Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-27-2019, 10:38 AM
Dongyang2016 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 28

The United Way and their tactics.


Can someone explain the United Way?

In the 1990’s I was working in Harrah’s Casino in Mississippi as a card dealer. Been there for about a year or so. One day a representative from the United Way (UW), to me at the time, some charity organization had a meeting which was mandatory for the workers to attend. The representative did her speech, and I went back to work.

About a week later, my immediate supervisor came to me in the hallway off the casino floor and told me that the management demanded “100 percent participation”. So while I was not under any obligation, management knew who “gave” and how much. So I reluctantly gave a $1 a week to this organization.

From that, I learned a lot from this odious organization and their operations. The UW is not a charity perse, they merely collect money and then distribute the monies to various groups while keeping a piece of the money for themselves. The leaders of this group make very good salaries.

This part I do not get, why do companies deal with the UW? The only thing I can figure out is that the company wants a tax write off, and not only does the company contribute, they strong arm the employees to do the same, so that the company can get a bigger tax write off on the backs of their employees. Again, very odious to say the least. The company has a list from the UW of who contributed and how much, and this is part of an employee evaluation. To give more is to seem as a “team player” and more likely to be advanced in the firm. The employees are cowed to give money while the company gets a huge tax break from the money the workers “give”. To me this is legalized extortion. Sort of like the monster who comes to your business and offers protection, as in “this is a nice place, hate to see something happen to it”. The UW is “See you have a job, hate for you to lose it or never be promoted to a better job.”

Some of the workers in these various companies even “volunteer” their time to UW events. Remember that a lot of these employees are barely making a living wage.

I have also noticed that the UW gets their shakedowns, I mean contributions from companies that have a lot of low waged employees. My company was exactly this. I made $5 and hour plus tips. Security and cage cashiers made about $8 an hour. Even the supervisors on the floor weren’t that well paid, made $40,000 a year for full time. People who were expendable for the most part and easy to replace. If I were for example an orthopedic surgeon and the UW came to my hospital, I could tell them to piss off because the hospital won’t fire me for this only.

To end, there was a story in our local newspaper website several years ago with the head local UW person and he said that the local UW broke records in 2008 and 2009, during the time of the so called “Great Recession”. Proof right there that people did not want to jeopardize their jobs and were pressured to contribute their money.

I hate the United Way. I personally think their tactics in the workplace should be made illegal. Then for the UW to keep about 30 percent of the contributions for themselves to pay themselves. Something is wrong here.

So what am I missing here?
  #2  
Old 07-27-2019, 10:51 AM
Joey P is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 28,970
First of all, and I could be wrong about this, but I think since you're the one making the donation, you're the one who gets to claim the deduction. Make sure its is on your paystub and claim it on your tax return.

Second. If you can find any proof, or get enough people to corroborate your story that you're A)being strong armed into donating and B)your wage increases and ability to move up in the company depends on how much you donate (you'll have an even stronger case if they don't allow you to claim the deduction). Take that proof or other people that want to complain and get in contact with your state's labor board or whatever department (likely the same one) handles whistle blowers.

What the UW does with the money the receive or how well they pay and treat their employees is of no concern to you. Or rather, it certainly can be of concern to you but if you want to fight a fight, fight the one that's impacting you and let the UW workers handle their own problems.
Grouping the two things together only serves to muddy the waters and may make it easier for your concerns with how you're being treated easy to dismiss.

TL;DR, find your states labor/unemployment/workforce standards department and poke around. You should find employer/employee/labor laws. Start poking around in them and see if you can figure out if they're breaking a law.
  #3  
Old 07-27-2019, 11:07 AM
Crafter_Man's Avatar
Crafter_Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,340
Way back in 2002, a group leader where I worked sent out an email asking for volunteers to help build a wheelchair ramp for a disabled person. It was part of a United Way project.

I volunteered. It was estimated to take three days to finish the job (Friday, Saturday, Sunday). The group leader gave out the address of the person's home. He told everyone to bring whatever tools we think we might need.

I gather a bunch of my tools and headed to the place Friday morning. At least 15 other people from my work showed up.

It was a nice ranch home in Beavercreek, Ohio. While I was busting out the old concrete steps using a sledge hammer, the homeowner came out to chat with us. He was walking and smoking a cigarette. He never said anything along the lines of "Thanks" or "I appreciate what you're doing." I said he had a nice place, and asked how much land he had. "We have 10 acres."

