Charity Guilt Tripping

i dont even know how they got my name and address

we get calls all the time from charities we have previously given to, we give when we can afford to.

Yesterday i was walking through a shopping centre when a guy  (obviously on a work visa) from a childs charity got all up in my face, he was about 20cms away from my face! I hate those!!!!!

today i got a call from a call centre, basically the guy (whom i could barely understand) was trying to let me allow them to give my details to charities so they could call us up!

no way!!!!!

I agree with everything you said.

I hate being made to feel like a bad person for fobbing them off but it's not a good way to go about things

^ yeah, those street ones are often attractive females too with cleavage showing.
they know that if you get a word in you will say no, so they are really pushy

Greenpeace and Amnesty aren't too bad though.

The charities that you really have to watch out for are the ones that outsource their recruitment and money collection to private companies. I remember there was a charity that I donated to regularly and the guy asked me for my regular donation and I asked him how much of my donation went to the cause. Turns out 50% was going to his company's fees! Taking into account the actual charty's admin fees, overheads, etc. and it's certain less than 50% of what I was donating was acually going towards the cause.

Also if you do sign up to a charity, always make sure you read their privacy policy. As I said, often it's not the charity itself that does the recruiting, following up for money etc. but another company that does this. Often these companies maintain huge databases of people's information. So you may give your details to this company that's representing one charity, but when that company is engaged by another charity to recruit or get more money, they will also go after you too. So you might find yourself being chased by a charity you haven't even heard of or signed up for.

So yeah, specifically look at their privacy policy to see that it says "we do not give your information to third parties" or something to that effect.

Yeah exactly!

Really bad for actual decent and honest charities because with these forceful marketing tactics, the general public is going to get a more negative outlook towards charities and be less likely to donate to good causes.

If they ring though, tell them to remove your name from their database.

I used to agree. The first time I ever (wo)manned a stall for Animals Australia was at the Mind Body Spirit festival. Before my shift started I looked around and came across Greenpeace, so I stopped to look at their stall. A girl approached me and tried to sign me up as a monthly donor. I told her I was a student on Centrelink and couldn't afford it and that I gave to another charity when I could afford it etc. and she proceeded to tell me I should then give my daily coffee or eliminate something else so that I COULD afford it, and by this time she had me pinned up against the stall wall- literally 2 centimeters from my face.

I was pretty freaked out, and when I was able to get away I walked onwards to the AA stall, but noticed WSPA on the way. The enormous photos of graphic cruelty all over their stall, and the attitude of the salesperson toward me (sell sell sell!) combined with my previous experience with Greenpeace resulted in me bursting in to tears!!

When I finally reached AA, Jesse (who was running the stall) probably thought I was a real weirdo....

I'm glad AA isn't like that. In my view it's unethical.

Yeh you're right, but you've got to draw a line between the organisation itself and the workers. Greenpeace as a charity does a lot of good work and are certainly better than a lot of environmental charities. Take Wilderness Society for example- I went to a public event once during the day a few of them got drunk and were acting like yahoos!

But I think a lot of it has to do with the nature of them working on a commission basis. I really don't like it, but at the end of the day those large charities like Greenpeace and Amnesty International need a lot of members and funds because a lot the work they do involves hiring professional and qualified people to produce things like reports and research on a large scale. Essentially what they are doing is adapting a business model to the charity in order to better do their work and get their message out there. I really hate it because it's more likely to cause situations like the one you were faced with and give the charity a bad name, but on the other hand I can understand the pressures of trying to achieve your charity's goals.

It's like I said, there are a lot of bad workers but my main concern is whether the actual charity does good work and my money gets put to good use in the charity, so I try not let bad employees tarnish the organisation's reputation.

Yes I absolutely agree. I should have clarified that I don't discount the good work WSPA and Greenpeace do for animals and the environment. Their campaigns are what would earn my membership.