5 Ways to Stay Connected!
Free monthly
e-newsletter (includes a Quick Tip)
Responses to:
Government,
Politicians, and the Use of the Word "Volunteer"
First time here? Start at the bottom of the page to get the full feel of the discussion.
Submitted on 5Mar2004 by Femida Handy, Assoc.
Prof, York University, Ontario, Canada
Why not consider the forgone
salaries as -monetary donations- to the government- and not call
them volunteers?
After all they ran for positions as elected officials to paid positions!!
Submitted on 19Feb2004 by Rob Kantenwein, Director of
Operations, Hands On Helpers, Princeton/New Jersey, USA
In
1995, I became a member of a local AmeriCorps program working
through the USDA on environmental issues. From day one, we were instructed
that we were not AmeriCorps volunteers but were AmeriCorps members
or participants. Our program managers were very thorough in explaining
the parameters of our participation and the expectations and benefits
that came with it. We were responsible for working a certain number
of hours to qualify for our education award. We were also paid our
stipend based on the hours that we worked each pay period.
The parameters as they were explained to me prior to and after accepting
the position did not make me feel like I was a volunteer. I realized
that I voluntarily accepted the position, but I never believed that
I was a volunteer. My supervisors did a great job of treating us
as valuable members of the team.
Submitted on 19Feb2004 by Marty Martin, M & M Consulting,
White Lake, MI
Thanks for giving us topics and ideas to reflect on. In the
busy
rush of doing all that needs to be done, we seldom take time
to
consider all sides of something as simple as the word, volunteer.
When
I notice the word in media, I often find that the meaning is
different
than mine.You have given me much to ponder as I drive or sit
in
gridlock. Perhaps I will have something to share. Right now,
I have
lots of questions. Thanks for the brain food.
Submitted on 18Feb2004 by Dee Wadsworth, Gerontology graduate
student, UNT, Denton, TX
Forced but unpaid OR paid but freely chosen:
The issue at the forefront concerns the definition of volunteering.
Let's reduce it to: one freely deciding to donate time or talent without
a fair market wage or other full monetary reward. Certainly military
service does not fall within this viewpoint of volunteering, since
renumeration includes future educational benefits, full medical care,
retirement benefits, etc. But, AmeriCorps and Peace Corps clearly demonstrate
the role of volunteering.
The trend of a "community service" sentence instead of jail time for crimes committed comes up also. Would these people otherwise decide to donate their time? I think not. Yet, for some organizations, such forced volunteering becomes a vital part of fulfilling their mission.
As for the "Govenator" and others who have donated their
salaries back to the government coffers, I appauld their decision.
It sets an example showing their choice is not based on direct economic
reward. The other side of this applies to those who truly wish to
serve the people but are not independently wealthy. Do we think less
of their motives if they accept the salary and benefits? The level
of salary at $175,000 appears to be a large income, but if the state
of California was a publically traded corporation, the CEO would
probably command a much higher salary and benefit package.
Submitted on 13Feb2004 by Juli Smith, Student, University
of North Texas, Texas
Arnold has volunteered in several arenas
involved with physical fitness and children's after school care
and whether he is wealthy or not, he should be commended for
refusing his governor's salary.
I don't believe the National Honor Society's policy for community hours is altruistic though. College applications look better when there are volunteer hours included and more NHS members are admitted; which makes the school look good. They are, generally speaking, sending a false message to the students.
Minimum wage is not a "living wage" in many areas of the country and if the Peace Corps extends a stipend for all the good they do; so be it. The volunteers are giving of themselves for others, which is the ultimate volunteering. In church situations, people also give of themselves, and are volunteers. As someone who is just entering the "volunteer world", after 30 years in the self-serving advertising profession, I am wondering if this is a question of semantics.
Submitted anonymously
on 10Feb2004
It is inaccurate at best to use Arnold
Schwartzenegger, John F. Kennedy or Roosevelt as models for not
accepting salary to other volunteers. These people are independently
wealthy. (Perhaps it is advisable tax-wise for them to NOT take
the salary) Consider other comparisons, please.
Submitted on 10Feb2004 by Johanna Shrout, Coordinator, District
Volunteer Services, Beaverton School District, Oregon
As a
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer I have to defend my service as voluntary.
My living allowance was roughly equivalent to $50 a month and supported
food and basic necessities. I and many other PCVs could not have
given the time we did without that minimal support. I had skills
and training that were desperately needed in my village. Like my
neighbors, I lived in a small wooden house with a thatched roof,
no running water or electricity. Taking two years out of my life
to live and work in Africa was not the same commitment as when
I worked a couple of hours a week for the Red Cross. Yes, I chose
this experience and I wouldn’t trade it for anything in the
world. I am very proud to say that I was a Peace Corps VOLUNTEER.
As a Volunteer Coordinator, I do understand the concern over the use and misuse of the term volunteer. I feel that people receive something in return for volunteering, whether that is social networking, career exploration, skill building or some type of tangible acknowledgement of their time. I think we lose something in program development if we forget that.
Submitted on 8Feb2003 by Suellen Carlson, Director of
Volunteer Services, Lutheran Social Services, New York State
USA
I have a difficult time seeing Schwarzenegger
as a "volunteer".
My guess is that the $175,000 spread over a year's time might just
complicate his taxes. I haven't seen him over the years giving of
his time, talent and money. At those salary levels, only the very
rich can afford to forego a salary, which, in turn, can make others
who actually need the salary look like they don't "volunteer".
