[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:	The Digital way of working

Moderator:	QUARK::LIONELON

Created:	Fri Feb 14 1986
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	5321
Total number of notes:	139771

392.0. "Alternatives to the United Way" by VIA::BINNS () Mon Sep 28 1987 10:32

    Does anyone else share my displeasure with the United Way monopoly
    on payroll giving here? (I work in New Hampshire and live in
    Massachusetts.) We have just received the United Way sign-up 
    packet.
    
    My wife and I contribute independently to various charities and
    non-profits. My wife, as a City of Boston employee, is also able 
    to choose an alternative payroll deduction program called Community
    Works. There are several advantages to this: 
    
 *  We are able to contribute, through convenient payroll
    deduction, to a much wider variety of non-profits than the 
    traditional Boy Scout/Salvation Army type groups (this, by the way,
    is not to knock them, only to point out the bias in favor of
    traditional, corporate-style charities, at the expense of innovative
    local groups trying harder to meet the enormous unfunded local social
    problems).
    
 *  We get to choose what groups within Community Works get our money.
    The United Way list I have seems not to allow choosing among United
    Way-funded groups.                                 
    
 *  We get to exert influence on United Way to change its priorities.
    As groups like Community Works make modest gains in getting entry
    to the workplace in Massachusetts, United Way loses its monopoly
    position. I am convinced that changes for the better in the
    Boston-area United Way (for example, a growth in monies for the
    housing crisis) are in large part due to the competition from groups
    like Community Works. 
    
    Any thoughts? I would especially like to hear from those in authority.
    
    P.S. Minor (highly annoying) point for Miss Manners' arbritation:
    I was tempted to address these issues in a letter directly to the 
    person signing the United Way cover letter. However, the salutation
    said "Dear Christopher". Under the circumstances, I felt obliged to
    address Mr. Charles E. Schue, Vice President, U.S. Sales, as "Dear
    Charles" (have we met?), but couldn't bring myself to do it.
    (Yes, yes, I know it is "Chick", just as my friends call me "Kit";
    that is part of the point. Harrumph.)

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
392.1	Comes up every year at this time	VCQUAL::THOMPSON	Noter at large	`Mon Sep 28 1987 11:28`	3
	See also topic 185.* in this conference. Alfred
392.2	Also not worth the rehash	YODA::SCHMIDT		`Tue Sep 29 1987 12:31`	14
	"Just say no.�" Then give to the charities of your choice. Atlant �Given the political climate of the moment, I should probably inform all of you that I lay no claim of originality on this phrase.
392.3	Not a reshash, so what's the beef?	VIA::BINNS		`Tue Sep 29 1987 13:04`	12
	re: .2 As I said in the base note, that's exactly what I do. The point I raised had to do with organized alternatives to the United Way, so that the charities to which I give have exposure to large groups of people in the way United Way charities do. I certainly agree with the complaints in note 185 about heavy-handed solicitation, but my point is quite different (in that it proposes a solution that also undermines that unfortunate activity). It is most certainly not a "rehash" of 185. (I admit that I did not read all of 185, however, so I may be wrong.)
392.4	How much do you care?	FURILO::BLINN	Looking for a job in NH	`Tue Sep 29 1987 13:29`	22
	Re: .0 and .3 -- I pretty much have to agree with Atlant's reply in .2 -- if you don't want to give to United Way, then don't. Saying "No" is an option. I happen agree with your point that DEC probably should invest at least as much energy in alternative charities as is spent on the United Way campaign (which can get somewhat heavy handed). HOWEVER, there's the old rule that he or she who proposes, disposes. If you really want to see this changed, then you have to start taking the issues up the management chain. You could start with your manager and your local personnel person. You'll probably have to take it pretty high up, though, and you can't assume that you'll get cooperation at every step along the way. But you can assume that if you've got a reasonable argument for your views and are willing to argue for what you think is right, you may be able to change the way things are done. You should not assume that writing a note in this conference will get anything changed, though. Tom
392.5		COOKIE::WITHERS	Bob Witherz	`Tue Sep 29 1987 14:08`	12
	If you give on your own, then remember to use the Matching Grants cards. That way, DEC will go 1-for-1 on contributions you choose. There are other advantages to giving individually...as a shareholder, I'm bothered by the amount of energy DEC invests (particularly in personpower) in UW. If we double the effort for two charities, as a stock holder I'm more concerned. So, let people who want to give on their own do so. If you don't want to give to UW, don't. If your boss tells you to go to UW presentations, then he's paying you to do that...and give to someone else if you choose. BobW
392.6	Just trash it	VAXRT::WILLIAMS		`Tue Sep 29 1987 16:50`	16
	My approach has been to immediately and publicly dispose of the pledge card (I assume that is what is in the envelope). I also am a heavy user of the matching cards. If ever called on the carpet, I'll just recall the Inspector General's rule of thumb, that any organization with 100% participation in any campaign was automatically to be investigated, since coercion must have been involved {But sir, I was just trying to save you from an investigation...} For a couple of years the secretaries claimed that I (or they were going to get fired because the "forms must be returned...". I told them to check the orange book. /s/ Jim Williams (who hates organized**2 charity)