That sorta pissed me off. I knew for a fact the area he lived in had very high land values. Why couldn't he sell a couple acres of land? He could then easily pay for someone to build a ramp. Here I am, busting my ass trying to build this guy a ramp, and he lived in a much nicer place than me.

Around noon some guy from the United Way drove up in a brand new Cadillac. I guess he was the project manager, and wanted to see the progress. He didn't lift a finger to help, nor did he thank us.

After that experience, I never gave another fucking dime to the UW.
  #4  
Old 07-27-2019, 11:59 AM
carrps is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 673
My company was very big on charitable contributions. They used United Way when I started with the company to coordinate contributions. When all the UW shenanigans came out ages ago, they dropped UW and started their own in-house charitable organization. And when I say ages ago about the scandals I mean decades....like at least 20, maybe 30 years ago. There's no reason for any company to use UW anymore.

Last edited by carrps; 07-27-2019 at 11:59 AM.
  #5  
Old 07-27-2019, 12:15 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dongyang2016 View Post
..
From that, I learned a lot from this odious organization and their operations. The UW is not a charity perse, they merely collect money and then distribute the monies to various groups while keeping a piece of the money for themselves. The leaders of this group make very good salaries.

This part I do not get, why do companies deal with the UW? The only thing I can figure out is that the company wants a tax write off, and not only does the company contribute, they strong arm the employees to do the same, so that the company can get a bigger tax write off on the backs of their employees. Again, very odious to say the least. ....
Is this this more of a oldish pit rant?

The leaders of many charities make nice salaries.

The company doesnt get to write off what you donate.
  #6  
Old 07-27-2019, 12:16 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crafter_Man View Post
...I said he had a nice place, and asked how much land he had. "We have 10 acres."

That sorta pissed me off. I knew for a fact the area he lived in had very high land values. Why couldn't he sell a couple acres of land? He could then easily pay for someone to build a ramp. Here I am, busting my ass trying to build this guy a ramp, and he lived in a much nicer place than me.
....
Because quite often you can just sell of a couple acres. That's a subdivide and it often isnt approved.
  #7  
Old 07-27-2019, 01:56 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,165
25 years or so ago as a manager I got stuck doing UW campaigns. While there was some pressure our employee base was such that they couldn't force people to donate, though I totally believe the OP.
When I started doing it you donated and UW gave your money to any charity they felt like giving too. When enough people complained you finally got to designate your contributions, but to a limited set of charities.
There was a big UW scandal in Silicon Valley, and when I switched jobs the CEO of my new company hated UW with a passion, so I never had to deal with them again.
  #8  
Old 07-27-2019, 02:52 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dongyang2016 View Post
Can someone explain the United Way?

In the 1990’s I was working in Harrah’s Casino in Mississippi as a card dealer. Been there for about a year or so. One day a representative from the United Way (UW), to me at the time, some charity organization had a meeting which was mandatory for the workers to attend. The representative did her speech, and I went back to work.

About a week later, my immediate supervisor came to me in the hallway off the casino floor and told me that the management demanded “100 percent participation”. So while I was not under any obligation, management knew who “gave” and how much. So I reluctantly gave a $1 a week to this organization.

I had the same problem in the 1990's when I worked for an organization. They DEMANDED 100% participation. Since charity is a VOLUNTARY thing and they couldn't legally force me to do it, and I was pissed off about the demand, I refused.

Several managers came to talk to me about it, because I was the only person refusing to cooperate. I told them to feel free to donate money in my name in order to achieve that 100% participation, but I refused to give them a dime. None of them would do that. I said if the COMPANY insists that I do it, then THE COMPANY can give me the money to do it with. Again, nope. So they didn't get their 100% participation that year and a few people were pissed off at me about it. I didn't care. Hell, I even threatened to sue the ever loving shit out of both the company and the individual managers if they tried to hold it against me, again noting that they had every opportunity to donate in my name to achieve their goals.

Since then, I have steadfastly refused to EVER give The United Way a single penny in any form. Fuck those guys.


Quote:
From that, I learned a lot from this odious organization and their operations. The UW is not a charity perse, they merely collect money and then distribute the monies to various groups while keeping a piece of the money for themselves. The leaders of this group make very good salaries.
They're essentially a clearing house. They take 19% off the top for their own expenses and then give to basically every other charity, which also have their own overhead, some of which are again, clearinghouses that give to other, smaller and more local charities. I don't like the entire scam.

