Personally, I know two people who have been strong-armed into donating to the United Way and have heard countless other stories around about this practice.

The first person I know was told repeatedly by their HR department that they have to make at least a $5 donation. When she refused after repeated attempts, the HR director said that they would just donate in her name anyway. Attempts at finding out why were just either ignored or told it would be in her best interest. This was at a major financial institution.

Another person I know, who worked for a smaller company had repeated meetings with the owners of said company stating that it would "be in his best interest and look favorable on his work record" if he were to donate. He continued to deny a donation and eventually left the company because of this, amongst other things.

Where I work, we have the forms to donate to the United Way, the company pushes for it but there's not really any strong-arming for donations. I won't donate because of these stories I've heard, their repeated problems with corruption, too much of the donations being used for administrative costs, and I don't agree with a few of the organizations the United Way makes donations to.

I've searched around the internet and really can't find any information on these strong-arm practices. From what I've found, this is a fairly common occurrence but there's no information on exactly why this is done.

Has this happened to any of you or do you know why this is being done? It seems to totally reek of corruption and against the meaning of charitable donating.

[Dork.]

My company has a regular United Way drive. We are forced to watch a video, and we are forced to hand a pledge card back in a sealed envelope, though there's nothing preventing us from pledging $0. They go out of their way now to let you know that your contribution is confidential, and won't be factored into any appraisals of your work, but that's not the way it always has been. From the stories I've heard, nobody was ever given a bad appraisal because of their level of contribution at this company, although someone with the inclination to move up the corporate ladder would probably not get very far if they refused.

My big beef with our United Way pledge drive is that, although it is possible to designate your contribution to a specific organization that's affiliated with the UW (instead of jsut having it go into the general fund), I would prefer to designate to a few organizations back home in New York City, but my company wants designated contributions to stay in Rochester.

Rochester has several big, multi-national companies based here, and they all participate in the UW pledge drive.

[ghporter]

Give your local United Way office a call. I'm certain THEY don't want anyone strong-armed. Donations are voluntary, or are supposed to be. I can see requiring "100% CONTACT" so that everyone knows about the drive, but "requiring" a donation is NOT legal.

[Spliffdaddy]

AT&T is the worst about strongarming United Way donations from employees. They like to get annual weekly deductions from your paycheck. Then, every year they renew the deduction unless you throw a fit and forbid them from doing it. I think they like to see 100% employee participation...but I don't know why.

Still, I'd rather donate to United Way than the American Red Cross, a corrupt organization.

[vmarks]

Companies like to be able to advertise that they have 100% participation in contributing to the community. They think it makes them look good to the mayor, chamber of commerce, etc.

[turtle777]

I'm glad I work for a big foreign company. No pressures whatsoever. For sure it doesn't play any role in appraisals. In the past three years, I have barely noticed that they have UW activities. I like it that way, really low key.

-t

[Kevin]

No UW pressure here. We don't even have such collection.

[dilbottehrobort]

UPS makes their supervisors donate a certain amount every year... I just started to work part time at UPS as a supervisor, and before i became a supervisor i donated 200 a year... Dont know how much they make us supervisors donate, yet.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by dilbottehrobort

UPS makes their supervisors donate a certain amount every year... I just started to work part time at UPS as a supervisor, and before i became a supervisor i donated 200 a year... Dont know how much they make us supervisors donate, yet.

How do they make you ? Just deduct it from the paycheck ?
If "voluntary", what if you don't give ?

-t

[Railroader]

GM was pretty bad when I worked there. They liked 100% compliance.

[TETENAL]

Only in America.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Only in America.

Yeah, socialism in action

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yeah, socialism in action

Sorry, but corporations strongarming employees isn't socialism. That's capitalism of the Anglo-American kind. Socialism would be employees owning corporations. Sort of the opposite of what happens here.

[Eug Wanker]

Strange. None of my employers in Canada have ever strong-armed United Way donations.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Sorry, but corporations strongarming employees isn't socialism. That's capitalism of the Anglo-American kind. Socialism would be employees owning corporations. Sort of the opposite of what happens here.

Corporations, Government, what is the difference?

I was referring to forcing people to give to charity and not making it a personal decision. Which is socialism.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Corporations, Government, what is the difference?

Corporations are owned by few while the government, ideally, is formed by the people.

I was referring to forcing people to give to charity and not making it a personal decision. Which is socialism.

No, it's not. Socialism is production means owned by the people. What you are referring to is corporations blackmailing their employees. That's the opposite.

[Kevin]

Well in socialism the gov blackmails the people as well. You do what they tell you, you get payed.

And socialist healthcare systems work similar. You pay in a lump sum for everyone or you don't get any.

I can sit here all day and spin like you too.

[itai195]

Not pressured to do it at my company but my brother is at his. There isn't exactly an explicit threat of consequences if he doesn't, but it's strongly implied!

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well in socialism the gov blackmails the people as well. You do what they tell you, you get payed.