Schwarzenegger's position is a salaried position. He can choose to
take the money and blow it or not take the money. I'm not so sure
that we want to go there when we talk about "volunteering".
The "all-volunteer" army only speaks of the draft. I guess
I volunteered for my job too - no one made me apply. Volunteers truly
see their time as the commodity. They believe that they are making
a difference by spending their time. If the exchange is anything
other than something you perceive as the common good and time, it
is not volunteering.
Submitted on 7Feb2003 by Penny Aulston, Volunteer Resources
Manager, Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago IL USA
In
my experience as a volunteer and with volunteers is that we all
fill a need for ourselves when we volunteer. It may be a need to
learn, make new friendships, to fill lonely days or to give something
back to a group or institution that has provided something good
for us. For some volunteers to be given a free meal, or carfare may
make volunteering possible. I had to give up a volunteer job at one
point because I could not afford to pay a baby sitter while I volunteered.
It is wonderful that Arnold can afford to serve as Governor without
pay, but we should not consider the perks often given to volunteers
as pay. Most volunteers are not wealthy. Americorp and Peace Corp
enable people without great wealth to serve as full time volunteers.
Submitted on 5Feb2004 by Caroline Buchanan, Volunteer Coordinator,
Dallas Retirement Village, Oregon
I also agree with sharing this encouraging
news about Arnold with the world. I have often pondered the use
of the word volunteer and agree with others here that our military
are not volunteers (even the National Guard.) I think when the stipends
get even close to minimum wage, policies need to be reviewed. I have
seen even a meal in exchange for service greatly effect the quality
of that volunteer experience. I think it somehow distorts the motivation
and something like entitlement enters in...I believe that community
service, be it required for schools, scouts or criminal justice systems,
has its benefit for the 'volunteer' in many cases, but the word "requirement" is
not analogous with volunteering. Quality suffers, motivation suffers
and the true spirit of willingly giving, with no expectation of getting
anything back in return is lost.
Splitting hairs even farther, I have often heard the term volunteers in church of late. People volunteer for a host of different reasons, but it's of my opinion that service to God is servanthood, with significant spiritual aspects (and rewards,) rather than volunteering for basically only the good of an organization or a person apart from the calling to do so. Great subject! Keep at it!
Submitted
anonymously on 4Feb2004
Highlight, illuminate and expose those
people in prominent positions who forego a salary. It is a beacon
of light to others. Start with Mother Teresa--was there ever
a more dedicated, caring volunteer in our times? Give Arnold
more recognition for his volunteerism. He is the American Dream.
He came here with nothing and achieved the dream of every American--to
build a better life for himself and in return--give back to the
country that gave him this opportunity.
Submitted on 4Feb2004 by Sandra Lyle, Volunteer/Red Cross, Indiana/USA
I
have been a full time volunteer (without pay) for 20 years. While
my job was very rewarding and I would do it under any circumstances,
I do believe if the government truly wanted to encourage volunteers
they would recognize their gift of time by allowing more of a tax
write off. At the moment they allow 12 cents (I am not sure but approx.)
a mile from home to place of volunteer activity as a tax item. Volunteers
often spend dollars to have the opportunity to do good works.
Submitted on 4Feb03 by Marjorie Moore, Volunteer Development
Coordinator, Radio Information Service, Illinois, USA
Through
our organization, we have found that in most but certainly not
all cases, those who are forced to be volunteers by community service
judgments or service learning requirements are not motivated by anything
other than getting the hours required in. Currently, I have three girls
working for their National Honor Society hours. One was a volunteer
with us long before she needed her hours and she has already exceeded
her hours. The other two still need ten hours (at least) with less
than a month to go. People are often shocked to hear that as a volunteer
manager I am not in favor of mandatory community service for high
school graduation. My concerns go back to the concept that we shouldn't
take every warm body that walks through the door. Volunteers have
to be WILLING and ABLE to perform the tasks that we ask of them.
I feel that required service is not in keeping with the true meaning
of volunteering. We've all read it, "The broadest, and
maybe the most meaningful definition of volunteering: Doing more
than you have to because you want to, in a cause you consider good" --Ivan
Scheier
Submitted on 4Feb2003 by Deb Anderson, Coordinator, Volunteer
Resources - St. Catharine's General Hospital, Niagara-on-the-Lake
Hospital, Niagara Health System, Ontario, Canada
I too have had
difficulty accepting the misuse of the term volunteer. As a Volunteer
Manager in a large health system of 8 hospitals, I often hear administrators/managers
asking staff to volunteer for a project or event. The recent crisis
with SARS was a prime example of staff volunteering. I challenge
this issue in my hospitals because of the negative implications on
those who are truly volunteering without remuneration. I think that
volunteers should be recognized for their good deeds and to encourage
others to follow the lead. Why not inform the country that Arnold
is not accepting his salary? As for military - the term volunteer
is a marketing strategy and nothing else. It was a political move
to gain support for government acts of war and the military personal
that serve them. Yes, they are serving but they are not volunteers.
Along with the many other hats we wear, it is our responsibility
as leaders in the voluntary sector to protect the term volunteer
and inform others of its significance.
An international online journal to keep you current on trends, research, successes...
Learn more | Subscribe
Online training for individuals, organizations or corporations to work successfully with volunteers. Learn more

Sign up for:
