Should Charity Shops Be Run by Volunteers?

Oxfam [Oxford Famine Reflief] have shops in even small towns in Britain, with books and music in seperate, dedicated stores. Oxfam promises a fair and decent wage for its employees for the country they work in, yet they pay their shop staff nothing. These volunteers don't even get discount on the products the shop sells, assuming that volunteers would not want to take any profits away from the charity. But retail experience is reasonably easy to get in a paid level. I can understand that someone wanting to work in bookselling (which is competitive to enter) might seek a job at Oxfam to aid a job in a bookshop. But they would not need the 6 months plus required of volunteers by some branches (e.g. Bristol Park Street). This is an incredible amount of time for staff to commit to working for free. It precludes gaining full time work elsewhere. It ties in those hours each week to not being paid. there's no perks such a free accommodation or food allowance for volunteers.

Bookselling and second hand charity shops run quite differently. There's less customers, and so less till work and cashing up. There aren't promotions and the ever changing point of sales that make up a big part of all retail work. There's no customer orders in second hand shops. And the stock is meant to sell faster in a charity shop. A bookshop would allow 3-9 months for a book to sit on its shelves before returning it to the publisher for a refund; but Oxfam gives books a month; and then they are sent to another store, and after that, pulped. I am not certain if the materials are recycled. There's no reps to see in Oxfam. There's no stock ordering. Therefore, charity shops give only limited experience to a would-be retail worker.

So what other reason would there be to volunteer?

Charity shop windows proclaim that working with them looks good on your CV - a line used too often by companies that have no intention of remunerating staff. But us workers need something that looks good on our bank balance.

Yes, there may be those who simply want to give some time to support charity, and to meet people and fill their day. If unemployed, having charity work on your CV does indeed fill a gap and look better than saying you've been [truthfully] filling your day filling out forms for jobs and benefits. But we live in an expensive world. We are told that government pensions may die out; many people claim benefits to make up their income in retirement. So older people perhaps can't afford to work for free either.

So many students and younger people (the latter frequently are lumped with the former) need paid work to supplement studies which they have to pay for themselves. And if you are unemployed, you still have to seek paid work and be prepared to give up your volunteering in 48 hours. This can't help charities any more than benefit claimants, but my views on that ruling is for another time. But benefit laws do have an effect on Oxfam workers. Knowing how much pressure there is to find work, knowing how expensive living is (especially housing), and knowing that any earnings are deducted from benefits (for a single person only £5 is disregarded) means this:

People who have time to work at Oxfam shops are those who are not in full time work

People who are not in full time work, unless sitting on a nest egg or living with a rich partner or family, are poor and need to use their time earning more

If they are claiming benefits, they are still jobseeking and cannot commit to you

So who do you expect to be able to work for you for nothing!?

Applying for a job was not an impressive experience either. A shop manager in Bath was to be paid £14,000 - this is hardly more than an assistant would be elsewhere. Oxfam appears to be very corporate: this is evident from volunteering and from their recruitment site, which was very disappointing.

Volunteering should be a three way benefit: the organisation; those it seeks to help; and the staff. If the company puts its needs and those they are helping over their staff, then it is not valuing its workforce; it priviledges the underprivileged over whom they consider priviledged. But people who volunteer are not privileged. Our wages in Britain might sound great compared to some countries but we need them for our high transport and housing costs. Many in the UK are not earning enough to cover a rent, let alone be afford a mortgage.

It seems that to fight poverty, some charities are prepared to make their workers poor. And that takes from their ethos and mission.