honour.
3. Covering contingencies from lack of fundraising: Its not to say that eventually Outgoings exceed Incoming funds at some point - being a charity that receives no funding from the government they rely solely on inheritance donations, fundraising and generosity from the public. We could be rumbling slowly towards a recession perhaps where people need to tighten the purse strings, and this means that the RSPCA will suffer as a result. Relying on donations is not an effective business strategy, and they are right to 'save' any excess at the end of the year.
As for Sat Navs, you what? A good friend is an ACO (Animal Collection Officer) and he can read a map perfectly well. If he couldn't, he probably shouldn't be doing the job perhaps, or at least should be given a little guidnance.
Perhaps SatNavs may well come in at £50 per unit (guessing here) however, its additional theft risk (they already pay hefty insurance on their vehicles) and also could be percieved as a H+S risk due to the usage of them whilst driving (i.e. not concenrating - yes I know maps are just as dangerous but there you go).
Maybe they could install them - its a valid idea, but I hardly think they will...
Without studying the details of their accounts and employee spread, I would hazard that they are a fairly major employer, with thousands of employess across the country.
Hell, I'd even go so far as to say that they would be considered as a fairly major business.
And this is where the boundries blur.
A lot of people seem to have this impression that charities should lurch from day to day not sure where the next penny comes from and always having to fundraise constantly for money.
Well to a degree, the branches do this - they have fixed budgets, and if they want a specific additional capex purchase, they tend to look to raise the money locally to do so.
However it's to be considered that as a large emplyer, the business will have overheads to be expected of a large organisation, and additionally they need to consider the recompensation schemes for the staff they employ. As much as we all hope that RSPCA staff do it out of the goodness of their hearts, most have families and homes to provide for:
Like my missus.
Now shes worked with the RSPCA for three years and has just been given a rise in line with her experience, training on top of her CPD requirement, and quite simply, if she hadn't had got that, she'd have gone somewhere else that would. Just like everyone else.
Now coming to my point: Where has £10million gone a year? I don't know, but I can suggest a couple of options:
1. They are simply saving - remember how expensive Foot and Mouth was to the economy, well I'm sure that the RSPCA took a HEAVY hit with respect to that - not directly mind, but indirectly through loss of staff, increased support costs dealing with public worries etc. I would be surprised at a business that does NOT ensure that it holds funds back for a 'rainy day' as it were - you simply don't know what the next 'big thing' is going to be
2. The RSPCA took a heavy hit in the stock market - they invest in the stock market to maximise return on their contributions, and if I am correct from what I was told, about ten years ago they were hit very hard - additionally I know that 9/11 didn't do them any favours. So again, they will be ensuring that they cover thier reserves, and I would imagine they perhaps have debts they need to honour.
3. Covering contingencies from lack of fundraising: Its not to say that eventually Outgoings exceed Incoming funds at some point - being a charity that receives no funding from the government they rely solely on inheritance donations, fundraising and generosity from the public. We could be rumbling slowly towards a recession perhaps where people need to tighten the purse strings, and this means that the RSPCA will suffer as a result. Relying on donations is not an effective business strategy, and they are right to 'save' any excess at the end of the year.
As for Sat Navs, you what? A good friend is an ACO (Animal Collection Officer) and he can read a map perfectly well. If he couldn't, he probably shouldn't be doing the job perhaps, or at least should be given a little guidnance.
Perhaps SatNavs may well come in at £50 per unit (guessing here) however, its additional theft risk (they already pay hefty insurance on their vehicles) and also could be percieved as a H+S risk due to the usage of them whilst driving (i.e. not concenrating - yes I know maps are just as dangerous but there you go).
Maybe they could install them - its a valid idea, but I hardly think they will...
Edited by Neil_Bolton on Wednesday 16th May 09:57
Neil_Bolton said:
The first intelligent comment on charity finances, since ever
Thanks Neil, the misconception that charities can operate effectively and employ professional people without paying for them, from fundraised income, has always frustrated me!
Back to the OP - I also don't support my donations going to Sat Navs, I'd rather see increased public awareness and change around issues such as animal transport and farming conditions.
Neil_Bolton said:
3. Covering contingencies from lack of fundraising: Its not to say that eventually Outgoings exceed Incoming funds at some point - being a charity that receives no funding from the government they rely solely on inheritance donations, fundraising and generosity from the public. We could be rumbling slowly towards a recession perhaps where people need to tighten the purse strings, and this means that the RSPCA will suffer as a result. Relying on donations is not an effective business strategy, and they are right to 'save' any excess at the end of the year.
Contingency best practise is around 3-6 months operating costs, most charities aim for something around this mark.
Surely nobody wouldn't invest in a piss pot company with bad finances, and incompetent business leadership?
Edited by parakitaMol on Wednesday 16th May 10:09
MK4 Slowride said:
As we're talking on an animal number here, I had to drive round three ducks 'at it' in the middle of the road this morning. I hope everyone else spotted them or there's going to be some orphan ducks this summer.
Three?
I know that most animals can and do swing both ways but both at once? :boggle:Nic Jones said:
stovey said:
flat16 said:
If you’ve ever hit a fox, this could be the time to clear your conscience...
