Charity Wages - Mary Davis

canhascheez

Might not be the correct forum. Mods bounce if off somewhere if you like.

So with this latest Mary Davis 'p60 story', she is paid roughly €160,000/year for her role in 'Special Olympics'. Is this the norm for somebody working for a charity?

Do other charities pay as much, or more?

star gazer

Yeah, looks more suited to politics at this moment.
<moved> from volunteerism

thebman

Is the Special Olympics a charity? It is a sports competition is it not?

I think if you drop the Special people become less shocked.

Not going to vote for this woman more than likely but I don't think there is anything wrong with being paid a wage for organising a high profile sporting event.

I think if anything, people should look into how she got the job with her also being put in charge of the Bertie Bowl. I've not seen any real dirt stick that the media has thrown at her about it though TBH. If she applied for the job and was the best candidate then you can't really hold it against her either.

RATM

CEO positions in a charity can pay huge wages, I think the Irish Cancer Society pay about 150k+ for their CEO.

It's not unusual in that sector, they are after all running multi-million euro enterprises. If they weren't in the charity sector arguably they'd be getting even more in a private business.

It seems bizarre in a charity but a good CEO can be the difference between raising €2m a year and €10m a year; they really can prove their worth in economic terms.

I think I remember reading that Melanie Verword increased UNICEF's funding by over 400% during her three years there- impressive stats indeed.

Dirk Gently

thebman wrote: »

If she applied for the job and was the best candidate then you can't really hold it against her either.

This is the thing I'm unclear on. What qualifies someone for a place on a quango. Is it a case of an open application and the best person gets the job or is it a political appointment, a favour for a friend/sympathiser etc. A lot of back benchers for example get put on various boards simply to keep them sweet, to look after their own or to make up for missing out on cabinet positions etc.

Does it differ from quango to quango, are some awarded by nod and wink by a politician and some more high profile ones vetted or at least appear to be vetted? She seems to have made a bit of a career out of being appointed to boards. I'd be more interested in who appointed her and why and if the positions where open to competition from other applicants rather than the simple fact that she sat on so many of them.

JonathanAnon

Yeah I have to say that it doesnt sit well with me that she gets 156k as CEO for Special Olympics.. I mean a lot of people will have the impression "isnt she a great woman working for such a good cause" as if she was doing it for nothing..... when in reality she is just a hired gun, and the organisation could have been BP for all she cared..

thebman

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Yeah I have to say that it doesnt sit well with me that she gets 156k as CEO for Special Olympics.. I mean a lot of people will have the impression "isnt she a great woman working for such a good cause" as if she was doing it for nothing..... when in reality she is just a hired gun, and the organisation could have been BP for all she cared..

Mud slinging IMO. Got anything to back it up?

Don't think you can say that is the case, she has worked with the organisation on an International level afterwards and she started out as a special needs teacher according to her website:

Most recently Davis has held the role of Interim Chief Marketing and Development Officer at Special Olympics International, overseeing development in more than 180 countries, and is President and Managing Director of Special Olympics Europe/Eurasia with responsibility for development in 58 countries.

From the start of my working life as a special needs teacher in Ballymun, I have worked to promote fairness, equality, respect and inclusion for some of the most marginalised people in Irish society.

It is obviously something she actually cares about. Not going to vote for her but I find it a bit distasteful to throw out such a comment about her work with the Special Olympics like that.

djpbarry

RATM wrote: »

CEO positions in a charity can pay huge wages, I think the Irish Cancer Society pay about 150k+ for their CEO.

€150k does not strike me as a “huge” wage for a CEO, but I’d agree with the general argument in the rest of your post.

Seth Brundle

Dirk Gently wrote: »

This is the thing I'm unclear on. What qualifies someone for a place on a quango. Is it a case of an open application and the best person gets the job or is it a political appointment, a favour for a friend/sympathiser etc. A lot of back benchers for example get put on various boards simply to keep them sweet, to look after their own or to make up for missing out on cabinet positions etc.

Do you not recall your former Taoiseach telling the following: "I might have appointed somebody but I appointed them because they were friends, not because of anything they had given me."

Dirk Gently

kbannon wrote: »

Do you not recall your former Taoiseach telling the following: "I might have appointed somebody but I appointed them because they were friends, not because of anything they had given me."

Thats why I'm asking. I'm asking what was the application process she went through (if any) to get on the boards. She seems to have been on an lot of boards (24 I think she said) which leads me to believe they were gifted to her as opposed to her successfully applying for and earning the positions in a fair and open way, especially considering how varied and unrelated the boards were to each other.

ei.sdraob

djpbarry wrote: »

€150k does not strike me as a “huge” wage for a CEO, but I’d agree with the general argument in the rest of your post.

Does 120+K in pensions strike you as "huge" for such a loud self proclaimed socialist such as Michael D? whatever happened to the "sharing is caring" Barney Marxist ideology of his...

djpbarry

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Does 120+K in pensions strike you as "huge" for such a loud self proclaimed socialist such as Michael D?

What?

-Chris-

Link?

ei.sdraob

djpbarry wrote: »

What?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/1004/1224305205587.html

Michael D Higgins has a pension income of just under €110,000, including a €90,000 Dáil and ministerial pension and a university teaching pension of just under €20,000.

The amounts are a few K larger (~117K) if you listen to yesterdays RTE news 16mins in and his answer to the question of his earnings.

Here is someone who never created a job in his life and spend it preaching socialist nonsense, getting to cream the system in meantime,
and now running for presidency where he can get another large paycheck

Kids if you are reading this thread, forget about wanting to be a doctor or entrepreneur or engineer, what you need to become is a socialist loud mouth the pay is much better :rolleyes:

djpbarry

ei.sdraob wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/1004/1224305205587.html

The amounts are a few K larger if you listen to yesterdays RTE news and his answer to the question of his earnings.

Here is someone who never created a job in his life and spend it preaching socialist nonsense, getting to cream the system in meantime,
and now running for presidency where he can get another large paycheck

Kids if you are reading this thread, forget about wanting to be a doctor or entrepreneur or engineer, what you need to become is a socialist loud mouth the pay is much better :rolleyes:

Eh, ok.

What has this rant got to do with my original point?

ei.sdraob

djpbarry wrote: »

Eh, ok.

What has this rant got to do with my original point?

Ill start a thread of its own

JustinDee

canhascheez wrote: »

Might not be the correct forum. Mods bounce if off somewhere if you like.

So with this latest Mary Davis 'p60 story', she is paid roughly €160,000/year for her role in 'Special Olympics'. Is this the norm for somebody working for a charity?

Do other charities pay as much, or more?

Its an international organisation and not taxpayer money surely? Therefore none of our chuffing business?
Yes, for someone as the helm of such a large charity, it would be the 'norm'.

Who cares what people earn privately though? Thats their own affair and has no bearing on any aspiring Presidential traits.

This campaign is even more disgusting than usual. The mudslinging is embarrassing.
Last night's effort on TV3 was utterly shameful, with a pro-agendaic, contrarian hedonist 'chairing'. It wasn't even a debate. It was the Vincent Browne Show, complete with a series of props and slanted questions.

This f***ing country sometimes . . .

ei.sdraob

JustinDee wrote: »

Who cares what people earn privately though? Thats their own affair and has no bearing on any aspiring Presidential traits.

If these earnings (in any shape or form) came from the public purse then yes we should care.

We have institutional politicians milking the system (from several tits) for everything it got

JustinDee

ei.sdraob wrote: »

If these earnings (in any shape or form) came from the public purse then yes we should care

They didn't though. Thats my point.
All the melodrama amounts to zip all except badgering opponents.

djpbarry

ei.sdraob wrote: »

We have institutional politicians milking the system (from several tits) for everything it got

Acting as managing director of Special Olympics Europe seems to me like an extremely inefficient means of “milking the system”?

ei.sdraob

djpbarry wrote: »

Acting as managing director of Special Olympics Europe seems to me like an extremely inefficient means of “milking the system”?

I was talking about Higgins

walshb

Davis, another damp squib!

sunshinediver

Dirk Gently wrote: »

This is the thing I'm unclear on. What qualifies someone for a place on a quango. Is it a case of an open application and the best person gets the job or is it a political appointment, a favour for a friend/sympathiser etc. A lot of back benchers for example get put on various boards simply to keep them sweet, to look after their own or to make up for missing out on cabinet positions etc.

Does it differ from quango to quango, are some awarded by nod and wink by a politician and some more high profile ones vetted or at least appear to be vetted? She seems to have made a bit of a career out of being appointed to boards. I'd be more interested in who appointed her and why and if the positions where open to competition from other applicants rather than the simple fact that she sat on so many of them.

I was chatting to my nephew recently who's studying to become a PE teacher, He reckons that within 5 years he can be on the board of the DAA

goose2005

djpbarry wrote: »

€150k does not strike me as a “huge” wage for a CEO, but I’d agree with the general argument in the rest of your post.

Only because CEO wages have exploded since the 80's. Army rangers, surgeons, physics professors, presidents all accept such salaries.

RATM wrote: »

CEO positions in a charity can pay huge wages, I think the Irish Cancer Society pay about 150k+ for their CEO.

It's not unusual in that sector, they are after all running multi-million euro enterprises. If they weren't in the charity sector arguably they'd be getting even more in a private business.

It seems bizarre in a charity but a good CEO can be the difference between raising €2m a year and €10m a year; they really can prove their worth in economic terms.

I think I remember reading that Melanie Verword increased UNICEF's funding by over 400% during her three years there- impressive stats indeed.

Perhaps true for some, but Angela Kerins gets 400k from Rehab because <snip>, it has nothing to do with how much money they could make

djpbarry wrote: »

Acting as managing director of Special Olympics Europe seems to me like an extremely inefficient means of “milking the system”?

However, her masterminding of the Special Olympics was portrayed as a great act of altruism, when she was just organising a bit event as part of her salaried job, no different than if she organised business conferences.

thebman

goose2005 wrote: »

However, her masterminding of the Special Olympics was portrayed as a great act of altruism, when she was just organising a bit event as part of her salaried job, no different than if she organised business conferences.

Did she though? I don't think she acted like she wasn't getting paid for it. She just said she was in charge of it, I think that someone would get paid for such an effort was fairly obvious.

I'd more have issue with her not thanking so far the many volunteers that contributed to make her organising of it a success.

djpbarry

goose2005 wrote: »

However, her masterminding of the Special Olympics was portrayed as a great act of altruism, when she was just organising a bit event as part of her salaried job, no different than if she organised business conferences.

You're comparing the Special Olympics to a business conference? Seriously?

WalterMitty

Seeing as she is so motivated by chairty and doing good, maybe see can disclose how much of her huge income over past decade she gave to charities? She strikes me as someone in the charity "business" for her own self enrichment/promotion. Mefeiner.

irishh_bob

she has that small town doctors wife vibe off her

djpbarry

WalterMitty wrote: »

Seeing as she is so motivated by chairty and doing good, maybe see can disclose how much of her huge income over past decade she gave to charities?

Nobody's business but her own.

WalterMitty wrote: »

She strikes me as someone in the charity "business" for her own self enrichment/promotion.

Who cares?

bijapos

I just listened to an interview with her by Philip Boucher-Hayes on Drivetime on RTE Radio 1. He asked her a number of questions on her role in ICS, she came out badly out of it, talking over him and so on.

She sounds a bit bad tempered tbh, as she has in a couple of interviews as if she is not used to being questioned or critiscised.

irishdude11

Haha, PBH just roasted her on Drivetime. All I ever hear from Mary Davis is "special 'lympics......blah blah blah....special 'lympics...blah blah blah"

Callan57

irishdude11 wrote: »

Haha, PBH just roasted her on Drivetime. All I ever hear from Mary Davis is "special 'lympics......blah blah blah....special 'lympics...blah blah blah"

That was a superb interview .... he really got under her skin. As already said she clearly is not used to anyone questioning her and does not appreciate it. Sounded as though she flounced off in a huff.
Fair play to PBH he stuck to his guns and demanded answers.

Gergiev

goose2005 wrote: »

However, her masterminding of the Special Olympics was portrayed as a great act of altruism, when she was just organising a bit event as part of her salaried job, no different than if she organised business conferences.

Her wages are nothing excessive for the kind of work she is doing as I understand it and she has responsibilty for all of Europe and Eurasia.

However...she has been emphasising the Special Olympics and the spirit of volunteerism at every turn in her campaign and how she wishes to incorporate this into her Presidency were she to win.

So I think it might come as a bit of shock to a lot of people who don't really follow these things too closely and may have just assumed that her own role is of a voluntary nature.

WalterMitty

Gergiev wrote: »

Her wages are nothing excessive for the kind of work she is doing as I understand it and she has responsibilty for all of Europe and Eurasia.

However...she has been emphasising the Special Olympics and the spirit of volunteerism at every turn in her campaign and how she wishes to incorporate this into her Presidency were she to win.

So I think it might come as a bit of shock to a lot of people who don't really follow these things too closely and may have just assumed that her own role is of a voluntary nature.

Yeah , exactly, she goes on like she gave up any career or income to selflessly work for next to nothing for handicapped children. The individual volunteers who are involved with special olympics and work for nothing are infinetely more selfless than this quango queen.

gizmo555

Classic interview - well done that man!

The context he set out in the intro was equally important - Davis insists that 100% mortgages were generally considered reasonable within the banking industry at the time the ICS board started providing them.

They were in fact hugely controversial at the time they were introduced by First Active and as Boucher Hayes points out, the CEO of AIB said at the time he'd rather lose market share than give 100% loans to 1st time buyers, which First Active specifically targeted with their offering.

Despite this, ICS followed First Active's lead a bare month after they started the ball rolling. Davis shares responsibility for this decision.

trishasaffron

Have to agree that she's trying to airbrush her backgound (just like her photos?). I almost feel a bit sorry for her in that I think she got where she is by being boosted by others with special interests and kinda lost perspective.

FWIW - I first heard of her sometime in late 1990s when a friend was approached by a contact (who was well got with FF and himself on many boards courtesy of his party cronies) to see if he'd be interested in working with Davis on the SO. Having met Davis the friend declined the offer as Davis didn't impress him at all. M y firend would have been an amazing organiser so presumably she got similar people involved - and perhaps that's to her credit. Mind you Davis is the only name I've heard associated witht he project's success though I suspect there are those who put themselves out there for a lot less reward.

IMHO she's a party hack and that is what has got her where she is. Misguided naivety on her part to accept the nomination and the result will ruin her.

Funny she reminds me of Adi Roche - looks a bit like her too.

Callan57

Her interview with PBH proved IMO that she has absolutely no relevant banking or financial skills or experience to bring to a banking board. She was on the board simply because she was well got & it was a way of giving her a nice little financial bonus!

As an example of how board members were/are selected it goes a long way to explaining what went wrong with the banking sector in this country .. boads stuffed with unqualified & unskilled & anything but independent stooges.

gizmo555

trishasaffron wrote: »

Have to agree that she's trying to airbrush her backgound (just like her photos?)

Why the question mark? Compare and contrast these two pics from her website, the first with the "Oil of Ulay" look from the poster . . .

Seth Brundle

Just wondering, what educational background has MD?

Her website claims the following:

A native of Kiltimagh, Co. Mayo, Mary Davis studied as a Physical Education teacher at Trinity College, Leeds, and won a scholarship to complete her studies at the University of Alberta, Canada.

(from http://www.marydavis.ie/mary-davis/about-mary/)

Did she actually complete her studies in Canada or is she pulling a Bertie?

YourNameForMe

Its a pretty standard amount for an organisation of that size but if she is going around acting like she did it voluntarily then I'd have a problem with that. I can remember a friend giving out that the CEO of Concern gets a salary of 50000 Euro, I was defending it as an incredibly small salary for such a large organisation but it turns out he gets closer to 140000.

A lot of people argue that you need to pay huge salaries even in charity organisations to attract great people but I think that great people are naturally attracted to fulfilling positions which give them the opportunity to make a meaningful difference in the world. I know not everyone out there is willing to sacrifice for the sake of principle but I'm sure there are a lot of people who are.

gizmo555

On last night's presidential election debate, Davis again insisted ICS Building Society was "not a leader" in providing 100% mortgages.

The facts are that on 12 July 2005 First Active became the first lender to offer 100% mortgages.

After other lenders quickly followed suit, Junior Minister Noel Ahern made this comment on behalf of the government on 25 July 2005:

The Government has criticised "irresponsible" new lending schemes that offer 100% mortgages to first-time buyers.

First Active and Ulster Bank announced the introduction of such products last week, while Permanent TSB is set to create a similar package.

Speaking about the matter this morning, Junior Minister Noel Ahern, who has responsibility for housing, said he feared the move could reverse the recent slowdown in house price increases.

"That is bordering on the irresponsible and I'm very concerned that this trend might start where financial institutions are basically being reckless in handing out money," he said.

ICS, having had time to reflect on this, introduced their 100% mortgage product on 4 August 2005, less than four weeks after First Active's announcement.

If they weren't leaders, they were hot on the leaders' heels, in spite of this trenchant criticism by the government . . . the ICS and Davis are as responsible for what followed as any other 100% mortgage lender.

gizmo555

On RTE yesterday (Oct 18):

Independent Presidential candidate Mary Davis has said she accepts "collective responsibility" for decisions made in relation to mortgage lending while she was on the board of the ICS building society.

Speaking on Six-One, Ms Davis said if she had known then what she knows now, there would not have been 100% mortgages.

What more did she need to know beyond what Noel Ahern stated 11 days before she and the rest of the ICS board decided to join the 100% mortgage feeding frenzy?

gizmo555 wrote: »

The Government has criticised "irresponsible" new lending schemes that offer 100% mortgages to first-time buyers.

First Active and Ulster Bank announced the introduction of such products last week, while Permanent TSB is set to create a similar package.

Speaking about the matter this morning, Junior Minister Noel Ahern, who has responsibility for housing, said he feared the move could reverse the recent slowdown in house price increases.

"That is bordering on the irresponsible and I'm very concerned that this trend might start where financial institutions are basically being reckless in handing out money," he said.