And socialist healthcare systems work similar. You pay in a lump sum for everyone or you don't get any.

I can sit here all day and spin like you too.

The difference is that an employer-employee relationship is a voluntary association.

[bstone]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

AT&T is the worst about strongarming United Way donations from employees. They like to get annual weekly deductions from your paycheck. Then, every year they renew the deduction unless you throw a fit and forbid them from doing it. I think they like to see 100% employee participation...but I don't know why.

Still, I'd rather donate to United Way than the American Red Cross, a corrupt organization.

I couldn't agree with you more. I spent 3 months in the Gulf Coast after Kartina running a free, tent-based medical clinic. I saw first hand what the ARC did with their donated money and it amounted to nothing of substance.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

The difference is that an employer-employee relationship is a voluntary association.

Are you saying socialist governments aren't voluntary?

Originally Posted by ghporter

Give your local United Way office a call. I'm certain THEY don't want anyone strong-armed. Donations are voluntary, or are supposed to be. I can see requiring "100% CONTACT" so that everyone knows about the drive, but "requiring" a donation is NOT legal.

In Wikipedia's post on the United Way FWIW, they mention that the UW has been "slow to respond" to complaints from employees who have been coerced into donating.

From the few posts here, UW volunteers at companies are participating in strong-arming donations but there still isn't a definitive answer as to "why" other than looking good to the city the company does business in. I know many company charters require giving back to the community so I would suspect that is part of it. But why the almost "cult-like" problems within some companies with the UW pledge drive? What do they gain in recognition of 100% donations/high donation amounts?

What is "legal" is directly proportianal to how much of a fight you want to put up and how much of that fight you can afford to finance. Many people will just tow the line or give up because the fight isn't worth it.

[Kevin]

I've worked in the US for almost 20 years and I have never an into this.

Maybe it's area specific.

[DigitalEl]

Wow... I thought this was just one former employer of mine and didn't realize it was a problem for lots of folks at lots of different places.

The casino I worked for had a big "high school pep rally-like" assembly to kick off the campaign, then you HAD to turn in the pledge card, whether you were donating or not. Like Dork said above, it was supposedly "voluntary," but I guarantee The Corporate They knew who donated and to what extent. Declining would've reflected very poorly for anyone with ambition there.

I thought it was complete bullsh*t at the time and hadn't thought about this in years. WHY does the United Way get such special access? Surely there are other worthy charities.

FWIW, I was a p*ssy about the whole thing and donated $5 or $10 a paycheck instead of having the guts to decline.

Stuff like that turns me off to charities now on principle. Then again, when asked, you really can say "I gave at the office."

[Dakar²]

No, its not a big deal where I work. I donated my first year here, forgot to fill out the form the second, and this year, I am again (and they asked that if I didn't I return the form anyway).

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Are you saying socialist governments aren't voluntary?

Government, in general, is not voluntary. Most of the time nowadays you get to have a say in the government that you deal with directly, but short of moving away from your home, there's no way to opt out of it entirely. With a business, you can always refuse to be a customer or employee and just find somewhere else. It might not be easy, and sometimes might involve moving as well, but it's always possible.

[USB HUB]

Our company used to have the "big rally" also years ago. I actually was a coordinator for a few years and the corporation did not see individual results. We had envelopes and sent them directly to the United Way. The company only got a report of the contributions. Now I'm not saying the company couldn't get to via payroll but it was a hard-core push. But now it is a much lower keyed drive. Could be because the employees have lost their pension plans and will be losing their contributory health insurance in the next year. Plus RIF (reduction in force) occurring every six months. ..... "Charity begins at home!'
Over the years I finally stopped when I found the UA keeps 20-30% to administer the funds.
Now I just pick my charity and give directly.

[itai195]

We are not coerced into doing it but the only charity we can give to via payroll deduction is UW. Blech.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Only in America.

Thank God!

In Canada and most European countries it's the government doing it.

[ghporter]

While I was in the Air Force, I participated every year in the Combined Federal Campaign. This is an annual "open house" sort of charity drive that centralizes the charity pitches into one big one instead of a bunch of little ones spread out through the year. CFC has watchdogs too-an organization has to disclose how much of the contributions go to actual charity work and how much goes to overhead, and if they don't keep the overhead down they get booted from the CFC list.

I was a CFC project officer a couple of times, and the rule was simple: get 100% contact so that everyone has a chance to donate, then back off. There were indeed "goals" for each unit (but not "quotas" because "that wouldn't be ethical") and the one year I was the unit project officer we exceeded our goal by quite a bit-and at the very last minute of the drive! Meeting goals meant good press for the Air Force. Exceeding goals meant bragging rights for any unit that did so. Not meeting goals meant some strong questions about how much effort a commander had put into getting people contacted-politically unpleasant but that's all.

I think this is a good model for charity drives; give employees all the information they need, a form to fill out, and then BACK OFF. It says something about a company that pushes for contributions.

