Data Shows Goodwill Means Good Wages At Canadian Charities

First Posted: 07/10/11 02:35 PM ET Updated: 09/09/11 06:12 AM ET

Breast Cancer

THE CANADIAN PRESS -- OTTAWA - Goodwill means good wages for thousands of Canadian charity workers.

An analysis of tax filings by The Canadian Press has found salaries often run well into six figures -- raising questions about how money raised in the name of charity is being spent.

The Canada Revenue Agency keeps a database of all the country's registered charities, which now number around 85,000. Charities must disclose how much their 10 highest-paid workers take home.

There are around a million charity workers in Canada. The agency's database shows more than 6,000 of them earned above $120,000 last year. A few hundred made over $350,000.

Another 12,000 workers made between $80,000 and $120,000. And about 163,000 earned less than that.

It's likely the number of charity workers making six-figure salaries is actually greater since organizations must only disclose their Top 10 earners.

Charities defend the high pay by saying they have to pay top dollar for the brightest talent.

"If you really want those charities to have an impact and make a real difference, you're going to need to bring in the best people to work in that sector," said Marcel Lauziere of Imagine Canada, an advocacy group for Canadian charities.

"It's not only in government and in business. So you will have to pay salaries that are commensurate to that."

The definition of a charity is murky. Not every group that's registered as a charity builds schools in poor parts of the world or raises money to fight diseases.

Many are Canadian hospitals, school boards, universities and colleges. These groups tend to pay top dollar to attract the best talent, which perhaps explains many of the six-figure salaries.

Registered charities with at least 10 people earning $350,000 or more include the La Salle Manor retirement home in Scarborough, Ont., the Regina Qu'Appelle Regional Health Authority, the University of Saskatchewan and Toronto's Mount Sinai Hospital.

There are also many churches and religious or community groups. By registering as charities, these groups can issue tax receipts for donations.

Some spend millions of dollars on salaries.

The Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation paid its 156 full-time workers and 30 part-timers nearly $13 million last year, Canada Revenue Agency records show.

All of the foundation's top earners made more than $120,000 last year -- and three of them made between $200,000 and $249,999.

The foundation also spent about $23 million last year on charitable works, including research grants and scholarships.

Sandra Palmaro, head of the foundation's Ontario branch, said that's the going rate.

"From our perspective, that's basically what the market dictates as the acceptable salary range for employees at that level for our size of organization" she said.

The Sick Kids Foundation, which mainly raises money for the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, paid its staff of 136 full- and part-time employees nearly $12 million last year.

The 10 highest-paid workers at the Sick Kids Foundation all made more than $160,000 -- and five of them made more than $200,000.

The group raised $51 million for the hospital last year, and spent another $1 million on other charitable programs.

Ted Garrard, head of the Sick Kids Foundation, said the group's board of directors sets the top salaries and reviews them every year.

"We are a large and complex organization," Garrard said.

"We want to make sure that we attract qualified people to oversee and manage our various programs."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA

THE CANADIAN PRESS -- OTTAWA - Goodwill means good wages for thousands of Canadian charity workers. An analysis of tax filings by The Canadian Press has found salaries often run well into six figur...
THE CANADIAN PRESS -- OTTAWA - Goodwill means good wages for thousands of Canadian charity workers. An analysis of tax filings by The Canadian Press has found salaries often run well into six figur...
Filed by Lauren Strapagiel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:45 PM on 07/11/2011
Well for every dollar that these people make, a hundred should go to the actual charity for research, if that's even done anymore. The only research studies I hear about lately are for things that don't matter. I.e. Studies show that a new haircut increases your mood. Well thanks!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
12:49 PM on 07/11/2011
I've heard of this kind of thing for years....
The friends these charities have in government will nix any attempt
to look into their operations too closely.
11:20 AM on 07/11/2011
Nice to know that the 1st $12 MILLION that goes to Sick Kids goes DIRECTLY into the private bank accounts of all the employees....!!

Seek out 'grass roots' charities where the $$ actually goes to the people/cause it was intended for....

Stop giving to CORPORATE charities - they obviouisly don't ned the money if they can pay such lavish salaries....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Hey stop doing that
09:53 AM on 07/11/2011
The key here is that there are about 85,000 registered Charities. That amount simply proves that greed and theft has crawled into our society concerning charities. The Salvation Army is always my choice.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
haselcheck
Had enuff...Get active....
08:46 AM on 07/11/2011
I agree with comment on Sally Ann...The Salvation Army is the only Charity that has any credibility...It is the only charity to which I will donate....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Lives
The Venus Project ... look it up
01:10 AM on 07/11/2011
Well thats one reason I don't give to charity. The other is that its useless. Its at best a bandaid on a .50 caliber wound. Until we deal with the underlying problem, which most people don't even think about, the hole is only going to get bigger, and the bandaid smaller.
12:41 AM on 07/11/2011
A pretty good bet is the sally Ann. I think ninety percent of donations go to the cause and not the cost of running the charity. And they are very experienced, very dedicated snd verry honest. They are professionals who work for next to nothing for firemen at a fire, the mentally challenged, the addicts, the children, the homeless and those who are sick or in jail. Go Sally Ann.
01:28 PM on 07/11/2011
I worked at an ad agency back in the lae 80s that had the Salvation Army as a client. a billable client btw.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
logicanada
Blogger, radio co-host, writer, editor, voice-over
07:15 PM on 07/10/2011
. . . which speaks poorly to the amount of actual money going to the needy.
05:53 PM on 07/10/2011
The recent stories on this topic seem intended to foment public anger and tighten purse-strings at a time when many more Canadians are in need of our charitable support. Non-profit organizations DO NOT operate in an alternate universe from for-profit organizations. They're competing for the same talent, and need to be able to offer current and potential high-performing employees competitive incentives to join and stay with their organizations. Yes, the satisfaction derived from working for a good cause is beyond compare- but these workers still have to pay the same rent, taxes, and gas/food prices as the rest of us- so why would we expect them to work for much less? Do the media actually expect educated, knowledgeable workers to take a significant, permanent pay cut because they want to work for a good cause? That seems unfair.
These organizations need to pay for top talent to ensure their success- and they're competing with the private sector, as well as other non-profits for those top people. That drives the price of labour. We should stop pretending that we know how their organizations should be run better than they do. Non-profit is just as complex as any other industry/field, so we shouldn't assume that regular supply/demand labour principles don't apply here. Would we be happier to hear that Canadian non-profits were only employing workers whose lack of experience, education and ability made them cheap labour? That would be a waste.
11:45 AM on 07/11/2011
Ballony....there are huge numbers of 'talented' people out there working in fields that pay virtually nothing, from child-care to nursing to teachers to aid workers etc...

