RHS considers job cuts in face of falling income

Fundraising | Celina Ribeiro | 5 Aug 2009

The Royal Horticultural Society could cut nearly 10 per cent of its workforce as it tries to make £1.7m in savings.

Fears that traditional sources of income could dry up has prompted the gardening charity to propose that up to 100 jobs could go as part of a proposed ‘programme of change’.

Lynne Beddoe, spokeswoman for RHS, said that some of its previously predictable revenue streams have become unreliable as a result of the economic downturn.

“£3.1m is our current operating margin. We need £3.5m surplus annually in order to fund our ongoing operations. We also need contingency funds,” she said.

“The figure that we are looking to achieve through our proposals for change is a reduction in costs of £1.7m. It’s 10 per cent of our wage bill.”

Beddoe said that the charity is concerned that corporates may shy away from sponsoring RHS events. “We are looking for sponsors for several of our major events and activities at the moment and we have to prepare ourselves for the fact that that might not come though in the same quantity as we had it before,” she said.

She added that the income from venue hire is “suffering as well”.

While union Unite has called the proposal “severe” and accused the charity of railroading staff, Beddoe told Professional Fundraising that the union had no authority to negotiate on behalf of RHS staff. She said that the union has too few members within the charity and that management is negotiating the proposed changes with an elected staff body.

“Unite is misrepresenting the situation rather badly,” said Beddoe. “Full and proper consultation is taking place… it’s just that Unite would rather it was taking place through them.”

Who's Who: Celina Ribeiro

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk 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

Please:

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.