Sorry, please tell me how those examples are unreasonable assumptions. For example, the organization my brother is currently working for started collected cars to resell at auction to raise money. This year alone they’ve received over 300 cars. Many of them have been less than 2 years old, top of the line automobiles. Each town/city is going to have 1 or 2 organizations that have a very strong car donation program - it’s becoming increasingly popular as a source of easy revenue for non-profits.
I never said I ruled out that UW paid for that car. Just that there are numerous other possibilities - the most likely being a spouse with a high-paying job. How is someone’s spouse’s career related in any way to your possible donation dollar?
I understand the stigma. I just disagree with the underlying assumption made.
Because the solicitation you described in your post is exactly the opposite? Did you or did you not describe a group presentation (1 person soliciting multiple)? Did I or did I not describe an individual solicitation (1 person soliciting 1 person)? If I was unclear, sorry. Hope that clears it up.
To be more specific, a significantly large portion of donations made to organizations are solicited on an individual basis. Normally, a board member, the CEO, the Development Director or a friend of the organization makes a personal appearance/phone call to ask for the gift. The next highest level of giving is going to be direct mail. Now, I don’t know if UW would consider its corporate philanthropy projects like the one described in the OP or your example to be direct mail, but it certainly is not an individual contact.
First of all I seem to remember that there’s a site for posting corporate stupidity of this sort. You might consider posting that there, but don’t get fired doing it of course. Second, fuck them and their little dog too. As someone pointed out, this is the best way to alienate those who might have been planning to give anyway. I love it when overpaid jackholes like this make a big show of how much money they give to charity. Nevermind that it won’t affect their comfortable lifestyle one bit, while giving might indeed affect their much lower paid employees lifestyles. I’m not a believer but it reminds me of that place where Jesus talks about the widow who gives two pennies being more blessed than the rich blowhard pharisee who makes a big show of giving a bag of gold.
We have had some fairly aggressive UW campaigns in the past at my company (nothing like this though). Since it’s already known that I’m “not a team player” I don’t become much more of a pariah by not giving though. I think the UW campaigns often now have a “meta-goal” and have become a thinly disguised pogrom at many American corporations against non-conformists and malcontents.
Chalk me up as another UW abstainer.
FWIW, I’m a manager and my Powers That Be encouraged participation but were very specific about not pressuring anyone. A single reminder/request to turn in the forms was about it.
I don’t hate UW. They probably do some good by presenting a formal process for giving. Lots of people (myself included) might intend to give but somehow not get around to it. UW can serve as a reminder and focus.
That said, I don’t like giving to fundraising agencies that funnel aside enough funds for massive salaries, fancy cars, perks, etc. for execs. That’s their business structure and that’s fine. There are cogent arguments for it. I’m just far from convinced that the actual end benefits justify the excess. Overhead IS valid consideration too.
In lots of ways UW is a McFundraiser. It drastically limits the menu while pounding the hell out of promotion. It provides a neat, prepackaged list of options. I don’t like having to sort through their selections and exclusions, much less their actual payouts. Anymore I just UW campaigns as a reminder to look for places to donate. Often I pick agencies that they don’t include, not as a rejection of their good work, but preferring those starved off the list.
Then I give directly.
Just because someone drives a particular brand of vehicle doesn’t mean that they would use that vehicle for work. They may or may not.
And maybe I’m out of line, but if someone were to be represnting an organization, and drove up in a clunker car, I might think a little less of that organization because I would expect a professional presentation. Sadly, some of us can be swayed by outward trappings. An unfortunate fact of life
And where I work, a number of people also drive such expensive automobiles (not ME, mind you )
New Hondas and new Lexus’s are not that dissimilar in outward appearence, and several Lexus models can be had for the same price as a high end Honda (just under 30 G’s) A Mercedes can be purchased for less than a high end Honda. So I don’t why someone would make that distinction of someones worth or motives based on the manufacterer of their vehicle. To be honest, I can’t tell the difference until I get up close.
Some people here seem to have taken it as fact that the “lady in charge” had her Lexus paid for by UW, but I’ve yet to see a cite better than “I saw a story one time”.
Of course, quietman1920styledeathray saw it with his own two eyes in 1996. “UW paid for my Benz” must have been part of the presentation, because as far as I can tell, that’s the only way he’d know.
About 9 years ago I worked for a company who did the yearly United Way drive. I had just moved from a remote division to the mother ship, so this was my first time working at the headquarters. In the field UW was no big deal - donate or not. I always chose not to, for most of the reasons already listed by others above. So, that year I did as I always did and put a big zero down.
Then I got called into my boss’ office to explain. Then when I did not cave in, I got called into the directors office to explain again. When I still did not cave in, I got called into the VP’s office, where he explained that I needed to be a team player, and if I chose not to be a team player then I did not belong with the team. I took out my wallet and dumped the contents on his desk, and told him “You win. Take it.” :mad:
United Way has to know that this kind of schtuff goes on. They allow it, and encourage it with these stupid awards, because it is so profitable for them. I don’t care what their official policy says - they encourage extortion by employers.
CITE where I said clunker. Re-read what I posted. The quote refers to ME. My money. If You want to give to the “Lord Won’tcha Buy Me A Mercedes Benz Fund”, that’s up to you. That’s Your money and its Your God Given Right to piss it away however you see fit.
**
Oh, I can just Hear the violins. :rolleyes:
Oh and ntucker I say again for the record: She drove up in a Mercedes. I Saw It. CITE where I said I saw who paid for it. CITE where I care who paid for it. She rolled up in it and later that day she was the one asking Me for money. And if You are asking Me for money, You Damn Well Better Not Drive Up In A Mercedes Benz.
My apologies. I thought you were being an idiot by assuming that the Mercedes was paid for by the organization, when in fact you were being an idiot by assuming that the wealth of an organization’s representatives is some kind of useful indication of that organization’s need.
I humbly regret miscategorizing the precise manner in which you have your head up your ass.
Well, you’ve already cited that you care about in this post, but here goes.
It’s obvious that care quite a bit about it.
Why, I have no idea.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m no fan of the UW or any other charities that doe the ‘drives’. But I’m not gonna expect a professional fundraiser not to exercise their personal choice in automobiles. There is a difference between what they collect for their organization and what they earn for themselves.
The fact that a charity fundraiser drives a luxury car is not, in and of itself, hypocrisy.
)