What say you?
I think people on here shoot foxes.
Tis true you know!
And, if I remember correctly, the RSPCA were in favour of a hunting ban..... so they can feck off and buy their own satnavs!
sa_20v said:
Just kidding, I love the idea, however the RSPCA are more likely to benefit from better governance, and mild cruelty to their fat cat!
What is bad about their governance? you sound like you have some inside information there... I thought they were governed by their Trustee Council (unpaid), I have looked at their list of Council members and have no concerns whatsoever with their integrity, I'd be really interested to know more if you can share it though.
What is this fat cat, or are you referring to their reserves?
Please expand your comments, thanks.
parakitaMol said:
sa_20v said:
Just kidding, I love the idea, however the RSPCA are more likely to benefit from better governance, and mild cruelty to their fat cat!
What is bad about their governance? you sound like you have some inside information there... I thought they were governed by their Trustee Council (unpaid),
You are correct, any expenditure at a local level at least (including my missus getting a rise and training) are signed off by the board of trustees.
They most certainly are not paid and do it for the good of it.
It does help that some of them are well off mind, but still, they receive no recompensense from the RSPCA.
Edited by Neil_Bolton on Wednesday 16th May 10:50
flat16 said:
If you’ve ever hit a fox, this could be the time to clear your conscience...
What say you?
What say you?
I say the fox should have stayed out of the road. Those fast-moving solid lumps of metal are a bit of a giveaway.
Personally, I think the RSPCA is moving away from being an organisation that cares about individual animals to another nanny-state pressure group. While I don't like senseless cruelty, I also don't subscribe to the belief that animals need special care or someone running around behind them when no-one seems to care that my daughter's education is at third-world standards.
Charity begins at home.
Neil_Bolton said:
parakitaMol said:
sa_20v said:
Just kidding, I love the idea, however the RSPCA are more likely to benefit from better governance, and mild cruelty to their fat cat!
What is bad about their governance? you sound like you have some inside information there... I thought they were governed by their Trustee Council (unpaid),
You are correct, any expenditure at a local level at least (including my missus getting a rise and training) are signed off by the board of trustees.
They most certainly are not paid and do it for the good of it.
It does help that some of them are well off mind, but still, they receive no recompensense from the RSPCA.
Edited by Neil_Bolton on Wednesday 16th May 10:50
I knew that
I've recently been invited to become a Trustee for another charity, It's a huge commitment in terms of time & responsibility, undecided as to accept or not.
spokey said:
flat16 said:
If you’ve ever hit a fox, this could be the time to clear your conscience...
What say you?
What say you?
I say the fox should have stayed out of the road. Those fast-moving solid lumps of metal are a bit of a giveaway.
Personally, I think the RSPCA is moving away from being an organisation that cares about individual animals to another nanny-state pressure group. While I don't like senseless cruelty, I also don't subscribe to the belief that animals need special care or someone running around behind them when no-one seems to care that my daughter's education is at third-world standards.
Charity begins at home.
Er hello?
Have you forgotten the sterling work that is tirelessy done by the ACOs, nurses, vets, relief workers, dog walkers, etc etc that continues to this day, and will always continue?
People get so wrapped up at what it being spouted by the media and thrid hand heresay that they forget just what bloody hard work goes on at ground zero.
I would suggest to ANYBODY that if you have a day to spare, see if you can help out for a day, you will be amazed at just what they have to deal with: You see this BBC article about a dog being set alight?
It was my missus (RSPCA Vet) who had to get up at 2:30am in the morning to treat this, carried on monitoring and treating it through the night, and ultimately saved its life. Hell, as she was stuck at work on the sunday morning since being called in, I decided to take her some lunch, and I even helped by getting the animal some Aloe Vera from Boots to help its burns cool a bit.
Now tell me that the RSPCA isn't doing its job.
Edited by Neil_Bolton on Wednesday 16th May 11:00
Edited by Neil_Bolton on Wednesday 16th May 11:01
spokey said:
Charity begins at home.
Yes you're right it does - what is the price of pork belly?
your 'focus' or 'cause' is probably best directed into an area where you are passionate - perhaps education? or children? I'm sure there is someone out there working to improve things in schools - maybe you should look into it?
However, this does not make the activities of the RSPCA any less worthwhile. They can't exactly drop what they are doing & change their constitution just because it's deemed less valuable than educating children - it's not a competition to see who is the most 'worthy' - I wouldn't expect someone to buy a new car based on my purchase priorities any more than I'd encourage them to donate to a charity based on my motivations.
Much of RSPCA's property wealth and endowment funds have been bequeathed to them, they are obliged to honour that bequest and perfectly entitled to invest in order to provide security for their organisation.
Neil_Bolton said:
Have you forgotten the sterling work that is tirelessy done by the ACOs, nurses, vets, relief workers, dog walkers, etc etc that continues to this day, and will always continue?
No, I just don't care. My interface to the RSPCA invariably takes the form of a very expensive TV commercial that seems to imply that human beings are bastards and the RSPCA is the only thing preventing an animal armageddon, oh, and can you give us some money, please?
Personally, I'd rather give my charity to someone who can't afford prime time TV ad breaks.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff