Back in the early '80s, when I was working in Tampa, FL, we had UW drives every year. A co-worker had had a very negative experience with the UW-sponsored and -approved shakedown at his former employer, and was waxing eloquent about how he had absolutely no intention to contribute this go-round. I was commiserating with him, when our boss, “Skip”, came out of his office to berate me for trying to convince my co-worker not to contribute.
I patiently explained that I was not trying to change my co-worker’s mind or his decision to contribute or not, but was merely agreeing with him and his reasons for not participating. But since you’re here, I continued, why is it that the United Way encourages employers to hold hostage their employees’ jobs, performance reviews, raises and promotions, based on whether, and how much, they contribute to the United Way?
Me: “So there is a big consortium of executives downtown running the United Way campaign, and they decide that all the wage slaves in the community should have their life and livelihood held hostage to the “charitable” fund drive, when many, such as my co-worker and I, contribute voluntarily, and generously, on our own without management jack-boot tactics?”
Skip: “For your information, ‘Dave’, our director, is on the board of the United Way, and he gets a plaque to hang on his wall if we get 100% participation.”
Me: [I knew this already] “Ahhh…so that’s what this is really all about. It has nothing whatsoever to do with helping those in our community who, for reasons beyond their control, are less well off than us, and deserving of the community’s charity. It is all about Dave getting a plaque to hang on his office wall.”
Skip: “Well…I…”
Me: “So the fact that my buddy here and I contribute generously to those less fortunate, counts for nothing, because Dave can’t brag to the other board members that his agency had 100% participation, and get a plaque to hang on his wall, is that about right?”
Skip: “Well…I…”
Me: “I have nothing more to say.”
Skip: “Me either.” And he turns on his heel and storms off to his office.
To address the contention that the Board of Directors of the United Way campaign were unaware of the reprehensible workplace tactics used to coerce the employees to participate, I point to the obvious fact that said board is composed of executives from the very companies and governmental agencies which engage in these disreputable practices.
Either they know, and agree with the tactics, and are therefore corrupt, in my estimation, or they are blissfully unaware of the atrocities being perpetrated in their name, with the inevitable animosity which that engenders, in which case they are incompetent, in my estimation, to handle and disburse the billions of dollars flowing through the United Way coffers.
In either case, I would much rather research charitable organizations on my own, and determine, to the best of my abilities and with the publicly-available information, which seem—to me—to be best equipped and managed to provide services to the community with a moderate overhead.
Here it is, thirty years later, and in Colorado, and we still get the literature from our employer every year for the UW campaign where they acknowledge the apprehensions of employees to the egregious shakedowns of the past with a line to the effect that, “We don’t do that anymore.”
ANYMORE!
They admit they used to, and still would, were it not for governmental intervention preventing them from using UW participation as a sledgehammer over the heads of their employees!
