The article printed in the Canberra Times on 21st June 2006 is somewhat misleading. Volunteering Australia’s commitment to the principle that volunteering is undertaken by choice for the benefit of the community and for no financial payment remains unchanged. It is my belief that the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, is considering a proposal, put forward by Senator Barnett, which suggests ways government can assist in the sustainability of volunteering, including how to deal with the rising costs associated with it. And whilst dealing with some of these costs under the taxation system is one option it is a long way from ‘paying retired volunteers’.

The issue is not one of payment but of reimbursement for the sometimes substantial costs incurred in the course of providing volunteer service. The impact of recent petrol price increases in Australia and the cost to volunteers of maintaining uniforms and equipment may prove to be a serious impediment to the continued burgeoning of volunteer involvement in Australia.

A number of things can be done by governments and the voluntary sector itself to ensure the viability of volunteering. Some robust enquiry into the costs to the volunteer, and how this will be dealt with by a community that values their involvement, can not be allowed to be sidetracked by a debate premised on a misunderstanding of the difference between reimbursement and payment.

www.volunteeringaustralia.org

This is a huge issue. We all talk about not "paying" volunteers to participate; yet we in America have a huge program called Americorps that DOES provide for payment! While that payment is couched in terms of things like "stipends" or "living expenses", in my view it is still pay. This becomes even more of an issue when you are trying to utilize volunteer time to match federal grants. If someone receives compensation for work performed, especially if it is federal money, you cannot then utilize that time to match another federal grant.

I deal with volunteers that perform a myriad of functions; including driving and even flying thousands of miles each year. In some cases I have a third party reimburse them for their fuel costs. No, we do not provide pay, but sometimes we will give them per-diem if they are our on a multiple day project.

I don't have a problem with reimbursing volunteers their expenses, but I do have a problem with providing "pay", even when it is couched in terms like "stipend" or "living expense". Either we pay or we don't; but lets not try and disguise what we do.

Kim Toulouse

Wildlife Education Coordinator

Volunteer Program Manager

Nevada Department of Wildlife

1100 Valley Road

Reno, NV 89512

Cover a volunteer's legitimate expenses? - YES!

Pay a volunteer? - NO

It should be noted that AmeriCorps participants are officially called "members" so, while they are clearly engaged in community service, they are not considered volunteers. Their stipends, though small, are considered income and are subject to taxes, etc. This is a service program, not a volunteer program. Recruiting community volunteers is part of the mission of the members, however.

The Foster Grandparent and Senior Companions (also funded through Corporation for National Service) are considered volunteers and do receive a small stipend (currently $2.65/hour) but must be determined income eligible based on guidelines set by congress. The stipend is designed to merely offset the costs of volunteering. There are thousands of low income older adults, who would otherwise be at home, out in their communities contributing to others lives because this modest incentive is offered.

Since both of these program are funded through federal dollars it is correct that their time cannot be used to match other federal grants. However, the benefits of all these programs far outweigh this one consideration.

Lynn A. Doll, CAVNC

Director of Volunteer Services

J. Iverson Riddle Developmental Center

Morganton, NC 28655

What an interesting article and an area that always sparks lots of discussion whenever discussed at any event or training courses. A complete contrast to our situation where we are being told not to pay valid expenses! I personally think that you've hit the nail on the head by asking if more people are volunteering for financial incentives will it continue to be voluntary work. This is the view that I've always held. By giving your time freely you really are volunteering for something and whilst all volunteers should be valued and recognised for what they do, financial rewards do blur the boundaries and perhaps give some people the wrong reasons for volunteering.

It is probably time that we were more creative with some of our voluntary recognition schemes but I think that financial rewards is not the right way to go about it and many volunteers might not actually want this. For most people, the thought that either the charity they support or the tax payer (through government run reimbursement) would be paying for this would be unacceptable and not the reason for them volunteering, I know that's always been my view with the voluntary work that I have done. I certainly wouldn't have classed it as voluntary work otherwise.

I'd be really interested to hear other views on this.

