Those were quotes from this very thread.
Where I worked, the UW Donations were given in the name of the Company. I donated to Paws for a Cause, a directed donation. About $500/year through UW. The newsletter from the charity showed money from the Meijer Corporation even though, my donation size would have qualified for mention in the annual report where annual donations of $100 or more were listed.
I have worked in the charitable sector for over 30 years, for a variety of agencies in several Canadian cities, almost all of which received support from the local United Way. And I volunteered for the United Way over the years too, in a variety of capacities. I like to think I know a little about the topic.
There is no such thing as THE United Way. Each one is local, and they vary considerably in how they are run. It pays to do a little research.
In one Canadian city I worked in, the United Way had a 100% donation pass-through, since the Chamber of Commerce and the Labour Congress split the UW Admin costs 50:50, partly through cash, partly through seconding staff. This same United Way had one of the most grueling accountability processes I have seen-- we weren’t just audited by a bunch of accountants and guileless volunteers, no. One thing we had to do was second a senior executive every few years to join the UW audit team for another grantee agency (never one in the same sector). This was critical, as our execs knew all the tricks, all the places to look for buried bodies, all the pointed questions. Another innovation was that the UW was able to pool all the employees of all the agencies they funded, and purchase a benefits package at a greatly reduced rate. Our salaries sucked, but man our benefits & pension plan were freakin fantastic.
I supported them enthusiastically. And most of the charities they supported, had or were very close to 100% employee participation-- we could see the effectiveness on the ground.
In another Canadian city I worked in, it was a rather different picture. The executives at the local UW were VERY well paid. The United Way decided to get into the program delivery business itself, in direct competition with the agencies it funded (it also did a pretty horrible job of it, IMHO). They were quite politicized, always ready to support reforestation in Israel but very reluctant to feed feckless homeless alcoholics. Their annual financial statements were a miracle of obfuscation, but it sure looked to me like they were running overheads of roughly 40%.
I did not support them at all. And very few agencies ran employee campaigns for them.
The UW in the city I currently live in is sort of mid-way. I think they have a bit of mission drift, they put a lot of resources into research and public policy, which isn’t entirely a bad thing, but perhaps not so much the intent of donors. They do put a lot of effort into making all the agencies in the sector play nicely with each other, which is a Good Thing, and they do a lot of interagency work on professional development (staff training) and administrative capacity building. But their audits are a little new agey for my personal taste, I like hard numbers of things like bed-nights and dogs spayed, more that mission statements and client outcome testimonials. And I think they are a little too cozy with government and politicians sometimes, and some lines get blurred that really shouldn’t be.
I supported them, modestly. They had good, but not fantastic employee participation rates among member agencies.
Like everything else in life, it behooves you to do your research.
And, as others upthread have pointed out, not blame the strong-arm tactics of over-zealous employers running campaigns, on the United Way itself, either the local version, or the movement as a whole. At least without some evidence.
Thank you for your well thought out post.
While anecdote is not evidence, I know what I went through in Silicon Valley and was very happy where I worked here in Arizona, the company never allied itself with UW. Instead, they had a long list of charities that you could have a contribution deducted from your paycheck and they would match 50%. If you had a charity not on the list you could submit a request with information – the website sufficed – they would investigate, and add it to the list if it passed muster.
I requested and had approved two charities, Burners without Borders and Kids Need to Read. In addition I donated to Heifer International, which was already on the list. The only disadvantage I could find was that while the paychecks were twice a month, the disbursements were once a quarter so the company might have been making a bit on the float. You could direct that the donation be under your name or anonymous, as you saw fit.
Question for employment lawyers. Is it illegal, in an at-will state, to fire someone for not contributing to the company’s UW drive?