Oxfam sex abuse criticism disproportionate, chief executive says

[Scott]

Continuing to lie about the admin costs, will earn a suspension.  

 

In many countries, the ability to be classified as a charity would be revoked if the admin costs are too high.  

 

I have also worked 'in the field' and with and for numerous charitable organizations.   The pay for many was low to adequate.   I never met a 'highly paid' NGO worker in the field.  

 

There are a lot of costs to putting people in the field, including transport and relocation costs.   Even those are generally pretty reasonable.

 

Many of the government agencies who send people are paid very well, have the nicest and most secure housing.   They are civil servants, not NGO or charity works or contract employees.

 

 

[Samui Bodoh]

8 hours ago, ravip said:

"If I were working in a disaster area where I might be killed by bad people or fall sick I'd absolutely expect to be paid, or get some fine compensation."

 

I have nothing against it - my point is that almost 80% or over is spent as "Admin costs" by these charitable organisations - and at times, they fiercely compete against each other to "win" a disaster area for themselves!

So eager are they to help the poor and the needy.

 

  

Right-wing, idiotic cocktail party gossip.

 

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

[ravip]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Right-wing, idiotic cocktail party gossip.

 

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty obvious of someone's ignorance OR the refusal to except the truth!

Edit

Check out the salaries & perks of the Big & Powerful NGO's.

[dick dasterdly]

6 hours ago, ravip said:

Pretty obvious of someone's ignorance OR the refusal to except the truth!

Edit

Check out the salaries & perks of the Big & Powerful NGO's.

Quite.  Nobody's 'complaining about the unpaid or low-paid staff - only the ridiculously high salaries for those 'at the top of the chain'.

[dick dasterdly]

Those who donate also need to know the proportion that is spent on admin., and the proportion spent 'on the ground'.

[Gecko123]

Because Oxfam was operating as a charitable organization in a foreign country, the employees clearly abused their position of trust by exploiting the local population in a manner in flagrant violation of the organization's mission. The Oxfam employees should unquestionably be held to a much higher ethical standard of conduct both on and off the job than an ordinary person might be. That their salaries were paid by donations from third parties relying on them to carry out their stated mission only raises the ethical bar further. Oxfam, indeed Oxfam Haiti, is a charity I have donated to in the past and I am saddened that its name has been tarnished in this way. Anyone who turned a blind eye to this behavior needs to be shown to the door.

 

[MaeJoMTB]

33 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

 the employees clearly abused their position of trust by exploiting the local population in a manner in flagrant violation of the organization's mission.

I think they went above and beyond the Oxfam mission, by spreading their own money among the local (female) population.

It would have been much worse if they had saved their wages and brought it back home.

[sanemax]

2 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I think they went above and beyond the Oxfam mission, by spreading their own money among the local (female) population.

It would have been much worse if they had saved their wages and brought it back home.

Why would that have been worse ?

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Because Oxfam was operating as a charitable organization in a foreign country, the employees clearly abused their position of trust by exploiting the local population in a manner in flagrant violation of the organization's mission. The Oxfam employees should unquestionably be held to a much higher ethical standard of conduct both on and off the job than an ordinary person might be. That their salaries were paid by donations from third parties relying on them to carry out their stated mission only raises the ethical bar further. Oxfam, indeed Oxfam Haiti, is a charity I have donated to in the past and I am saddened that its name has been tarnished in this way. Anyone who turned a blind eye to this behavior needs to be shown to the door.

 

The workers do their job during "working hours" and afterwards it's their own time to do whatever they want to do. 

The only result of the sort of requirement that you apparently want to place on them would be that less people will be willing to do that job. How does that benefit the victims of disasters?

Far as I know, there is a shortage of saints willing to go help people in disaster areas.

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, sanemax said:

Why would that have been worse ?

Less money for the people that would benefit from some extra cash?

No one is suggesting aid workers should donate their wages to the people, and I doubt many would.

I'm assuming that aid workers actually get paid a wage that they can spend as they wish.

[sanemax]

37 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Less money for the people that would benefit from some extra cash?

No one is suggesting aid workers should donate their wages to the people, and I doubt many would.

I'm assuming that aid workers actually get paid a wage that they can spend as they wish.

The Pattaya sex-pats should form a task force.

Everytime theres a World disaster, they all fly off there to the disaster zone to pay the woman for sex and help that Country recover

[BobBKK]

22 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Because Oxfam was operating as a charitable organization in a foreign country, the employees clearly abused their position of trust by exploiting the local population in a manner in flagrant violation of the organization's mission. The Oxfam employees should unquestionably be held to a much higher ethical standard of conduct both on and off the job than an ordinary person might be. That their salaries were paid by donations from third parties relying on them to carry out their stated mission only raises the ethical bar further. Oxfam, indeed Oxfam Haiti, is a charity I have donated to in the past and I am saddened that its name has been tarnished in this way. Anyone who turned a blind eye to this behavior needs to be shown to the door.

