Comments on: As an Aid Worker, Am I Paid Too Much? http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/ My most notorious writings Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:53:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Anonymous http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-239 Anonymous Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:49:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-239 Hi Peter, Thanks for the article. I guess being an aid worker would require a certain degree of humanism and idealism to go along with professionalism as well as strong support from your inner circle, being yourself, family, parents - whichever that are applicable in your case.<br/><br/>Within your search for the answer, in corporate world we have a saying that it is not the money that makes a man, it is the man who makes money. In non-profit industry, it is your success, performance that make yourself, not the money. Hi Peter, Thanks for the article. I guess being an aid worker would require a certain degree of humanism and idealism to go along with professionalism as well as strong support from your inner circle, being yourself, family, parents – whichever that are applicable in your case.

Within your search for the answer, in corporate world we have a saying that it is not the money that makes a man, it is the man who makes money. In non-profit industry, it is your success, performance that make yourself, not the money.

]]> By: pumuckl http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-235 pumuckl Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:56:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-235 it is a job, it is a business - pay less, and the organisation becomes less professional. does being an aid worker mean you have to suffer like the ones you are working for?<br/><br/>does it help any of the Hmong refugees if I sit with them, struggling for education and nutrition, or does it help if I look smart and go on government level advocating and negotiating for fairer chances?<br/><br/>I'm not saying the system is right and good. but i am not going to feel bad for earning money and realising the chances that I get in life.<br/><br/>I would never work for a development agency, though. it is a job, it is a business – pay less, and the organisation becomes less professional. does being an aid worker mean you have to suffer like the ones you are working for?

does it help any of the Hmong refugees if I sit with them, struggling for education and nutrition, or does it help if I look smart and go on government level advocating and negotiating for fairer chances?

I’m not saying the system is right and good. but i am not going to feel bad for earning money and realising the chances that I get in life.

I would never work for a development agency, though.

]]> By: Peter Casier http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-234 Peter Casier Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:09:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-234 Hi E.,<br/>(as per discussion over lunch :-) )... <br/>I would agree with you on points 2 and 2, but point 3 stands only for those based in the field, especially in hardship duty stations. For those based in 1st world 'duty stations', though, it is different...<br/>P. Hi E.,
(as per discussion over lunch :-) )…
I would agree with you on points 2 and 2, but point 3 stands only for those based in the field, especially in hardship duty stations. For those based in 1st world ‘duty stations’, though, it is different…
P.

]]> By: Anonymous http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-233 Anonymous Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:13:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-233 Maybe it's just one factor amongst many, but I feel it's worth mentioning. this compensation (and here I'm referring to the qualified workers) serves to:<br/>1. Provide an adequate value/quantify the 'sacrifices'..<br/><br/>2. Allows a worker to focus on the work and not on 'making ends meet' whilst in the field. esp if the worker has a family under his/her belt. <br/><br/>3. Scenarios for the field workers that are obtaining strong compensation and may require to take breaks (for fear of burnout) - would it not be adequate these workers take breaks in desirable locations that could 'cost' a little more? Do they not deserve this choice?<br/><br/>A lot of these questions/observations come into play when compensation is being discussed - since we are humanitarian. We are human.. and these aid workers are also people.. Maybe it’s just one factor amongst many, but I feel it’s worth mentioning. this compensation (and here I’m referring to the qualified workers) serves to:
1. Provide an adequate value/quantify the ‘sacrifices’..

2. Allows a worker to focus on the work and not on ‘making ends meet’ whilst in the field. esp if the worker has a family under his/her belt.

3. Scenarios for the field workers that are obtaining strong compensation and may require to take breaks (for fear of burnout) – would it not be adequate these workers take breaks in desirable locations that could ‘cost’ a little more? Do they not deserve this choice?

A lot of these questions/observations come into play when compensation is being discussed – since we are humanitarian. We are human.. and these aid workers are also people..

]]> By: Peter Casier http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-232 Peter Casier Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:04:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-232 Thanks for your reaction, Ryan. <br/><br/>You are right to point out that salaries (or 'the value of the package') is only one issue. Staffing levels, staff quality,.. is the other side...<br/>(leaving alone the question which organisation is providing EFFECTIVE "aid making a change")<br/><br/>p. Thanks for your reaction, Ryan.

You are right to point out that salaries (or ‘the value of the package’) is only one issue. Staffing levels, staff quality,.. is the other side…
(leaving alone the question which organisation is providing EFFECTIVE “aid making a change”)

p.

]]> By: Ryan http://petercasier.be/writing/as-an-aid-worker-am-i-paid-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-231 Ryan Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:07:00 +0000 http://petercasier.be/writing/?p=229#comment-231 I am more concerned with the level of staffing than the salary of directors. A lot of NGOs seem to have huge HQ staff levels, some of which happens due to volunteer or below-market staff, but it always seems to evolve into a large number of well paid staff. Additionally, the non-cash compensation (being based in expensive cities, housing, etc.) contributes to high overhead as well. And, aside from the financial overhead of high staffing levels (even if they're low paid, you then end up with higher paid managers to manage them, facilities, etc.), you get the organizational inertia, which if you have an important enough mission and a changing environment, is a bigger cost than the overhead itself.<br/><br/>Clearly there's some point in being near donors, and being able to provide accountability, hand-holding, etc. to those donors, but pushing more of the staffing out to commercial companies (for surge demand, or specialist skills), lower-cost places (i.e. increasing the level of management in the regional centers, with HQ mainly for external interface to donors), and standard efficiency/IT/etc. measures from the corporate world make sense.<br/><br/>I think this is a bigger issue with charity organizations NOT operating in conflict zones or developing places....the non-conflict United Way was one of the bigger fiascos, and groups like MSF have a pretty good reputation for efficiency I am more concerned with the level of staffing than the salary of directors. A lot of NGOs seem to have huge HQ staff levels, some of which happens due to volunteer or below-market staff, but it always seems to evolve into a large number of well paid staff. Additionally, the non-cash compensation (being based in expensive cities, housing, etc.) contributes to high overhead as well. And, aside from the financial overhead of high staffing levels (even if they’re low paid, you then end up with higher paid managers to manage them, facilities, etc.), you get the organizational inertia, which if you have an important enough mission and a changing environment, is a bigger cost than the overhead itself.

Clearly there’s some point in being near donors, and being able to provide accountability, hand-holding, etc. to those donors, but pushing more of the staffing out to commercial companies (for surge demand, or specialist skills), lower-cost places (i.e. increasing the level of management in the regional centers, with HQ mainly for external interface to donors), and standard efficiency/IT/etc. measures from the corporate world make sense.

I think this is a bigger issue with charity organizations NOT operating in conflict zones or developing places….the non-conflict United Way was one of the bigger fiascos, and groups like MSF have a pretty good reputation for efficiency

]]>