Just when the NKF saga last year was blown over, now Youth Challenge, another charitable outreach group, is under investigation.
Apparently, the chairman of the organization earns a salary of S$13,000.00 per month. Which is a fair amount for the chairman of any organization, but being a charitable organization, it is frowned upon for the chairman to be paid what the public will view as a ridiculous amount.
Somehow, I cannot relate charity to profit. If a person is to be in a charitable organization, then he has to go in with the full understanding that it is for charity and welfare to the less fortunate, not to earn any form of high salary for himself.
If the head of a charitable organization earns a ridiculously high salary, then it will definitely be open to public scrutiny. People who donate will wonder where their funds go to, ie is it really to charity or to the chairman’s own pocket?
With so much hype about the mismanagement of funds in charitable organizations, is it any wonder why nowadays donations are getting lesser and people are less willing to donate?
Of course, to me, if and when I donate, I will give and not question where the money goes. And the chairman giving himself such a high salary does not really bother me, although it definitely sparked off lots of anger from others.
But Youth Challenge is after all a youth group focusing on humanitarian activites. So whatever funds raised should be channelled to the humanitarian effort, not to anyone’s pocket.
According to this article, it seems like the volunteers paid everything in advance, and then when they go to the area to outreach, they stay in high class hotels and eat extravagant meals.
It makes one wonder exactly where all the money go to. Is it really to help the less fortunate, or to let their members and volunteers enjoy themselves?
I used to be a member of Youth Challenge as well. That was many years back, when I was still a school kid. I thought the activities they are involved in are interesting and meaningful, thus I signed up as a member.
However, I ended my membership within months due to a conflict with the chairman. The article stated that the chairman is prejudiced against those who raised lesser amounts as compared to those who could raise thousands.
But in raising funds, as long as people try their best and it is all for charity, whatever amount should suffice. Is there a difference for those who managed to raise more or those who raised less? Why must those who raised a lesser amount be put down?
I am not sure whether it is the same chairman, although from the description it sounds like the same. What happened was the chairman called me up and asked me to help out in some fund-raising event.
He called me at a very bad time, as I was working then during one of the school holidays. It was a school-based attachment, and I had to work for at least a month. So I politely told him that I was not able to help out that time, but I would be more than willing to help out another time if my schedule allowed.
He then started blasting at me. He said how sincere was I to join as a member, then refuse to help out? I was totally bewildered.
In the first place, me joining as a member and volunteer does not mean I have to take part in all the activities; it is my right to choose which activities I like to take part in.
I thought the concept of being a volunteer means you give your time to help out for a worthy cause, at your own time. Afterall if we are not going to be paid, we have no obligations to take part in every activity.
Of course, it is not for the money, but the thing is, we are willing to give our time to commit and help out, so does it really matter if we take part in all or just one of the activities? After all, I believe everyone has their own affairs to attend to as well.
So I told him that that period of time was really bad for me, since I had to work. He then said why did I choose to work and earn money for myself, when I could outreach and raise money to help the needy?
Of course I know that, but it was because of my school that I had to work, not on my own accord. If I miss my attachment, I could fail my course. And I have my own future to think of.
I know I sound mean and self-centred by saying that, but if I do not secure a good future, I will not be able to give more time and money to help out in the future.
That guy really riled me. He had no right to tell me what to do and what not to do. He sounded so propaganda, like as if he was promoting something. Like a pesky sales assistant who was trying to coerce one into buying something.
So I ended my membership, because if the organization is to function this way, then I do not believe in its policies and values. A charitable outreach organization should be one that really reaches out and care for others’ welfare, and not one that accumulates profits for its own benefit.
Perhaps charitable organizations should be more transparent in how they utilize the resources. It is not to nit-pick where our money go, but whether it is truly for charity and humanitarian efforts, instead of one’s own pockets.
Apparently, the chairman of the organization earns a salary of S$13,000.00 per month. Which is a fair amount for the chairman of any organization, but being a charitable organization, it is frowned upon for the chairman to be paid what the public will view as a ridiculous amount.
Somehow, I cannot relate charity to profit. If a person is to be in a charitable organization, then he has to go in with the full understanding that it is for charity and welfare to the less fortunate, not to earn any form of high salary for himself.
If the head of a charitable organization earns a ridiculously high salary, then it will definitely be open to public scrutiny. People who donate will wonder where their funds go to, ie is it really to charity or to the chairman’s own pocket?
With so much hype about the mismanagement of funds in charitable organizations, is it any wonder why nowadays donations are getting lesser and people are less willing to donate?
Of course, to me, if and when I donate, I will give and not question where the money goes. And the chairman giving himself such a high salary does not really bother me, although it definitely sparked off lots of anger from others.
But Youth Challenge is after all a youth group focusing on humanitarian activites. So whatever funds raised should be channelled to the humanitarian effort, not to anyone’s pocket.
According to this article, it seems like the volunteers paid everything in advance, and then when they go to the area to outreach, they stay in high class hotels and eat extravagant meals.
It makes one wonder exactly where all the money go to. Is it really to help the less fortunate, or to let their members and volunteers enjoy themselves?
I used to be a member of Youth Challenge as well. That was many years back, when I was still a school kid. I thought the activities they are involved in are interesting and meaningful, thus I signed up as a member.
However, I ended my membership within months due to a conflict with the chairman. The article stated that the chairman is prejudiced against those who raised lesser amounts as compared to those who could raise thousands.
But in raising funds, as long as people try their best and it is all for charity, whatever amount should suffice. Is there a difference for those who managed to raise more or those who raised less? Why must those who raised a lesser amount be put down?
I am not sure whether it is the same chairman, although from the description it sounds like the same. What happened was the chairman called me up and asked me to help out in some fund-raising event.
He called me at a very bad time, as I was working then during one of the school holidays. It was a school-based attachment, and I had to work for at least a month. So I politely told him that I was not able to help out that time, but I would be more than willing to help out another time if my schedule allowed.
He then started blasting at me. He said how sincere was I to join as a member, then refuse to help out? I was totally bewildered.
In the first place, me joining as a member and volunteer does not mean I have to take part in all the activities; it is my right to choose which activities I like to take part in.
I thought the concept of being a volunteer means you give your time to help out for a worthy cause, at your own time. Afterall if we are not going to be paid, we have no obligations to take part in every activity.
Of course, it is not for the money, but the thing is, we are willing to give our time to commit and help out, so does it really matter if we take part in all or just one of the activities? After all, I believe everyone has their own affairs to attend to as well.
So I told him that that period of time was really bad for me, since I had to work. He then said why did I choose to work and earn money for myself, when I could outreach and raise money to help the needy?
Of course I know that, but it was because of my school that I had to work, not on my own accord. If I miss my attachment, I could fail my course. And I have my own future to think of.
I know I sound mean and self-centred by saying that, but if I do not secure a good future, I will not be able to give more time and money to help out in the future.
That guy really riled me. He had no right to tell me what to do and what not to do. He sounded so propaganda, like as if he was promoting something. Like a pesky sales assistant who was trying to coerce one into buying something.
So I ended my membership, because if the organization is to function this way, then I do not believe in its policies and values. A charitable outreach organization should be one that really reaches out and care for others’ welfare, and not one that accumulates profits for its own benefit.
Perhaps charitable organizations should be more transparent in how they utilize the resources. It is not to nit-pick where our money go, but whether it is truly for charity and humanitarian efforts, instead of one’s own pockets.
0 comments:
Post a Comment