Volunteer rights – a long and winding road

As some of you may know I also write a monthly blog for Third Sector magazine online. Last June, in only my second blog post for them, I questioned whether the time was right for the sector to be addressing the issue of volunteer rights.  My posting was borne out of a frustration that the momentum built up by the Volunteer Rights Inquiry had seemed to stall somewhat.

Thankfully any drop in profile for the results of the Volunteer Rights Inquiry had only been a temporary blip and there are now more than 100 organisations who have pledged their support for the Inquiry’s 3R promise.


Yet still we read allegations of poor treatment of volunteers.  In November we had further reports into Jon Danzig’s dispute with the Pituitary Foundation and now we have the tale of Gillian Brocklehurst who, after being dismissed from Cylch ConwyDistrict Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) after four years, had to bring a claim under the Data Protection Act to be allowed access to a report into her dismissal.

As with many other cases, this one centres around a CAB.  I don’t for one second think CAB consistently treat their volunteers poorly.  I do, however, think that their volunteers are more aware of their ‘rights’ and so feel more confident in bringing claims of unfair dismissal which is why we see so many

Citizens Advice are to be congratulated for conducting an investigation into the circumstances of Gillian’s dismissal.  Yet the latest developments in the story show that this investigation was flawed; that processes hadn't been followed; that communication was poor; and that evidence existed to suggest bullying and harassment had taken place.  

As was often seen during the work of the Volunteer Rights Inquiry, it appears the person who originally dismissed Gillian was a trustee – in this case Phil Ward, the chair of the CAB.  Whilst these situations can be blamed on poor volunteer management, the Volunteer Rights Inquiry found that sadly they are all too often due to poor governance, behaviour and management by senior staff and board members. 

So what can we learn from this and other similar situations?  


I think there are three things:

• These are complex and emotive issues, made more so by a lack of clear legal status for volunteers and by the strong passions and emotions that often surround such cases.  To the volunteer, volunteering can be a deeply personal act and to be dismissed can be incredibly hurtful.  However justified an organisation may feel it is in taking the step to dismiss a volunteer, it must always be handled sensitively.
  
•  In this day and age volunteers, just like anyone else, have very easy access to a variety of means to share their experiences far and wide.  Couple that with a media who much prefer negative stories to positive ones and the chances of your organisation being cast in a bad light greatly increase.  So if you must dismiss a volunteer, be completely open, fair and honest about why and always use it as an act of last resort.
  
• We need to stop seeing such situations as problems for volunteer managers.  If senior managers and trustees are often a cause of these problems then they need to take their role in running a successful volunteer programme much more seriously.  We accept the need to develop their knowledge and skills around fundraising, why not volunteering too?

Whether these lessons are learnt or not, I fear quick solutions are not going to be forthcoming.  There is a long and winding road ahead of us with much distance still to be travelled, and many more to join the journey, before volunteers can be assured that they will not become the next Jon Danzig or Gillian Brocklehurst.

Value, cost and volunteer management

I was recently reminded of a blog post my good friend Martin J Cowling wrote last year about his experiences of running training when the host organisation has offered the session for free.  In a nutshell, Martin argues that training offered for free results in more people not turning up, more people leaving early and more people not really engaging in the training.

A couple of days later I  read an article on "How e-learning can help charities provide staff training on a budget".  I've got nothing at all against e-learning but the sense conveyed by the headline is that this is a good option when belts are being tightened.  In other words, e-learning is cheaper than 'conventional' training (whatever that is!).


In both cases the issue of value seems not to factor.  e-learning may be cheaper, but is it good value?  A free course with Martin would be a really good deal (he is a superb trainer) but if you don't engage in the session because it's free then it isn't going to deliver any value to you.

All too often we hear colleagues and/or management say that they can't justify that training course, database, item of equipment etc. because of the cost?  So a cheaper option is found or nothing happens at all.  But is any consideration given to the value each option would return?  A training course may cost (let's say) £200 more than a cheaper option but it is so much better that the improved performance of the trained person recoups that cost in no time.

