Daffodil Day

Poor Uncle Tom · 21-02-2016 01:10PM #1

Irish Cancer Society - Daffodil Day is coming up on 11th March. a group of collectors in Wexford have pulled out on principle this year, based on the €7.5m payroll bill for 2014, including €145k for CEO John McCormack and €70k salaries for at least 10 other people in the ICS.

Source: http://www.wexfordecho.ie/2016/02/10/charity-salaries-end-daffodil-day/

I believe the volunteers on the ground selling the Daffodils and out with the collection buckets are every bit as important, if not more-so, than the fat management creaming off the hard earned collection monies to line their own bank accounts.

This year, I for one will not be contributing to the coffers of over paid paper pushers.

Notwithstanding the news in January that Mr. McCormack was to take a €10k reduction in pay given his decision to remove it's hardship fund for families of children with cancer and the subsequent, 360 on this decision when it hit the headlines.

Source: http://www.thejournal.ie/cancer-ceo-pay-cut-2550092-Jan2016/

If he can take a €10k reduction in pay at the drop of a hat, I dont see why someone else can't actually do his job for €75k a year.

The waste of money here is disgusting.....

Valetta · 21-02-2016 01:13PM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Irish Cancer Society - Daffodil Day is coming up on 11th March. a group of collectors in Wexford have pulled out on principle this year, based on the €7.5m payroll bill for 2014, including €145k for CEO John McCormack and €70k salaries for at least 10 other people in the ICS.

Source: http://www.wexfordecho.ie/2016/02/10/charity-salaries-end-daffodil-day/

I believe the volunteers on the ground selling the Daffodils and out with the collection buckets are every bit as important, if not more-so, than the fat management creaming off the hard earned collection monies to line their own bank accounts.

This year, I for one will not be contributing to the coffers of over paid paper pushers.

Notwithstanding the news in January that Mr. McCormack was to take a €10k reduction in pay given his decision to remove it's hardship fund for families of children with cancer and the subsequent, 360 on this decision when it hit the headlines.

Source: http://www.thejournal.ie/cancer-ceo-pay-cut-2550092-Jan2016/

If he can take a €10k reduction in pay at the drop of a hat, I dont see why someone else can't actually do his job for €75k a year.

The waste of money here is disgusting.....

So the charity suffers because you throw a hissy fit.

How did your application for CEO go?

Poor Uncle Tom · 21-02-2016 01:22PM

Valetta wrote: »

So the charity suffers because you throw a hissy fit.

How did your application for CEO go?

I'm not qualified, but I'm sure there are lots out there who actually are and would be delighted of the opportunity to invest their time for a good pay packet, not an obscene amount of almost €3k per week.

The scenario here is like a cancer itself, the affected area should be cut out, as it is hemorrhaging vital resources from the organisation and will, in the long run, lead to the destruction of the whole organisation if it is not tackled now.

I believe the news today should be enough of a warning that this is already happening....

osarusan · 21-02-2016 01:26PM

What's his performance as CEO like?

I have no idea, but depending on that, his salary might be a bargain for the charity.

Chucktastic · 21-02-2016 01:27PM

Valetta wrote: »

So the charity suffers because you throw a hissy fit.

How did your application for CEO go?

And the charity suffers even more if he doesn't.
They do great work but 145k is nuts. The oncologists themselves probably get around that.

KERSPLAT! · 21-02-2016 01:31PM

If they're earning their money then fair enough. No point getting someone in on the cheap who isn't successful or as successful where by the charity ends up actually losing out.

Who knows, maybe the CEO is already doing this on the cheap and could be earning double elsewhere...

I haven't read into this at all, the above is just my ramblings

Poor Uncle Tom · 21-02-2016 11:44PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

If they're earning their money.....

As the CEO of a charity, how can you earn that kind of money?, €3k a week, if you took your job seriously how could you sleep at night?

Spanish Eyes · 21-02-2016 11:51PM

This kind of support for cancer should not ever have to rely on charitable donations. EVER.

That is the problem right there. Charities providing essential supports. And the scandals surrounding many charities too.

Should be a given through our high taxes. I just don't understand it TBH.

Why is it that such essential supports need to be funded by donations?

Ah here, I'm baffled.

Have lost my Dad and my youngest sister to cancer. Never was offered anything until we asked.

Sorry, am probably still in grieving mode and angry.

Poor Uncle Tom · 21-02-2016 11:56PM

I lost my dad and my brother, so I do understand what your posting, it is a disgrace......

biko · 22-02-2016 12:00AM

I suppose his salary pays for him to do stuff like this

In 1991, he founded the Irish Charities Tax Reform Group which has lobbied successfully for the introduction of tax relief on corporate donations.

Irish Cancer Society CEO takes €10,000 salary cut in wake of funding controversy SRC

Bless his little heart

Is John McCormack as valuable as two or three regular people? My answer is no.

KERSPLAT! · 22-02-2016 12:01AM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

As the CEO of a charity, how can you earn that kind of money?, €3k a week, if you took your job seriously how could you sleep at night?

As I said, he could be worth it. What's the alternative? You get what you pay for, IMO. You could try get someone in for €50k or whatever number you want to dish out and they could end up losing a lot more than the €100k you saved in a wage.

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:01AM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

I lost my dad and my brother, so I do understand what your posting, it is a disgrace......

So sorry for your losses. (I know that is easy to say but I do know what it's like). Awful stuff altogether.

Disgrace is right, that end of life care through the cancer support services must be funded by daffodils bought by randomers on the streets.

I am a bit upset now. Sorry about that.

KERSPLAT! · 22-02-2016 12:03AM

biko wrote: »

I suppose his salary pays for him to do stuff like this

Bless his little heart

He works for a charity, he shouldn't get any wage at all ffs!!!

Can't win with some people.

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:05AM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

He works for a charity, he shouldn't get any wage at all ffs!!!

Can't win with some people.

Should Charities be involved at all in this critical care need for many? That would be my question anyway.

Poor Uncle Tom · 22-02-2016 12:07AM

biko wrote: »

I suppose his salary pays for him to do stuff like this

Bless his little heart

Does that justify trying to remove the €1,000 per family grant for families who have a child with cancer, sometimes goes to just cover parking so you get to see your kid?

I know it isn't what you mean it is just mind boggling how this goes on with such high salaries and so many sick kids....

osarusan · 22-02-2016 12:09AM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

As the CEO of a charity, how can you earn that kind of money?, €3k a week, if you took your job seriously how could you sleep at night?

As already pointed out, maybe he turned down the chance to earn double that elsewhere.

You can't just look at the salary and say it's too much. If the guy get paid that and has the knowledge and connections that bring in 5 million a year in funding more than anybody else, is it still a waste of money?

Would you rather pay somebody half that salary and have them only be able to bring in 75% of what he might be bringing in?

Again - I have no idea what this guy's performance is like, but you can't just look at the salary and say it's all wrong.

KERSPLAT! · 22-02-2016 12:09AM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Does that justify trying to remove the €1,000 per family grant for families who have a child with cancer, sometimes goes to just cover parking so you get to see your kid?

I know it isn't what you mean it is just mind boggling how this goes on with such high salaries and so many sick kids....

I understand there are cuts but again. I would assume this CEO is making many multiples of his salary for the charity. If you want to higher someone cheaper, expect lesser results and more cuts, IMO.

Poor Uncle Tom · 22-02-2016 12:11AM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I would assume this CEO is making many multiples of his salary for the charity.

My friend, that is some assumption......

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:13AM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I understand there are cuts but again. I would assume this CEO is making many multiples of his salary for the charity. If you want to higher someone cheaper, expect lesser results and more cuts, IMO.

Again, why should a charity be required for such necessary supports for cancer sufferers?

I know you cannot answer that really, but honestly, it is a fekin joke when you think it through.

Ice Maiden · 22-02-2016 12:15AM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

He works for a charity, he shouldn't get any wage at all ffs!!!

Can't win with some people.

I don't think anyone is saying he should not be paid anything, just that 145k seems perplexingly high for the CEO of a charity, rather than of a business. Where is this revenue stream coming from? A chunk off that 145k would still be a decent salary.
There is a huge gap between 145k and a poor salary.

It's all the more bizarre when there are volunteers doing collecting also, and as someone pointed out, when it's for a life-threatening illness for which there is a healthcare system and private health insurance also.

Stheno · 22-02-2016 12:18AM

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying he should not be paid anything, just that 145k seems perplexingly high for the CEO of a charity, rather than of a business. Where is this revenue stream coming from? A chunk off that 145k would still be a decent salary.
There is a huge gap between 145k and a poor salary.

It's all the more bizarre when there are volunteers doing collecting also, and as someone pointed out, when it's for a life-threatening illness for which there is a healthcare system and private health insurance also.

145k as a salary for a CEO is fairly low compared to private industry.

The man is the head of an organisation who ensured that facilities were in place that meant my father died in an hospice suite in a hospital, rather than in a public ward.

He is the head of an organisation who provide huge additional supports to families affected by cancer across the country that the HSE do not.

He is the head of an organisation who contribute to cancer reseaerch also.

He has a lot on his plate, I cannot see the issue with his salary, and I for one will forever be grateful for the work done by the ICS to the victims of cancer and their families.

KERSPLAT! · 22-02-2016 12:19AM

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

My friend, that is some assumption......

Well he's not there to change the flipping bog roll. He's there to run the charity and to ensure they get in the most amount of money possible and put that money to good use.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Again, why should a charity be required for such necessary supports for cancer sufferers?

I know you cannot answer that really, but honestly, it is a fekin joke when you think it through.

But sure thats nothing to do with the topic and as you said, I can't answer that.

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying he should not be paid anything, just that 145k seems perplexingly high for the CEO of a charity, rather than of a business. Where is this revenue stream coming from? A chunk off that 145k would still be a decent salary.
There is a huge gap between 145k and a poor salary.

It's all the more bizarre when there are volunteers doing collecting also, and as someone pointed out, when it's for a life-threatening illness for which there is a healthcare system and private health insurance also.

For all we know this lad could be making multiples of this working elsewhere. If he is doing his job and there is no one else that can do it as good for ;ess money, then he's worth it.

Personnel and services have to be paid, a charity is no different.

KERSPLAT! · 22-02-2016 12:21AM

The more I think of it the more I believe that €145k is pretty low on the scale for CEOs of such a large organisation.

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:23AM

Stheno wrote: »

145k as a salary for a CEO is fairly low compared to private industry.

The man is the head of an organisation who ensured that facilities were in place that meant my father died in an hospice suite in a hospital, rather than in a public ward.

He is the head of an organisation who provide huge additional supports to families affected by cancer across the country that the HSE do not.

He is the head of an organisation who contribute to cancer reseaerch also.

He has a lot on his plate, I cannot see the issue with his salary, and I for one will forever be grateful for the work done by the ICS to the victims of cancer and their families.

I am sorry for the loss of your Dad. I know what that is like.

However, we did not get anything like you did re my own Dad. Sadly, it was a case of "he is in a private room, there are palliative care staff, and that was that. Nothing came from the Daffodils.

When my sister died she was in a hospice outside of Dublin. There was no alternative, her OH was ill too with another illness and the care needs were critical at the time. But if things had been different, it would have been each to their own I reckon.

Not saying your family did not deserve care for your father at all, please don't get me wrong, but it is, in my experience hit and miss.

Stheno · 22-02-2016 12:27AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I am sorry for the loss of your Dad. I know what that is like.

However, we did not get anything like you did re my own Dad. Sadly, it was a case of "he is in a private room, there are palliative care staff, and that was that. Nothing came from the Daffodils.

When my sister died she was in a hospice outside of Dublin. There was no alternative, her OH was ill too with another illness and the care needs were critical at the time. But if things had been different, it would have been each to their own I reckon.

Not saying your family did not deserve care for your father at all, please don't get me wrong, but it is, in my experience hit and miss.

Yes it is hit and miss, but where the supports are there, they are generally not HSE provided, but funded by the ICS.

The week my father died, the HSE were still talking about sending him home to palliative care.

The CEO of the ICS imo deserves the salary he is on, it's a huge organisation that does a massive amount of good. When my OHs mother was diagnosed with cancer also, it was all ICS support that was available supporting the HSE.

How much is the head of the HSE paid?

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:27AM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

The more I think of it the more I believe that €145k is pretty low on the scale for CEOs of such a large organisation.

I respectfully think you need to justify that statement. Thank you.

Cancer care should not need Charitable donations that fund the ancillary charges for salaries etc. IMV.

HSE where are you?

Charities are toxic now. For lots of reasons.

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:30AM

Stheno wrote: »

Yes it is hit and miss, but where the supports are there, they are generally not HSE provided, but funded by the ICS.

The week my father died, the HSE were still talking about sending him home to palliative care.

The CEO of the ICS imo deserves the salary he is on, it's a huge organisation that does a massive amount of good. When my OHs mother was diagnosed with cancer also, it was all ICS support that was available supporting the HSE.

How much is the head of the HSE paid?

But that is exactly my point. The HSE should be providing these services without question, and ICS should not have a role at all.

I just do not understand why they do, and people (hit and miss) may if they are lucky benefit from the charitable Daffodils.

That is not right. Equal treatment is the best treatment. Charities are toxic.

Arbiter of Good Taste · 22-02-2016 12:30AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I respectfully think you need to justify that statement. Thank you.

Cancer care should not need Charitable donations that fund the ancillary charges for salaries etc. IMV.

HSE where are you?

Charities are toxic now. For lots of reasons.

Just open the annual report of any plc and see what the CEO makes. It's not that difficult

Stheno · 22-02-2016 12:33AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But that is exactly my point. The HSE should be providing these services without question, and ICS should not have a role at all.

I just do not understand why they do, and people (hit and miss) may if they are lucky benefit from the charitable Daffodils.

That is not right. Equal treatment is the best treatment. Charities are toxic.

Well that's the opposite of my point, in that my father benefited from the work of the ICS as did my partners mother and his father in terms of support services.

I certainly don't think the ICS is toxic, they are filling a gap that is there, and providing real comfort to people.

The fact the HSE don't do so in this case is the real issue, and the ICS funds can only stretch so far.

Spanish Eyes · 22-02-2016 12:34AM

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Just open the annual report of any plc and see what the CEO makes. It's not that difficult

Eh, not sure what point you are making there.

I don't have to make charitable donations to a plc do I ?

osarusan · 22-02-2016 12:35AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But that is exactly my point. The HSE should be providing these services without question, and ICS should not have a role at all.

I just do not understand why they do, and people (hit and miss) may if they are lucky benefit from the charitable Daffodils.

That is not right. Equal treatment is the best treatment. Charities are toxic.

Your issue is with the HSE more than it is with the Irish Cancer Society.

Regardless of whether the very existence of the ICS is evidence of HSE failure or not, they do exist.

The salary of the CEO should only be judged on the performance of the charity, not on what the HSE does or doesn't do.

Daffodil Day

Comments