Hind offers encouragement for large charities wishing to pay trustees 3

Governance | Gareth Jones | 7 Jul 2010

Andrew Hind has said there needs to be a better understanding of the Charity Commission’s willingness to allow payment of trustees, arguing that among larger charities “there is increasingly a case for many of those boards to have paid trustees”.

Speaking at the Russam GMS Annual Interim Management Summer Congress, Hind (pictured) said: “I think there’s a challenge for the Charity Commission to communicate better that there are all types of circumstances in which we are prepared to agree that they can remunerate their board.

“Otherwise you find it too difficult to attract the kind of skills you need, but also you don’t build really diverse boards with wide ranges of experience because the only people who serve on boards where you need a day or two a month are the people who can afford to do it.

“That’s why the vast majority of trustees are over 55, because they’re retired and they’ve got pensions, and I think increasingly we need to see a bit more change there.”

Payment by smaller charities “counterproductive”

However, he ruled out removing the need for the Commission’s express permission to pay trustees, as “it would not be in the interests of the broader sector to have no controls at all”.

He explained: “How can you have a small fundraiser for a PTA or local environmental sector that raises 600 quid, and then say ‘there’s an honorarium attached to our board members and we all get 500 a year for sitting on the board’.

“You don’t need to do it, it’s counterproductive.”

Hind also addressed the issue of salaries for executives, saying the sector needs to be more honest with the public.

“The leading charities are themselves to blame for the fact that there is a general public perception that it’s unacceptable to pay competitive salaries for sector leaders.

“I say that because I think too many charities continually talk down the level of administration costs that is needed to run and lead complex charitable organisations.”

Directory: Charity Commission | Russam GMS
Who's Who: Andrew Hind

Place a comment

Ian Chisnall
Various Charities
Trustee
28 Jul 2010

At long last the CC have recognised that one of the barriers to getting representative boards with the right skills may be financial. Andred Hind is not obliging this change, but is signalling a major shift in attitude. Large national charities tend to attract people with resources, small local charities tend to attract people with time and interest. The middle ground is where the demands can be high because of the size of the organisations, yet the great and the good may not form a queue to serve in this capacity. It is here that some flexibility is vital and may help.

[Reply]

Sean
8 Jul 2010

Trustees need skills as well, as how else can they ensure effective governance and challenge the management when necessary.
I serve unpaid on 2 charities which both meet during the normal working week, but only because my employer allows me the time off, paid. If I had to have unpaid time off it would either take more than 50% of my annual holiday or a 5% pay cut to continue, neither of which is at all attractive, and I would drop out.
Saying that people should be passionate about something doesn't explain how a younger person with a family, a full time job and commitments of both time and money, issupposed to act as a trustee with no remuneration or rwrad, and funnily enough, that's why you see almost no one like that, just older semi- (or fully) retired types.

[Reply]

Ben
7 Jul 2010

In my opinion. Being a trustee of a charity is an honour, a big responsibility and something that individuals should be passionate about, passionate enough not to need remuneration. If a large charity needs specific skills, then recruit someone with those skills and pay them a salary, there is a direct conflict of interest if Trustees receive a wagee.

[Reply]

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.