Talk:Compensation
Rob Brooks Input
I understand the motivation for this. I have never seen anything like this and suspect it is not needed. Our labour pool is our membership. Some of our labour pool will work for us. At this time, all our labour is voluntary. Volunteers work not for compensation - whether real or fictional. They work because they a) have the time available, and b) believe in the cause / objective. As the party grows, if may increase its ability to raise funds and it would then be in a position to pay for labour. This would both allow us to compete for labour from outside our membership and also to compete for time from within our membership. I strongly recommend that this be avoided except for very surgical / high profile exceptions - for as long as possible. As soon as people begin getting paid - three things begin to happen a) resentment (some people get paid, some don't) and b) demoralization of volunteers (unpaid), and c) turf protection by paid staff. The turf protection is the worst of these. What happens is staff controls access to getting stuff done and effectively block volunteers from helping - in order to keep the work for themselves - and make it appear that they are needed and indispensable. Having the Leader receive compensation would not cause any problems. Having an Executive Director paid would not cause any problems. Paying these two key roles does widen the candidate pool. Paying for certain things very selectively on an ad hoc basis would not cause any problems. While it may seem hard to operate a 100% volunteer organization, I suggest that it is even harder to run a mixed paid / volunteer organization - and introducing pay for work will likely reduce the total labour output from our membership. As soon as you attach a monetary value to labour - you introduce a whole bunch of new consequences, such as measuring performance, organizing the labour into some structure, forced unemployment, etc.
What is typically done - is some form of "volunteer appreciation". This can be a nice mention in the newsletter, a pin, etc. Usually something of very nominal value so the resentment factor doesn't creep in. You can have two levels if you like. Volunteer, and volunteer with special mention. It is "nice" to be recognized in this way.
From my own perspective - I work for the party - not for any external recognition - either financial or emotional. I do what I do because I have the time and I believe in what we are doing together. I often think about why I choose to do this specific work - and the only answer I can come up with is to stroke my own ego - for my own selfish benefit. I don't do it so my wife thinks more highly of me, or my kids think more highly of me, or my friends think more highly of me. I do it so I can think more highly of myself - by seeing accomplishments achieved that I have contributed to that I can claim some part of. I like the challenge and I like to prove to myself that I can do something that others either won't or can't. It is somewhat related to competitiveness. Perhaps this is innate human nature - and I am just acting out on basic survival instincts. Beats me.
At present - nobody has to compete to get the work - everyone can get all the work they want. If real compensation is introduced, although it may appear that it will widen the labour pool available, it will also create a barrier to people being able to work for the party. I believe that any compensation scheme with an actual tangible reward would actually lower my personal ability to contribute and as such I would not be in favour of it - for the selfish reasons that I described.
Jeff McLarty's Reply 3/22/2013
This is all fantastic insight.jmclar984