Responses
to July 2005 Hot Topic
Is
it time we redefined volunteering?
By Andy
Fryar
Response
posted on 29th July 2005 by Kerrie Spinks, Volunteering
Central West, Bathurst, NSW, Australia
Thought
I would be a pedant and answer the questions one at
a time! A large cup of coffee is required to peruse
this.
* Why do we continually have to define volunteering
only within the constraints of ‘formal’
volunteering?
I
think most acknowledge that informal volunteering
exists in a multitude of areas – including within
culturally specific groups where it is probably perceived
to be helping a neighbour and not volunteering in
the minds of the participants. I understand the need
to acknowledge the grass roots volunteers who generate
a movement/activity due to their passion for an issue
and we should not be putting road blocks in their
way. However I do tend to sit on the fence on this
issue – I dislike red tape with the best of
us BUT I also believe that a person who is contributing
to their community should have insurance coverage
so that if the unthinkable happens and they are injured
and have a permanent disability there needs to be
something in place to cover their immediate and ongoing
costs – unfortunately in the existing “legalised”
society that would seem to necessitate formal volunteering
so that we can access an insurance policy. If the
government would contemplate having a generic all
encompassing policy that covered any volunteer in
any situation then I would say let us forget formal
volunteer and just get in and do what needs to be
done to make our community a more cohesive place!
* Why can’t we create a definition that
covers all types of volunteer involvement?
The
reason this is not going to happen is that we tend
to get caught up in semantics – my definition
does not fit your definition! I have been involved
in enough of these discussions to know that when you
have four people in a room discussing this issue you
will end up with ten widely differing definitions
of volunteering – is that necessarily a bad
thing?
* What is the rationale for this ‘formal’
volunteering only needing to occur through not-for-profit
organisations?
If
it is in a for profit organisation it is called slave
labour for the profit of the organisation! However
there are always exceptions – if the organisation
starts a ‘quarantined’ arm where they
supported not for profit activities and the parent
company in no way benefited then it is a possibility.
* Where do ‘for profit’ agencies
(such as private nursing homes for example) fit into
this scenario?
See
comment above – if the nursing home has a program
such as the Community Visitors Scheme then it in no
way adds to the profit of the nursing home and the
clients get an improved quality of life because caring
citizens have chosen to draw them into their more
cohesive community.
* How do we define ‘without coercion’?
I
am comfortable with the definition of “without
coercion” meaning that the person had an absolute
right to refuse to participate in the project. Thus
people on court orders and students who need a number
of hours completed to graduate are deemed to have
been coerced. They are making a contribution to their
community but they aren’t volunteers –
because they can not refuse to continue the activity
and be totally free of penalties. I am not saying
these activities should not occur – I am merely
saying they are not occurring ‘without coercion’
I know many will have a good experience and choose
to continue working with the organisation but they
came to volunteering via coercion.
* Does ‘without financial payment’
cover the whole gamut of payment types (such as concert
tickets)?
I
found Andy’s reference to VWI as being an “accepted
activity” within the Australian context interesting
– I would challenge that statement and say that
the issues of payment and coercion in that context
have never totally left the debate. However like most
of this debate the whole issue of payment has always
been shades of grey as opposed to the oh so comfortable
black and white. Some volunteers receive ‘reimbursements’
which enter the grey zone between a real reimbursement
or an average payment for everyone to make the bookkeeping
easier. Concert tickets, free lunches, tickets to
movies etc are these rewards or payments?
* How do we describe ‘benefit to the
community’? Whose community and to what benefit?
Community
as defined by the majority of the citizens perchance
and the benefit being that the cultural ‘norm’
is even more enhanced/entrenched – or is the
benefit to the government of the day in terms of less
services that they need to fund?
* Do we, by definition, prohibit ourselves
from using innovative methods of incentive to recruit
new volunteers to our programs?
I
think it is much more than definition that is stultifying
volunteer involving organisations – it is the
entrenched cultural norms and practices that have
become a comfort zone within most organisations. The
definition may be something to hide behind but it
is also about all of us being brave enough to undergo
major cultural change within our organisations –
many more may need to die/wither before it is accepted
that it is time to rethink the ways in which volunteers
are involved within an organisation
Response
posted on 10th July 2005 by Andy Fryar, Director,
OzVPM
Since
writing this Hot Topic, I have now found another similar
program, called 'Rockcorps' operating out of the US.
The website is http://www.boostmobilerockcorps.org/default.phpl
for anyone who is interested.
Response
posted by Don Rhodes on 7th July 2005, Don RHodes
& Associates Ltd, Otago, New Zealand
Greetings
from even further on the other side of the globe,
close to our "cousins" in Australia.