 

 

You are making an ethical judgement. Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. They got laid and paid and what? never happens in Thailand right?  the fact they worked for a charity is irrelevant it was their free time and, as far as I know, the chicks were willing partners in the exchange?  there is nothing worse than the 'outraged from Pimlico' who judge everyone who ever had a bonk, and paid for it, outside of marriage as a 'sinner' to be expunged.   

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

 

You are making an ethical judgement. Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. They got laid and paid and what? never happens in Thailand right?  the fact they worked for a charity is irrelevant it was their free time and, as far as I know, the chicks were willing partners in the exchange?  there is nothing worse than the 'outraged from Pimlico' who judge everyone who ever had a bonk, and paid for it, outside of marriage as a 'sinner' to be expunged.   

The people who collect money and who work for free in their shops to help people from poor Countries and the people who make donations , wouldnt want that money spent on prostitutes .

   Also , theres the probability that they paid  "non prostitutes" for sex , a poor hungry homeless 18 year old girl  "Drop by to my office at 5 PM sweetie , after work and I will take you out for a meal , as long as you have sex with me" kind of thing

[sanemax]

18 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

  there is nothing worse than the 'outraged from Pimlico' who judge everyone who ever had a bonk, and paid for it, outside of marriage as a 'sinner' to be expunged.   

This isnt simply about prostitution , there is the concern that some men went there deliberately to abuse vulnerable Children in the guise of being charity workers 

[Gecko123]

53 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

You are making an ethical judgement. Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. They got laid and paid and what? never happens in Thailand right?  the fact they worked for a charity is irrelevant it was their free time and, as far as I know, the chicks were willing partners in the exchange?  there is nothing worse than the 'outraged from Pimlico' who judge everyone who ever had a bonk, and paid for it, outside of marriage as a 'sinner' to be expunged.   

Thought I explained myself in my earlier post. When you're in a foreign country, and you're there for the purposes of furthering the welfare of the populace, and have been put in a position of trust by your association with that charity and you are representing not only that charity but all the people who donated money to the charity, I don't make an 'on the job - off the job' distinction for behavior. Oxfam probably has operations, if not in Haiti elsewhere in the world, designed to protect orphans and young women from exploitation. If you think it's acceptable to collect a pay check from a charity dedicated to helping these vulnerable groups during the day and exploit them on your off-hours, I think your ethics need a major tune up. My point is, even setting sexual mores aside for a moment, business ethics alone ought to be telling you that's unacceptable behavior.

[MaeJoMTB]

11 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

Oxfam probably has operations, if not in Haiti elsewhere in the world, designed to protect orphans and young women from exploitation.

Oxfam is a famine relief charity, the clue is in the name (OXford comittee for FAMine relief).

Protecting orphans would be 'Save the Children'.

[sanemax]

6 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Oxfam is a famine relief charity, the clue is in the name (OXford comittee for FAMine relief).

They do a lot more than just Famine relief 

[Gecko123]

9 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Oxfam is a famine relief charity, the clue is in the name (OXford comittee for FAMine relief).

Protecting orphans would be 'Save the Children'.

You're splitting hairs. The charity is there for one reason: to help people. Forget about the arguments about whether prostitution ought to be legalized, who is exploiting who, the contribution of the payment for sexual services helping the local economy. Let's say all that was true. You still have an ethical problem because (1) the worker wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the charity; (2) the charity wouldn't be there if they hadn't been entrusted to help out by the local government; (3) using prostitutes on or off the job was contrary to the charity's values and goals; (4) the charity was paying the worker with funds that were donated by donors who would almost certainly disapprove of workers conducting themselves in this manner. The point I'm trying to make is that the worker employed by a charity in a third world country is not only representing himself on his off-hours, he's also representing the charity and the people who funded that charity so what constitutes ethical behavior isn't just an individual decision bcause that behavior reflects on the charity and the donors as well. Ethics 101 in my book.

[Denim]

There is a sad moral to this story since human beings can't rise above being human beings.

 

 

[MaeJoMTB]

7 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

(3) using prostitutes on or off the job was contrary to the charity's values and goals; 

I'm not sure Oxfam has ever declared that.

As far as I can see Oxfams stated values and goals are to feed the  hungry as fast as possible.

And if they employed me to do that, and I was good at that job, what I did in my down time would be irrelevant.

I guess a foreign aid charity COULD forbid all staff from sex with locals as a part of their employment contract.

But currently they don't, and there's a lot of white female charity workers having sex with local men, and everyone's OK with that. 

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, MaeJoMTB said:

 

But currently they don't, and there's a lot of white female charity workers having sex with local men, and everyone's OK with that. 

Where is this happening ?

Is it a fact or did you just make that up ?