the only 'Talent' these people have is 'convincing' everyone they need to be paid hundreds of thousands of $$ to 'help' those in need...

Just like that great 'socialist' DSK sleeping in $3000 / night hotel rooms so he can 'help' the poor....

Stop beliveing this BS....
04:39 AM on 07/12/2011
You are right; There are a lot of talent out there, but no one is willing to hire. That's just nonsense, with those salaries, 5 people can easily have jobs. There are lots of bright people out there, it's just they need a chance.

Although I think the salaries are ridiculous, I still think we still need charities. Without these charities; where will the most vulnerable turn to.

If you're homeless, forced out of the house by your bank, or by the landlord, where can you turn? If you've been abused, where do you turn? that's why we need charities.

My guess is this article is trying to make the public angry in order for more funding cuts going to the charity sector soon. I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. Some charities that really need the funding don't get the funding, even for a few amount, while others receive a lot. I think people and the government should change their strategies about funding charities. Give it to the charities that really need it!!!!!!!!!!!
05:01 AM on 07/16/2011
JSWats has hit the nail right on the head. Nonprofit management is a unique skill that requires education, training and experience. Most NPOs of any size require at minimum a Master's degree to work at the executive level (at least, the one where I work does and our peer organizations do). Those NPOs that don't hire well-qualified business people to run their offices are far more likely to make costly errors, overlook a dishonest employee who misappropriates resources and the public trust, and mostly importantly, fail to provide high-quality services in support of their missions.

Just like in the private sector, there are organizations that are better run than others, making some wiser investments of charitable dollars than others. But beware of assuming that lower salaries equates to more public service - it may just mean that the organization is cutting corners on things like sound fiscal management, measuring and tracking the actual results it achieves to demonstrate its effectiveness to donors, adherance to HR law, effective training and supervision of employees and volunteers to ensure safety and quality in its activities, etc.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gabriel Oakes
04:00 PM on 07/10/2011
This mostly tells me that volunteering for a charity is maybe something to avoid- if there's paid work- apparently well paid work- to be had with them then why not go for that?
Bianca S
You can't go trick-or-treating. Ever. For a week
02:42 PM on 07/10/2011
I have no problem with a charity worker earning $100,000 if he/she has has has aided in raising millions of dollars through their own efforts. If a charity is struggling to raise funds, and the current organizer is making $60,000, sometimes it's better to invest in a person who has a proven track record even if they demand more. It's all relative to the value they bring to the charity.
I have more of a problem with the allocation of inflated 'administration fees' and shady bookkeeping ledgers.
05:43 PM on 07/10/2011
I have no problem with it either, if it is exactly as you said. If they earn over 100k, then they have to prove that they've personally brought in millions, and not because they are sitting in cushy chairs at the top. This is basically the BS argument that executives and CEOs make in every orgranization, but rarely if ever are their salaries tied to performance. Heck, sometimes the pay is in inverse relationship to performance.
Bianca S
You can't go trick-or-treating. Ever. For a week
07:10 PM on 07/10/2011
Well yes, obviously their performance has to be reflective of the efforts they put forth, as with any salary, high or low.
My point is, I don't immediately throw daggers at someone earning a high wage.
There are still many hardworking indivduals who rightly earn the wages they make, and the revenue they bring in is reflective of their talents. This is true especially in this economy, where charities can suffer. Charities need talented, innovative people and sometimes paying a higher salary can help them generate more money to their organisation. There needs to be a fine line between what an 'acceptable' salary is and a cap somewhere as to not abuse the system, however earning $100,000 does not immediately insure that indivdual doesn't earn it.
Charities needs our help more than ever, and I would hate to see people not donate, out of contempt for those who earn more.
02:11 PM on 07/10/2011
I hear people moaning about civil servants wages as well. "Oh, that city administrator looking after a budget of many millions is making too much." In the case of civil servants, and charitable organizations, it is extremely important to get the best VALUE FOR MONEY. It doesnt mean hire the person who will work for the least.

Does anyone else notice the number of news articles taking aim at what working people earn and trained professionals EARN? The big News corps are happy to run stories that are trying to turn the general public against each other in a race for the bottom. Don't fall for it.