If you don't know who to give to, it isn't entirely bad. They help a lot of smaller charities that otherwise wouldn't get the exposure and the money. But if you do the work and know where you want your money to go, giving it to them is a bad idea.
  #9  
Old 07-27-2019, 03:07 PM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,534
In a former life, I was the director of a small non-profit that got United Way funds. The theory behind the UW was good: it'd vet and act as a funding clearinghouse for charitable organizations. Employers and individuals would benefit by having fewer nonprofits with their hands out and by knowing UW vetted the member agencies; nonprofits would be able to focus on helping people instead of fundraising. The problem was that UW in that town couldn't couldn't come close to meeting the financial needs of the nonprofits, which operated on a shoestring, so we still needed to do a lot of fundraising.

As for UW fat cats, the national directors of major nonprofits often earn big salaries, but depending on the nonprofit, the money usually doesn't trickle down to the locals. I don't recall the salary of the local UW director, but believe me, she couldn't have afforded a new Caddy on what she made. Nor did she come out and raise a hammer to help us on some project, That was fine, too, as it wasn't her job, and she had a lot of nonprofits to visit. Since it was a small town, I knew she volunteered at the local Senior Center, which was not a UW nonprofit.
  #10  
Old 07-27-2019, 03:21 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
For reference, circa 1990, there were directors of the Minneapolis UW and of the St. Paul UW. Both made about $150k, which was really solid money in those days.

It was widely defended as claiming that those people needed to be top flight executives with lots of connections to other top flight executives and they had to live the lifestyle and afford the clothing, etc to blend in and press the flesh with those other executives to bring in money.
  #11  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:12 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,561
I have no opinion on the United Way, but the OP and several replies are talking about things that happened twenty or more years ago. Anyone have more current experience with the organization, good or bad?
  #12  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:20 PM
bizerta is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: wilmington, ma
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
When enough people complained you finally got to designate your contributions, but to a limited set of charities.
That's accounting double-talk. When you designate 100% of your $200 contribution is for charity XYZ, they simply donate $200 less from the general fund to XYZ.

It's the same game states play with promising 100% of lottery proceeds will go to education. The legislature simply allocates less from the general fund for education. They kept their promise so that you will vote for the lottery, but it's just more money for the legislature to spend as they see fit.
  #13  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:33 PM
K364's Avatar
K364 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 2,751
On the positive side -

UW has very little overhead (16%) compared to other organizations. This number is about 50/50 for administrative expenses, and fund-raising expenses. They can accomplish this because of a focus on volunteerism at all levels.

UW scrutinizes the agencies they fund, making sure that the money reaches the street and provides for community improvement.

Your company will push their local campaign hard for a number of reasons. One is just to be seen as a good citizen providing charitable funding. At my company there is a wide-spread culture of support for the UW over the years - Managers and other staff have served on the campaign or have been loaned reps to other companies. There is strong participation for "Day of Caring" whereby staff gets the afternoon off to provide agencies with workers. Participation (contributions) rate is over 80% and that includes wage and salary workers.
  #14  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:40 PM
hajario's Avatar
hajario is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 16,064
I’m a little surprised that that’s a thing. It’s been over a decade since I’ve read UW hate.

Anyway, here is a classic old Dope thread about the United Way. Enjoy: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=272996
  #15  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:58 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
I'm pretty sure that I don't need to read that thread to see that I posted the same story back then.

You have two people in this thread, myself included, complaining about the 1990's United Way tactic of demanding 100% participation from involved companies and the illegal and immoral ways their corporate contacts went about trying to get it.

If they've learned from that experience and aren't doing it anymore, than I'm happy about that. For myself, they earned a lifetime of non-involvement. I'm not going to apologize for that or change it. It just is, and I've moved on with my life.
  #16  
Old 07-27-2019, 06:03 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
....

You have two people in this thread, myself included, complaining about the 1990's United Way tactic of demanding 100% participation from involved companies and the illegal and immoral ways their corporate contacts went about trying to get it......
Old rant then.

Illegal? Cite?
  #17  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:24 PM
Kropotkin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: North
Posts: 764
Where I work, being asked to serve on the UW fundraising committee is regarded as a punishment for substandard work.
  #18  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:35 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Old rant then.
So what. How old does my experience have to be to be irrelevant?

Quote:
Illegal? Cite?
Do you think it is legal for a company to force an employee to give money to any specific charity?

Got a cite for that?

Ok, enough of that nonsense, it's non pertinent snark on your part.
  #19  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:38 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizerta View Post
That's accounting double-talk. When you designate 100% of your $200 contribution is for charity XYZ, they simply donate $200 less from the general fund to XYZ.
It's not. They don't just split up all the general UW contributions among every agency listed in their book.

I was a long time volunteer, and for part of the time in charge of, at a crisis center. We had a hard time qualifying for grants from their general fund contributions because of the nature of what we did. It was hard to justify specific limited programs that their process at the time seemed to highlight. Meeting their reporting requirements when our client base was anonymous people walking or calling in to the center was also difficult. I don't recall if we ever got any money out of their general fund contributions. We stopped even trying for those funds pretty quickly. It just wasn't worth our effort.

We did, however, qualify for being a named organization. That was worth our effort. We got that money.
  #20  
Old 07-27-2019, 08:49 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
So what. How old does my experience have to be to be irrelevant?



Do you think it is legal for a company to force an employee to give money to any specific charity?

Got a cite for that?

Ok, enough of that nonsense, it's non pertinent snark on your part.
Force? In a at will state, they can fire you for pretty much anything that isnt discriminatory.

And here's what you said "About a week later, my immediate supervisor came to me in the hallway off the casino floor and told me that the management demanded “100 percent participation”. So while I was not under any obligation, management knew who “gave” and how much. So I reluctantly gave a $1 a week to this organization.

......

This part I do not get, why do companies deal with the UW? The only thing I can figure out is that the company wants a tax write off, and not only does the company contribute, they strong arm the employees to do the same, so that the company can get a bigger tax write off on the backs of their employees.
"

So, they didnt "force" you, a supervisor suggested it strongly. "So while I was not under any obligation...."That's not force.

And, like several have said, you get the donation , not the company, so that later part is completely false.

And memories that old arent worth much, and you are starting a rant here, not a Question, about something that happened personally to you decades ago. Where the question?
  #21  
Old 07-27-2019, 09:33 PM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 29,842
"Nice job you have there. It'd be real sad if something happened to it. "

Force is sometimes implied. And recognized it you know what's good for you.

Last edited by dropzone; 07-27-2019 at 09:35 PM.
  #22  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:12 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizerta View Post
That's accounting double-talk. When you designate 100% of your $200 contribution is for charity XYZ, they simply donate $200 less from the general fund to XYZ.
If everyone designated charities, they couldn't do that. I'm not saying it's good. My problem was I worked in one county and lived in another, and would much rather give my money to charities in the place I lived, impossible the way UW was set up. It just sucked my charity money from where I wanted to put it to where they wanted it to go.
  #23  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:15 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
"Nice job you have there. It'd be real sad if something happened to it. "

Force is sometimes implied. And recognized it you know what's good for you.
The UW documentation said, IIRC, that no one has to donate. So leaning on someone would go against their own rules. I'm sure that if someone reported it, UW would get right on enforcing their rules.

*snicker*
  #24  
Old 07-28-2019, 02:38 AM
kitap is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 69
Back in the early 1990s Taco Bell did a huge charity push for the United Way in their corporate stores (I don't know about franchise stores). They wanted 100% participation. I was very irked - they didn't even offer affordable health insurance to their own employees (except store managers) and they were pushing us to give? My boss got leaned on very heavily to make me - the lone hold out at our location - participate. I finally grumpily gave in and donated a dollar. This was back when you filled out these things by hand on paper. So, where it asked you to check off either salaried or hourly I crossed both out and wrote in Uninsured Slave.

Then I signed it and gave it to my boss.

They must have had a slew of similar comments because they didn't do it for the next three or four years. I was there.

I still regret - this was soon after the William Aramony scandal - not adding in a comment about were they sure this wasn't going straight to Aramony?
  #25  
Old 07-28-2019, 12:07 PM
Omar Little's Avatar
Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 13,034
Just to clarify, your company doesn't get a tax write-off for what its employees donate.

The United Way acts as a middle man to promote other charitable organizations that many people may not be aware that exists. Many smaller charities depend upon United Way grants to survive.

I however am not a big fan of UW. People should research charitable organizations and give directly to them. As has been said, there are many execs at UW that skim their take off of the contributions they receive before passing along to the smaller charities, which IMHO, is a waste of the resources that are being given.
  #26  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:04 PM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
"Nice job you have there. It'd be real sad if something happened to it. "

Force is sometimes implied. And recognized it you know what's good for you.
You did not get the promotion/raise since we question if you really are a team player.

A company I worked for in the 90s did the 100% United Way campaign. And yes it was strongly hinted that whether or not you participated would be noted by the management.
  #27  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:16 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
"Nice job you have there. It'd be real sad if something happened to it. "

Force is sometimes implied. And recognized it you know what's good for you.
And just how did UW do this? Remember, it was a line supervisor according to this old story. Someone pretty far removed from UW.
  #28  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:23 PM
Saintly Loser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
So, they didnt "force" you, a supervisor suggested it strongly. "So while I was not under any obligation...."That's not force.
No, I suppose it's not "force."

That said, yes, pressure to participate in UW giving can be intense. My current firm isn't involved with UW, but the last place I worked was, and yes, there were visits from department heads to employees who didn't contribute the firm-recommended amount, and pressure to be a "team player," and all that.

I would say a department head telling a low-level employee that "it doesn't look like you're a team player. Don't you want to be part of the team? It's hard to work with people who don't fit in, who aren't part of the team" is coercion.

But I suppose it wasn't "force."
  #29  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:29 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintly Loser View Post
No, I suppose it's not "force."

That said, yes, pressure to participate in UW giving can be intense. My current firm isn't involved with UW, but the last place I worked was, and yes, there were visits from department heads to employees who didn't contribute the firm-recommended amount, and pressure to be a "team player," and all that.

I would say a department head telling a low-level employee that "it doesn't look like you're a team player. Don't you want to be part of the team? It's hard to work with people who don't fit in, who aren't part of the team" is coercion.

But I suppose it wasn't "force."
And it was guys from United way doing it, with armbands and everything?
  #30  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:33 PM
Saintly Loser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And it was guys from United way doing it, with armbands and everything?
No, it was the managers at that firm. And I'm pretty fucking sure that UW knows that participating firms do quite a bit of arm-twisting. They're pretty much on board with that stuff.

I'll never given a dime to the United Way. I despise their tactics.
  #31  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:39 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintly Loser View Post
No, it was the managers at that firm. And I'm pretty fucking sure that UW knows that participating firms do quite a bit of arm-twisting. They're pretty much on board with that stuff.

I'll never given a dime to the United Way. I despise their tactics.
So, you have no idea whether or not UW endorsed those tactics (and since i was one of the coordinators one year for the feds, I can tell you that that sort of thing is spelled out in the material as a non-no and the UW lady clearly told us at the training it was against UW rules), but you "despise their tactics"? italics mine.

In other words, you are blaming UW for something your company did, and have been spreading your hate on MB for a couple decades, right?
  #32  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:43 PM
hajario's Avatar
hajario is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 16,064
The corporate United Way experience is so common at so many companies over so many years that I suspect that the UW must have been part of developing these methods. If not, they should be taking an active hand in trying to put a stop to it to help their reputation.
  #33  
Old 07-28-2019, 02:18 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajario View Post
The corporate United Way experience is so common at so many companies over so many years that I suspect that the UW must have been part of developing these methods. If not, they should be taking an active hand in trying to put a stop to it to help their reputation.
No, what it is is competitiveness among CEOs and the like. At one smallish company I worked with, the CEO donated $50,000 out of his own pocket to win the bet with another similar company. The bet? A bottle of very expensive scotch. Like $200. So he wrote a check for FIFTYfuckingTHOUSAND dollars to win a $200 bet. And yes, we were all pushed to donate.

In a Credit Union I was consulting with, there was a competition among the local CU and small banks to see who would win the Food bank contest. The President and event coordinator each bought a pallet of beans to ensure their win. Are we gonna accuse the nice Food bank people now of "despicable tactics"? They got the "Golden Plate" award for five years running, iirc.

Oh, I am sure the Food bank and UW love the end result, yes. But they by no means overtly encourage it.
  #34  
Old 07-28-2019, 06:16 PM
Saintly Loser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
So, you have no idea whether or not UW endorsed those tactics (and since i was one of the coordinators one year for the feds, I can tell you that that sort of thing is spelled out in the material as a non-no and the UW lady clearly told us at the training it was against UW rules), but you "despise their tactics"? italics mine.