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

And if they employed me to do that, and I was good at that job, what I did in my down time would be irrelevant.

I guess a foreign aid charity COULD forbid all staff from sex with locals as a part of their employment contract.

But currently they don't, 

Its quite common these days that when people sign job contracts , that they agree not to bring their Company into dispute . That includes when they arent actually at work as well .

   Although you regard prostitution as being normal relationships , there are many people who feel that prostitution is immoral  and unacceptable .

   There are sill people who feel that relationships should be about love, rather than money

[MaeJoMTB]

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

   There are sill people who feel that relationships should be about love, rather than money

Only white people regard prostitution as abnormal, that's about 15% of the world population.

White people's opinions aren't important any more. The days of Victorian imperialism are over.

 

Relationships are always about money, and have been since the dawn of time.

Homeless, unemployed, poor men just aren't attractive to any women.

[dick dasterdly]

5 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Only white people regard prostitution as abnormal, that's about 15% of the world population.

White people's opinions aren't important any more. The days of Victorian imperialism are over.

 

Relationships are always about money, and have been since the dawn of time.

Homeless, unemployed, poor men just aren't attractive to any women.

Apart, of course -  by similarly homeless, unemployed women.

 

I'm sure there are examples of men getting involved with homeless, unemployed women in our home countries - but they are still the exception rather than the 'norm.'.

[sanemax]

13 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Only white people regard prostitution as abnormal, that's about 15% of the world population.

Its a class thing, rather than a racial thing .

Lower class people (of all races) tend to find prostitution acceptable .

[ravip]

45 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Only white people regard prostitution as abnormal, that's about 15% of the world population.

White people's opinions aren't important any more. The days of Victorian imperialism are over.

 

Relationships are always about money, and have been since the dawn of time.

Homeless, unemployed, poor men just aren't attractive to any women.

Only white people regard prostitution as abnormal ?

 

On which planet?

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

This isnt simply about prostitution , there is the concern that some men went there deliberately to abuse vulnerable Children in the guise of being charity workers 

But but but, where is the actual proof that any Oxfam worker abused children? If there were any, at all, it would be all over the media, but it's not.

[sanemax]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

But but but, where is the actual proof that any Oxfam worker abused children? If there were any, at all, it would be all over the media, but it's not.

It is in the media, do a websearch

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Gecko123 said:

You're splitting hairs. The charity is there for one reason: to help people. Forget about the arguments about whether prostitution ought to be legalized, who is exploiting who, the contribution of the payment for sexual services helping the local economy. Let's say all that was true. You still have an ethical problem because (1) the worker wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the charity; (2) the charity wouldn't be there if they hadn't been entrusted to help out by the local government; (3) using prostitutes on or off the job was contrary to the charity's values and goals; (4) the charity was paying the worker with funds that were donated by donors who would almost certainly disapprove of workers conducting themselves in this manner. The point I'm trying to make is that the worker employed by a charity in a third world country is not only representing himself on his off-hours, he's also representing the charity and the people who funded that charity so what constitutes ethical behavior isn't just an individual decision bcause that behavior reflects on the charity and the donors as well. Ethics 101 in my book.

the charity was paying the worker with funds that were donated by donors who would almost certainly disapprove of workers conducting themselves in this manner.

I doubt the people that actually go to disaster zones to help people give a monkey's as to the approval or otherwise of donors as what to do with their own money.

 

 

The point I'm trying to make is that the worker employed by a charity in a third world country is not only representing himself on his off-hours, he's also representing the charity and the people who funded that charity so what constitutes ethical behavior isn't just an individual decision bcause that behavior reflects on the charity and the donors as well.

I don't know why charity workers that go to disaster areas do so ( could be adventure, a wish to help, or both ), but I doubt "representing the charity" figures highly in their motivation.

Fact is, charities are not military organisations that can "order" their workers as how to spend their off duty hours. They can send those workers home, or if they committed an actual crime report them to the local authorities, but that is about it.

 

IMO all this hooha may discourage people from becoming aid workers as they don't want either the supervisors or the media shadowing them on the off chance of catching them in some sort of activity some people don't like.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 minutes ago, sanemax said:

It is in the media, do a websearch

The media say a lot of things, some of which turn out to be wrong.

The only "facts" would be how many have been successfully prosecuted.

 

In the interests of fairness, I did a google search and apparently only the Sri Lankan UN were actually involved in child exploitation in Haiti.

By adding +Oxfam, some articles came up, including 

 

It details four dismissals and three resignations in the wake of the allegations, which included using prostitutes on charity property, sexual exploitation of employees, fraud, negligence and nepotism.

Suspicions that some of the sex workers were under-age "cannot be ruled out", the document said.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/internal-oxfam-report-found-suspects-threatened-haiti-abuse-witnesses-11257313

 

Soooo, "suspicions" and  "cannot be ruled out" not actually proving anything....................................