Something
we find in New Zealand that may help in this debate,
is the legislative constraints on volunteering, especially
when it comes to offering "incentives".
Under some of our employment and workplace safety
legislation, volunteers v employee is clearly defined,
and that should be something for all organisations
to carefully consider.
I
act as a contracted advocate to a regional Employer
organisation in the south of the country [far and
away the most beautiful part and one which you should
all visit!!!}, and I often find situations where someone
has taken on some voluntary work on the understanding
from both sides that they are doing just that. Then
we find that after having received some form of recognition,
say the offering of petrol vouchers or similar, they
then become employees. Especially in the area of health
and safety in the workplace, that places more obligations
on the organisation not previously considered. Payment
of childcare fees is another that often occurs, which
then comes under scrutiny from the tax folk in terms
of whether or not the "incentive" constitutes
remuneration.
As
a final thought, we have felt for what seems like
centuries, that the less definitions there are, the
better off everyone is. That way every set of circumstances
can be dealt with as the participants see fit. It
seems to me that in the area of volunteer work, there
is not difference. Refrain from any attempt to define
a volunteer, and simply acknowledge the work these
folk do, for whatever reason, as being "gratefully
received help". In organisations I have some
involvement where we are ever grateful for the efforts
these people expend, we call them "our wonderful
helpers". So far they have not petitioned us
for a name change. I will keep you posted.
Response
posted to UKVPM's newsgroup on 5th July 2005 (and
reproduced with permission) by Richard Katona, Volunteering
Development Manager, DePaul Trust, United Kingdom
As
we all know, volunteering gets very fuzzy around the
edges and, to be honest, I think that is always going
to be the case. Andy Fryar is right, volunteering
is a dynamic phenomenon, not easily straitjacketed
into rigid definitions and Susan J Ellis is right
too, there does have to be a line between volunteering
and not-volunteering somewhere.
I
tend to think that we should be guided by what's happening
in real life rather than what the definition says.
A
couple of old war-stories come to my mind, regarding
two people who were treated fully in accordance with
volunteer management good practice. But the trouble
was that although they were both referred to as 'volunteers',
neither of them really were. One was on a work experience
placement and the other was on secondment from a religious
community. In the first instance there were supposed
to be academic placement outcomes that were not being
managed at all and in the second instance the person
was effectively being deprived of her statutory employment
rights.
Volunteering
'good practice' does not necessarily remain 'good
practice' when used to manage not-volunteering situations,
when you may need to adopt a different 'good practice'
set.
That,
I think, rather than snappy definitions, is the real
point.
Response
posted on 4th July 2005 by Andy Stoll, The 10,000
Hours Show\The James Gang, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
Just
ran across your article on the struggle of "defining"
volunteerism and your example of The 10,000 Hours
Show. I don't really want to get into the debate regarding
whether a concert ticket is "buying" off
someone and thus negating the entire concept of "volunteering,"
but let me give you some points that argue that "the
ends justify the means, in the case of The 10,000
Hours Show'
Some
basic facts and stats from the 2nd Annual 10,000 Hours
Show:
[keeping in mind that State of Iowa, which is primarily
an agriculture based state and has a really big problem
with young people moving away to bigger cities. Thus
engaging young people in their communities is a very
good thing.]
ENGAGING
YOUNG IOWANS
• 95% of registered volunteers are between the
ages of 17 and 30.
• Participating volunteers report higher connection
to their city after their service.
• Through 10K, hundreds of young Iowans have
fun and connect with each other at volunteer fairs,
service efforts, and the concert.
CREATING
SERVICE
• 155 10K2 participants were first-time volunteers.
• 26% of participants served more because of
10K.
• 7% of participating volunteers would not have
served without 10K.
• 100% of 10K2 volunteers who completed their
hours plan on serving in the future.
CELEBRATING
SERVICE
• The annual 10K concert is a unique celebration
of service, a chance for Iowa to say “Thank
you” to young citizens in a way that excites
– and motivates – them.
• 10K2 gathered hundreds of volunteers from
across Iowa as a united community of volunteers.
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
• 75 young Iowans make up 10K's yearlong staff.
• 95% of staff are 25 or younger.
• All gain experience in management, event planning,
marketing, graphic design, entrepreneurship, and more.
Hope
that helps. I appreciate you taking the time to spread
the word of The 10,000 Hours Show.
Its
not too late...
Let's
hear what you think!
Return
to current month's Hot
Topic
Visit
this month’s ‘Hot
Topic’ on the Energize web site
The
contents of this Hot Topic are copyright © 2003
- 2004 OzVPM.
You may reproduce this Hot Topic in part or in full
on the condition that the author, source and website
address (www.ozvpm.com)
are quoted.
|