Jo Hamilton

Volunteering Development Coordinator

MS Society

www.mssociety.org.uk

I see this is a very good initiative, if volunteers are paid for this is not only an incentives but a token of appreciation for the volunteerism and action they do. An incentive will always add value to the kind and scope of services offered.

Balakrishnan Chandrasekar

In my opinion volunteers need not be paid and in case they get paid, it is no more volunteering. However, they may get their incidental expenses such as travel costs, postage etc. reimbursed which will be sort of justified.

Sure wouldn't be voluntary work, if people got paid for volunteering. But I do see the benefit of a tax break for volunteering.

Pat Ford

Director of Girl and Adult Program

Girl Scouts-Totem Council

Thumbs Up for Australia,

I appreciate the initiative. It has been long overdue and waiting, we need to motivate Volunteers to see reason to do their all important duties. I will like to make a big push for Nigeria to address this too and work hard to emulate great ideas and incentives.

Congrats! Do it.

Henry Ekwuruke

Of course I agree we need to motivate volunteers... and in general I have no issue with the financial side.. the definition of voluntary work is shifting to include stipended community service.. but it seems to me that there should be other motivators that take the lead.

People volunteer for all kinds of reasons.. from a sincere desire to contribute to the commonweal in some particular cause all the way to simply liking the work. It is incumbent on those of us who design and manage these projects to learn how to motivate volunteers through making sure our assignements are meaningful and that volunteers have the tools, training and work that will make them feel successful.

Volunteers do not work for money, that's essential. But this does not mean that they shouldn't be reimbursed for necessary expenses that are necessary to enable them to do their work. Therefore: Reimbursement yes - emoluments no.

I find a certain "fundamentalism" in the discussion about whether volunteers should be "paid" or not. For example, when people volunteer full-time, whether at home or abroad, they rarely pay all the costs associated with their service. To the extent that someone else pays for their room and board, or they get a "free lunch", it can be argued that they are being "paid".

I have worked in voluntary service programmes for young people for the last 25 years and have not seen any programme that was so attractive financially that young people decided to do it because they could earn money at it.

Knowing there was funding for accommodation and food and a pocket money was often important for ones from poorer families, but not as an alternative to a "real" paid job. I have just had a young Romni (gypsy) woman from Hungary say No to going for a year to Germany to volunteer in a youth club working with youth from minorities because she has just been offered a job as a hotel receptionist in Hungary. She would much rather have the volunteer experience and feels she could learn a lot, but her father is ill and can't work and there are several other children to be supported. If a stipend of 175 Euro/month was not competitive against a hotel receptionist's starting salary in southern Hungary, then I would argue that it doesn't taint the motivation to volunteer when some financial support is offered.

This is a real issue in Europe because there has been a rapid growth in government support for such full-time youth voluntary service in the last 5 years. In 1999 only Germany had such a policy, now in Europe there are legal frameworks with various degrees of government funding for full-time voluntary service in place in Germany (25.000+ young people doing a voluntary social or ecological year), France, Italy (over 40.000), Czech republic, and - just starting up, Hungary. Since 1995 there has been the EU's European Voluntary Service as a source of financial support for international youth service.

With the exception of Hungary, the national schemes recognise and/or financially support international youth service as well. Norway and the Netherlands also have new programmes supporting youth international voluntary service. (Governments have funded development volunteer services such as Volunteer Service Overseas or Deutsche Entwicklungsdienst sending professionally qualified persons for many years, but support for programmes which don't require qualifications is new).

John Stringham

Executive Director

Ecumenical Diaconal Year Network

The idea of tax-relief on the stipends or reimbursement is great, will greatly enhance the volunteer spirit but since it's volunteer work, then the issue of pay should not arise.

No cash to volunteers! Reimbursment for expenses is OK if previously agreed, but paying volunteer work shall change the concept of wanting to do anything for higher cause than money...

What i do know in Brazil, as a poor country, is that if you don't guarantee at least the minimum way to participate - like transportation - it is hard for people to think in collective goals. They need to survive as individuals first. It is hard to keep them volunteering, despite all the desire to do it. Otherwise, we keep always the same social group doing it, what in my point of view turns volunteering into an elite activity. In sum, YES for reimbursement. From my experience, who has the ways to pay the expenses really doesn't care with the agency provides or not money for it.

I'm with with Rod from Canada, it's called volunteerism so no reward or pay should be expected, but I agree to facilitating some expenses that would help them in completing their goals which they volunteered for.

'Payment', 'compensation', 'financial gain' or any such terms - and 'volunteering' do NOT belong in the same sentence. It's like 'mandated volunteering' - no such thing. Volunteering does not and should not involve payment; REIMBURSEMENT for legitimate out-of-pocket expenses, YES! A true volunteer should not have to pay any expenses, associated with their volunteer work. It is not reasonable to expect that volunteers who donate their time, talents and so on should also have to donate $$$ - if they wish to, fine. That's just an added bonus to one's organzation for which an income tax receipt can be issued.

Volunteering New Zealand agrees with our international colleagues in our belief that volunteering is not an activity for which one should receive pay. However we strongly endorse the need for volunteers to receive reimbursement of actual out of pocket expenses and for those organisations which involve volunteers to take into consideration in their planning the need to budget adequately to support their volunteer programmes and for this to be supported by governments and other funders.

I don't have a problem with reimbursing volunteers their expenses, but I do have a problem with providing "pay", even when it is couched in terms like "stipend" or "living expense". Either we pay or we don't; but let's not try and disguise what we do. But still i am ready.

The fact that volunteers are not paid is not because they are worthless but because their services are invaluable.Secondly,a volunteer is not only a person who is not paid for his services, but also includes a person who is paid far more below his professional expertise. Therefore, it will not be wrong to pay a volunteer, however the pay should not be attractive so as not to make the payment the attraction rather than the desire for selfless service.

It is a positive move and thought to give volunteers some kind of monetary reward for a job well done. It is however not very encouraging to give them pay!

A volunteer's genuine expenses defenitely need to be covered; paying a volunteer a salary degrades volunteering to just another profession.

As pointed out by at least one responder, the article is misleading. If one accepts that "payment" is not the same thing as "reimbursement" then it should be possible to draw a line under the issue. Payment implies financial reward as an incentive while reimbursement of expenses implies the volunteer is not out of pocket. Reimbursement might also constitute an incentive in the sense of a person being encouraged to volunteer in the knowledge that there is no associated financial burden. The parameters of volunteerism, as defined by the United Nations, include the notion of an act undertaken out of free will, for the benefit of the community however defined, and not primarily motivated by financial gain. Reimbursement of expenses is defensible on practical grounds (securing a ready supply of volunteers) and ethical lines (avoiding exclusivity whereby only the better off are able to participate). By the way, whether or not "stipend" or "living expenses" are a hidden form of payment, as some responders appear to suggest, depends surely on the level and on local circumstances. I don't think one can generalize. At the end of the day, I would simply underline that seeking pecuniary gain should never be a defining characteristic of voluntary action.

Robert Leigh

Senior Policy Specialist

UN Volunteers

I don't know if we call it 'pay' or what, but what I think volunteer need incentive so that to incourage them to work properly.

I remember in 1995 to 2000, I was volunteer for National Immunization day. We were do this task for two day early in the morning with motorbike to remoted area for that, just about 50 kilometer go and return. And we were paid $5 per day can we call it a payment.

thanx

While I applaud the idea of volunteering, because I've done it. If a volunteer has work experience and expertise in a particular area, paying that person is a very good idea. In many parts of the world, it would offset the high cost of living.

Let seniors decide if they want to accept a stipend/payment for services rendered. I think its a good idea.

Gilberto

La hora de trabajo voluntario debe ser descontada de impuestos como una donacion en dinero, al valor de la hora normal de trabajo de cada donante.

Si reciben un sueldo no son voluntarios.

Reintegro de gastos, SI

I have no problem with paying the volunteers since their voluntary service touch so many people. Probably this now should be an eye opener to the volunteer organisations to state their conditions upon being enrolled as a volunteer.

Thank you for this chance.

Asaph.

El trabajo de voluntariado no puede estar fuera de la relaidad. Y la realidad es que las personas, lamentablemmente, en esta sociedad de consumo necesitabn de dinero para pagar el consumo de bienes y el uso de servicios basicos. por eso la deduccion impositiva parece atinanda, como asimismo un pequeññ oestipendio que le garantice durante el ejercicio del voluntariado la adquisiciòn de elementos basicos. Si lso politicos no son voluntarios, si los deportistas que dicen cuando actúan ens elecciones nacional representar a sus paises ganan dinero (y mucho en esos casos), opor que un voluntario que actúa motivado por la buena fe, no podrá ser objeto de paga que garantice sus gastos básicos., Quizas por que lso voluntarios no aparecen en lso medios de prensa para distorsionar la realiad social y desinformar a la masa social como lo hacen los deportistas, los actores y los politicos, todos estos actores sociales funcionales a un sistema basado en el agravio a los derechos individuales y dstinado a la destruccion del pensamiento individual.

Bueno, yo creo que si uno es voluntario y ofrecio toda su vida a servir a otra gente sin condiciones creo que sería justo el ayudar con retrubuciones de dinero para que el voluntario retirado tenga una vejes justa.

I think, if you're a volunteer, always you will be because the work of a volunteer is somethig that you never ask money; if government wants to help us reducing some taxes it's ok, but pay us never (it isn't volunteering)

je pense que le vocable volontaire seul définit l'essence de leur mission à savoir consacrer leur temps pour aider les autres, cela est certes louable et à encourager, soit en donnant des récompenses, que ce soit en nature ou en espèce soit rembourser les dépenses qu'un volontaire aurait engagé ou alors lui donner un subsit pour vivre décementet non parler d'un salaire comme si on pouvait quantifier le rendement d'un volontaire en lui donnant une rémuneration

Sería interesante que logramos diferenciar lo que es el pago al voluntario y lo que es el hecho de asegurar que el voluntario no incurra en costos personales al ejecer de voluntario. Que los voluntarios no "cobren" por su trabajo no significa que además deban poner en riesgo economía personal en el desarrollo de sus actividades. Sin fines de lucro no significa con ánimos de perdidas.

It's a good gesture, 'pay' doesn't mean commercial pay, just a cover up for out of pocket expenses. It's still a noble for a good cause.

Volunteering should come from the heart. But... if the pocket becomes empty the heart becomes weak. So .... if a bit to cover up all the expences incurred and that should be monitored. Not too bad an idea to pay out of pocket expences.

Well for me it is good to pay only like cost for home or mails etc., but not wage. No need to pay for voluntary work because it's voluntary, ok? If not, don't call it voluntary.

Pienso que el trabajo como voluntario uno lo hace con Amor y no creo que se deba pagar pero si que el voluntario tenga algun reconocimiento dentro de la sociedad, cosa que en mi pais no sucede.

Gracias.

To pay volunteers, is to undermine the relevant role of volunteer work. Volunteerism is vital to achieving the MDGs in developing countries. It is a divine but noble occupation to humanity

Retired volunteers or not, any payment plan (s) by the Australian Prime Minister John Howard has more to hide than the eyes can see. An international conspiracy and attempt to further submerge the power of the people. It’s a wake up call?

Why become a volunteer? It is not for fortune. It is not for fame. It is not for only personal gain. It is for love of fellowman or just to lend a helping hand. It is not for medals worn with pride. It is for feeling deep inside, of helping others far and ndear -- that makes you want to volunteer! “Volunteerism” on the other hand, means accepting responsibility to making changes in the society. A give -- and -- take experience.

God bless

I think volunteer work shouldn't be paid. Volunteering happens because an individual finds himself capable of offering things which escape monetary reward. The greatest recompense should be the smile received from those we help.

I absolutely do not believe that a person should be paid to volunteer! It's not ethical (in my opinion...cannot speak for everyone). However, i believe that there should be travel assistance. To be honest the reason i have not been able to volunteer outside of my community, country is due to my lack of finance. I simply cannot afford to the ticket prices with my teacher's salary.