In other words, you are blaming UW for something your company did, and have been spreading your hate on MB for a couple decades, right?
First, I do not believe that UW is unaware of the tactics used to pressure people into giving.

Second, UW does bear some responsibility for what is done in its name. They're happy to take the money, aren't they? And a disclaimer doesn't get them off the hook.

Third, a couple of decades? WTF?
  #35  
Old 07-28-2019, 06:30 PM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,458
My company has always done UW, but there has always been the option of donating $0. They wanted 100% participation, but that was 100% of the employees to respond to the campaign. Responding with $0 counted towards participation. AFAIK, none of the managers knew who donated what amounts. The company knows that X number of employees donated $Y total amount. I have no knowledge if the individual managers know how much each employee in their dept donated.
  #36  
Old 07-28-2019, 07:20 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintly Loser View Post
First, I do not believe that UW is unaware of the tactics used to pressure people into giving.
....

Third, a couple of decades? WTF?
That doesnt mean they perform the tactics themselves.


From the OP "Dongyang2016
The United Way and their tactics.
Can someone explain the United Way?

In the 1990’s...."


This is 2019, so at a minimum two decades.
  #37  
Old 07-28-2019, 09:16 PM
Saintly Loser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
That doesnt mean they perform the tactics themselves.





From the OP "Dongyang2016

The United Way and their tactics.

Can someone explain the United Way?



In the 1990’s...."




This is 2019, so at a minimum two decades.
I'm not the OP. I haven't said anything about the nineties. I haven't been "spreading hate" for decades.

I think a retraction is in order.
  #38  
Old 07-29-2019, 10:20 AM
enalzi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
My company has always done UW, but there has always been the option of donating $0. They wanted 100% participation, but that was 100% of the employees to respond to the campaign. Responding with $0 counted towards participation. AFAIK, none of the managers knew who donated what amounts. The company knows that X number of employees donated $Y total amount. I have no knowledge if the individual managers know how much each employee in their dept donated.
I don't know what the laws are, but I would be pretty disturbed to find out that someone outside of payroll knew the exact details of my paycheck.
  #39  
Old 07-29-2019, 10:10 PM
Saintly Loser is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
In other words, you are blaming UW for something your company did, and have been spreading your hate on MB for a couple decades, right?
Still curious about where you're getting this "spreading your hate on MB for a couple decades" stuff.

I haven't even been posting on the SDMB for a couple of decades, let alone spreading my hate.
  #40  
Old 07-29-2019, 10:41 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,585
Let's see, United Way culture...ah! Elaine Chao.

https://www.philanthropy.com/article...ted-Way/168461

And when you read this, it starts to make sense:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...e-chao-1358068

Quote:
he Transportation Department under Secretary Elaine Chao designated a special liaison to help with grant applications and other priorities from her husband Mitch McConnell’s state of Kentucky, paving the way for grants totaling at least $78 million for favored projects as McConnell prepared to campaign for reelection.
UW's culture of corruption has a point of origin. As does our current DOT:

https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/tec...t-14190706.php

Probably several hundred dead needlessly because Chao decided to let the Fox manage the ole hen house.
  #41  
Old 07-29-2019, 11:33 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,414
chimera:

Quote:
For reference, circa 1990, there were directors of the Minneapolis UW and of the St. Paul UW. Both made about $150k, which was really solid money in those days.
Ain't too shabby these days, either.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #42  
Old 07-30-2019, 12:06 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkeller View Post
chimera:



Ain't too shabby these days, either.
Depends on where you live. That is just slightly above the cutoff for being eligible for affordable housing in Santa Clara County.
  #43  
Old 07-30-2019, 09:38 AM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,414
Well, the subjects of the post I was responding to was talking about people living in Minneapolis-St. Paul. I'm not going to bother looking it up, but I'll bet the money goes a lot further there than it does in the San Francisco Bay/Silicon Valley area.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #44  
Old 07-30-2019, 09:45 AM
Jasmine's Avatar
Jasmine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 2,137
You really have to be careful with "charitable organizations", and United Way is the worst of the worst as far as I'm concerned.