[Dakar²]

What is that 3 dp is in consecutive threads?

You don't happen to be using the quick reply feature, are you?

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

What is that 3 dp is in consecutive threads?

You don't happen to be using the quick reply feature, are you?

Actually, yes I was. We're running a new vB version, and it's got some quirks. I just posted a reply and got a "this is a duplicate of a post" message, but there was only the ONE click to post it... Odd. I'll fix my dupe.

[Dakar²]

Yeah, I was just gonna note, when I've gotten the message, don't click post again... it has been posted.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by itai195 

We are not coerced into doing it but the only charity we can give to via payroll deduction is UW. Blech.

Same here, but with an extra form we can designate that our contribution goes to a specific area non-profit organization that UW supports, and not just the general fund. Ask if your company will let you designate: you may find that you can direct your contribution to a more acceptable place.

[KeyLimePi]

I'm in charge of the UW campaign at work this year.

[Rumor]

Reading this thread made me think of Death to Smoochy.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

They think it makes them look good to the mayor, chamber of commerce, etc.

Then why don't they simply donate from their revenue if they think it makes them look good?

[vmarks]

Donating from revenue isn't the same as saying "100% of our employees gave of their OWN income."

And thanks to tax laws, some employers will match employee donations.
So employee donates and company doubles it.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Thank God!
In Canada and most European countries it's the government doing it.

So, is it better if the corporation is doing it ?

If not, why thank God ?

-t

[mitchell_pgh]

I've never seen such strong-arming...

[Doofy]

So wait. A lot of Americans are blackmailed into giving to charity by their bosses?

Ummm... ...why aren't you all out there lawsuiting your bosses into next year?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck 

So, is it better if the corporation is doing it ?

If not, why thank God ?

-t

In America, corporations are God. The belief in the infallibility of the capitalistic approach to structuring an economy is more widely held than a belief in God.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

In America, corporations are God. The belief in the infallibility of the capitalistic approach to structuring an economy is more widely held than a belief in God.

Thanks, that's actually a good explanation

-t

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck 

So, is it better if the corporation is doing it ?

If not, why thank God ?

-t

You can easily move to another corporation. it's a teeny bit more difficult moving to a new country.

Why not thank God. Thank God for EVERYTHING!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

You can easily move to another corporation. it's a teeny bit more difficult moving to a new country.

Fair enough.

It depends on your skills, experience, knowledge, age etc.
If you are young and flexible, it's easy. If you are older, you might have to take whatever they dish out because you'll never be able to find something comparable once you quit. So yes, true in theory, not always in practice.

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Why not thank God. Thank God for EVERYTHING!

Fair enough.

-t

[Spliffdaddy]

Life has taught me that the folks who think they can't do better at another company - really can't. In which case, they're currently being overpaid and should be fired or have their pay cut.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Life has taught me that the folks who think they can't do better at another company - really can't. In which case, they're currently being overpaid and should be fired or have their pay cut.

Well, yeah, that would account for most 50+ year olds that used to climb up the corporate ladder. Peter Principle in full effect.

-t

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Why not thank God. Thank God for EVERYTHING!

Except commies. I'm pretty sure it was the other guy who invented them.

[legacyb4]

As they shouldn't be. If you are a "victim" of strong-arming, it's the company running the workplace campaign and not UW itself. Giving, in itself, is something to be respected and commended as there are a lot of people out there who have less than we do and need more help than we can give them as individuals (thus organizations like United Way, etc. who have far greater reach than you would imagine).

As far as what it costs to administer funds, I can't speak for charities in general, but you'll generally find that even the 20% is far less than what it costs for the current trend of event-driven fundraising events...

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Strange. None of my employers in Canada have ever strong-armed United Way donations.

[Spliffdaddy]

The American Red Cross (not to be confused with other Red Cross agencies) claims 9% of its donations are spent on 'administrative costs". They have a highly paid board of directors and a fancy headquarters building. Also, you can find literally hundreds of allegations and confirmations of misappropriated funds. 9/11 is a good example. see also: any tragic event in America. The American Red Cross is first on the scene to solicit funds for a disaster - and the last to actually do anything about it. When you donate for a specific cause, they just keep the money and put it in a 'general fund'. Earthquake? They collect $20 million and offer $100,000 in relief aid to the earthquake victims. And you thought you were helping that crisis with your donation. When you sent checks to victims' families of 9/11 - the Red Cross intercepted the mail, removed the checks, and forwarded only the cards and letters to the families.

The United Way is a bit less honest about their administrative costs, but the concensus seems to be about 14% of donations are eaten-up by such costs.

The Salvation Army, on the other hand, doesn't have a highly paid board of directors. Their staff is essentially dirt poor - as a requirement. I wasn't able to find good data on their administrative costs - but their headquarters sucks, their staff is not paid, and allegations of fraud and misappropriation of funds are not to be found. I'd guess almost 100% of your donations are funding projects, not lining pockets of chairmen.