First-class travel for charities frowned upon by public, finds survey

First-class travel for charities frowned upon by public, finds survey

First-class travel for charities frowned upon by public, finds survey4

Finance | Jonathan Last | 13 Apr 2012

The issue that concerns the British public the most about whether a charity is applying donations prudently is whether members of staff travel first class, according to research by nfpSynergy.

In data compiled as part of nfpSynergy’s Charity Awareness Monitor, which posed a variety of charity-related questions to 1,012 Britons aged 16+ nationwide on 11 November 2011, 55 per cent of those asked the question ‘Would knowing any of the following about a charity make you feel confident that they would spend a donation well?’ selected the option ‘No member of staff ever travelled first class on expenses’.

The next most popular choice was whether anyone in the charity is paid more than £50,000 per year (46 per cent), followed by if no one gets a bonus (43 per cent). The lowest concerns were whether all members would work for free one day a month, with 8 per cent, and if all new staff were unpaid for their first month, with only 3 per cent.

Seven per cent of respondents said that nothing at all would make them feel confident that a charity would spend their donation well.

Respondents were allowed to select up to five answers from the following (with the percentage each answer was chosen in brackets):

  • No member of staff ever travelled first class on expenses (55 per cent)
  • Nobody in the organisation is paid more than £50,000 a year (46 per cent)
  • Nobody gets a bonus (43 per cent)
  • The charity is mostly run by volunteers (42 per cent)
  • Nobody in the organisation is paid more than £100,000 a year (37 per cent)
  • All administration costs are paid for by Gift Aid money claimed on donations (29 per cent)
  • Staff pay for their own Christmas party (21 per cent)
  • All photocopying was on recycled paper (18 per cent)
  • No offices in London (16 per cent)
  • No printing was on glossy paper (eleven per cent)
  • All staff members work for free one day a month (eight per cent)
  • All new staff are unpaid for their first month (three per cent)
  • Other (two per cent)
  • Not sure (ten per cent)
  • Nothing would make me feel confident they would spend a donation well (seven per cent)

Joe Saxton, founder of nfpSynergy, thinks that what stands out from these results is how simple it could be to give donors confidence.

"I'm sure the majority of charity employees do not travel first-class," he said. "Our responses suggest that the public would be easily reassured if organisations made it visible that they do not, in fact, partake in the actions that people find so disagreeable.

"For instance, they could state in their documentation that they do not use donor money for luxury excursions, they aren't paid huge wages, they don't get bonuses, and so on. They could make a virtue out of these facts.

"We see from this research how people respond to factors that they can relate to – it's similar to the MP expenses scandal, where members of the public reacted angrily to the idea that those in privileged positions were exploiting public money for additional homes and other tangible benefits."

Barry Gower
16 Apr 2012

I would happily see charities pay enormous salaries with fantastic perks and bonuses, if those earning them could 'justify' such payments by the the 'returns' they generated for the charity. Unfortunately, unlike public businesses and corporations, there is not really anything like a share price, or a dividend for investors on which this can be measure. Equally, charities in the main seem to put forward an image of being more 'ideals driven' than 'results driven', and their funds are seen more as gifts than being earned. Consequently donors regard anything that is not seen to be being spent directly on the cause as being wasted.

I agree with Peter - charities ARE businesses, and should be run as such. There may be constraints and ideals which mean other factors have to be taken into consideration, but at then end of the day charities must be run in the best, most efficient way to achieve the maximum good for the beneficiaries of the charities

Peter Munro
13 Apr 2012

Very interesting.

Personally, I could relate to no member of staff travelling first class on expenses, nobody getting a bonus, and trustees being volunteers.
I'm not at all sure about putting a blanket cap on salaries; as it depends on the size of the organisation; however what I would like to see is a policy that salaries for senior staff rise no faster than salaries for junior staff.
The idea that all administration costs be paid for by Gift Aid is ridiculous. Staff that work for nothing are volunteers.

Whatever else, charities with staff are businesses, and I don't feel that staff should have to pay for their own Xmas party providing that it is a reasonable cost. I also think that volunteers should be invited, too, for free.
I don't think that photocopying on recycled paper is feasible, and it might be more expensive.

I really do wonder why charities that don't deliver purely London services have offices in London; they could save a lot of money and provide better working conditions for their staff and volunteers elsewhere; and those people would probably have better living conditions, too.

Michelle Stratford
Freelance Consultant to the Voluntary Sector
13 Apr 2012

I agree with Mike Wade - the factors are a bit bizarre and leading. I'd also comment that it's a little strange that an organisation 'run mostly by volunteers' is identified as making a charity more trustworthy - we're talking 'run by', not staffed by - personally I'd want a charity to have professional, paid staff running it with the responsbility and accountability that being in paid positions bring, supported by volunteers used appropriately.

Mike Wade
Director of Fundraising and Communications
13 Apr 2012

Hmm. Are donors *really* concerned about 1st class travel? Or are they just ticking the most outragous sounding option on a prompted list? I'd wager that if you included "£1m bonuses to all trustees" the great public would tick that as well.

I wonder what issues would have come up in response to an unprompted question? If an issue doesn;t come up here, I'd be sceptical of how reassuring it would be to bleat "we don't do it!"


[Cancel] | Reply to:

Close »

Community Standards

The community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

  • Robust but respectful debate
  • Strongly held opinions
  • Intelligent relevant discussion
  • The sharing of relevant experiences
  • New participants

We will not publish:

  • Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
  • Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
  • The posting of contact details for yourself or others
  • Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
  • Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
  • Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
  • Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
  • The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

  • Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
  • Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
  • You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear


  • Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
  • Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.

Free eNews

Age UK spends £1.8m in latest round of redundancies

21 Oct 2014

Age UK spent £1.81m on 120 redundancies in 2014, on top of £1.17m last year, as part of a review of...

Stand Up To Cancer raises over £14.5m

21 Oct 2014

This weekend's Stand Up To Cancer event has raised over £14.5m so far, and that figure is continuing...

Charities 'must continue to fight for the right to influence policy'

20 Oct 2014

Civil society organisations must not give up the fight to influence policy and governments, the international...

Demonstrate effectiveness or risk losing public trust, charities told

24 Oct 2014

Charities must demonstrate their effectiveness better to the public or face losing trust, David McCullough,...

Volunteers no longer happy to 'do what they are told', says report

24 Oct 2014

Volunteers now expect more from their experience and charities must do more to recruit and retain them,...

Relationship between government and charity 'has lost its way', says Nandy

23 Oct 2014

There needs to be a rebalancing of the relationship between the voluntary sector and government, shadow...

BeatBullying's technology CIC has not filed accounts with Companies House

22 Oct 2014

A software community interest company set up by the BeatBullying Group in 2012 is almost a year late filing...

Blackbaud launches online giving platform for individual fundraisers

17 Oct 2014

Blackbaud has launched its online giving platform, everydayhero, for fundraisers in the UK in a bid to...

Don't dismiss social media 'slacktivists', fundraisers told at IFC

16 Oct 2014

Charities should embrace and love charity ‘slacktivists’ because social is a great ramp for new donors,...

Join the discussion

 Twitter button