A friend's school district employed the same pressure tactics the OP was complaining about. A secretary to one of the administrators claimed it was because the United Way gave them a "kickback" percentage of the money given. I believe it. I've also read that the United Way keeps almost 3/4 of all the money given to them "to cover organizational costs". It's a "wolf in sheep's clothing" as far as I'm concerned.
__________________
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge."
--Daniel J Boorstin
  #45  
Old 07-30-2019, 02:22 PM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,491
I definitely experienced something similar. I've worked for three different companies where UW participation was expected, with a friendly bit of strongarming that would stay just this side of legal. "Of course, you understand BeepKillBeep, there would be no work repercussions if you choose not to participate, but and the other managers and I would be very disappointed that we didn't get 100% participation from our employees." I contribute to local charities of my choosing. I really loathe the UW because there's no question there are some shenanigans going on to cause this to be so commonplace.
  #46  
Old 07-30-2019, 02:28 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
I definitely experienced something similar. I've worked for three different companies where UW participation was expected, with a friendly bit of strongarming that would stay just this side of legal. "Of course, you understand BeepKillBeep, there would be no work repercussions if you choose not to participate, but and the other managers and I would be very disappointed that we didn't get 100% participation from our employees." I contribute to local charities of my choosing. I really loathe the UW because there's no question there are some shenanigans going on to cause this to be so commonplace.
"Do you really think I have extra money to contribute with the shit wages you pay here?"

  #47  
Old 07-30-2019, 03:21 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
I definitely experienced something similar. I've worked for three different companies where UW participation was expected, with a friendly bit of strongarming that would stay just this side of legal. "Of course, you understand BeepKillBeep, there would be no work repercussions if you choose not to participate, but and the other managers and I would be very disappointed that we didn't get 100% participation from our employees." I contribute to local charities of my choosing. I really loathe the UW because there's no question there are some shenanigans going on to cause this to be so commonplace.

Sure, but that wasnt UW.
  #48  
Old 07-30-2019, 03:40 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasmine View Post
... A secretary to one of the administrators claimed it was because the United Way gave them a "kickback" percentage of the money given. I believe it. I've also read that the United Way keeps almost 3/4 of all the money given to them "to cover organizational costs". It's a "wolf in sheep's clothing" as far as I'm concerned.
That would be illegal and easily discovered.


Nope: https://www.journal-news.com/news/cl...s4Yfy0zAA8rXO/

"Nearly 20 percent of monies donated to the United Way goes to pay for administrative costs, according to statistics provided by local United Ways that just kicked off their campaigns.


However, only about 5 percent of the overall total goes toward paying salaries and other costs, the United Way spokespersons say. And heads of local agencies affiliated with the United Way say their work would be impossible without United Way funds."

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ind...ary&orgid=4629

https://charity.lovetoknow.com/Where...d_Way_Money_Go
Per their Annual Report for 2014, United Way Worldwide claimed combined administrative, non-operating and fundraising expenses of 16 percent, meaning that they spend approximately 16 cents for every dollar donated on organizational costs, and the other 84 cents go directly towards community projects. This is well below Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance Standards for Charity Accountability that allow up to 35 percent in overhead costs. ....
  #49  
Old 07-30-2019, 04:08 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,836
I have to say that I share the loathing for UW because of the way they infiltrate organizations and make it nearly de facto mandatory to contribute, which always caused me to refuse on principle, even though I have no problem in general with charitable giving. Besides strong-arming employees, around here UW and a number of other organizations including MADD have also infiltrated the government-owned liquor stores, so that during checkout you can present yourself as either a good citizen willing to contribute to the needy or as an uncaring drunk merely interested in the self-centered acquisition of alcohol. My approach is to profusely thank them for the opportunity but politely decline. I note that if you manage to resist the pressure, the cashiers have apparently been trained to react with exaggerated cheerfulness so as to dial down the obvious intimation that judgment is being passed about which class you belong to.
  #50  
Old 07-30-2019, 04:21 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
I have to say that I share the loathing for UW because of the way they infiltrate organizations and make it nearly de facto mandatory to contribute, which always caused me to refuse on principle, even though I have no problem in general with charitable giving. Besides strong-arming employees, around here UW and a number of other organizations including MADD have also infiltrated the government-owned liquor stores, so that during checkout you can present yourself as either a good citizen willing to contribute to the needy or as an uncaring drunk merely interested in the self-centered acquisition of alcohol. My approach is to profusely thank them for the opportunity but politely decline. I note that if you manage to resist the pressure, the cashiers have apparently been trained to react with exaggerated cheerfulness so as to dial down the obvious intimation that judgment is being passed about which class you belong to.
"I gave at the office."
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017