At this point some of you may be thinking "that's all well and good, but we have a lot less money than in the past and simply can't afford a more expensive option".  I understand that mindset completely.  However,  when times are financially tough the argument for basing decisions on value more than cost are even more important.

With, less money than before there is surely even more of an imperative that it gets spent on things that will return real value to the organisation?  For example, spreading a much reduced training budget thinly on a wider range of cheap options isn't necessarily going to bring a great return, just lots of people going on average training.  Instead, send a smaller number of staff whose roles are key to the sustainability and growth of the organisation on some more expensive, high quality training.  That approach may well deliver better value.

Of course, not everything that is expensive is good value or quality.  I attended a wine tasting once where the most expensive wine on offer was the worst tasting.  A bottle of that was neither cheap nor good value.  By contrast, a bottle half the price was superb value, delivering much nicer wine.

The point I am trying to make is that we need to stop just asking how much something costs but really consider what value it will deliver too.  We can then factor both aspects into the decision, not just the cost.

This isn't just a consideration when we are buying training, consultancy, office equipment or whatever.  It is also a key issue when we think about the importance of volunteer management in our fiscally challenged organisations.

Sadly it is all to true that, when the income drops, one of the first things to go is the volunteer manager.  That is a decision frequently made on the basis of cutting costs without any appreciation of the value of that function.  But do we quantify and communicate that value effectively so our leaders look beyond the bottom line and consider what else they will be losing if the cut the volunteer management function?

In 2009 and 2011 The Minnesota Association for Volunteer Administration released reports exploring the status of volunteerism and volunteer programmes in a changing financial environment.  The studies showed that organisations who cut the funding for their volunteer programmes struggled much more than those who maintained or even increased their support for volunteering.

I think we need research like this here in the UK.  Research that validates the importance of organisations investing in volunteering and volunteer management in tough economic times because of the value they will derive, rather than cutting support because of the money it costs.

In its absence we need volunteer managers who can provide programmatic evidence and articulate this effectively to their leaders.  Evidence that doesn't just put across the (often flawed) financial value of volunteering but that demonstrates wider value as well as the potential value to be gained from maintaining (or even increasing) investment in volunteering when donated funds are harder to come by but donated hours may not be so scarce.

What do you think?

Does such research exist other than in Minnesota?  Please share links if you can so others can access it.

Have you been actively demonstrating the value of your volunteer programme to your organisation's leadership?  How did you do it?  What lessons can you share with others?  Did it work?

Please share examples below so others can learn from your success (or failure - go on, be brave!).

A milestone is reached

At some time in the last few hours this blog received it's 10,000th page view since my first post on 1st April 2011.  That's 1,111 views a month on average!  Wow.

I want to take a moment to say a massive thank you to everyone who has read, commented on or shared what I have written.  I am truly humbled by your interest in and (in most cases!) support for what I have to say.

For many years I wanted to have more of a public mouthpiece for my thoughts, opinions and musings on volunteering.  For a variety of reasons this wasn't possible until I struck out on my own last year.  Since then I have written 33 articles here as well as a monthly blog for Third Sector online and a variety of other magazines, websites etc..

Why do I do it?

For a full answer to that read my post on why I write and why you should too.  For now, the author Isaac Asimov once said that "writing is thinking with your fingers".  I love that and totally agree.  For me, writing is a great way to think through issues, to order my thoughts and to present them to the world.  Sometimes people agree, sometimes they don't.  The point is that opinions are shared and issues discussed.  If my small contribution via this blog consequently helps to advance our thinking about volunteering and ultimately affect our practice in a positive way then I'll be content.

So thank you again for reading my blog.  If you haven't yet joined the debate and commented on anything I've written then please do so.  It's dead easy but if you have any problems then drop me a line and I can post your comments for you.



For those of you interested in statistics, here is a bit more information about the 10,000 page views.

• The three most viewed posts are: my analysis of the Pathways Through Participation report and what it means for volunteer managers; my reflections on David Blunkett's proposals for a National Volunteer Service; and my observations on an advert for a volunteer manager position.
• There have been 36 comments on the blog so far.
• More than 50% of page views have been from the UK.
• France, Russia and the USA have each provided more than 1,000 page views.