Silva
Full Member
givewell and thelifeyoucansave have reasonable methodologiesThey look totally legit
givewell and thelifeyoucansave have reasonable methodologiesThey look totally legit
Charitywatch has been referenced by CNBC in their article rating US-based charities.They look totally legit
oxfam was a small part of the aid relief in haitiFor a big international disaster, you need big international charity to respond
People have been fired, that is a serious consequenceoxfam was a small part of the aid relief in haiti
there are multiple big international charities, all of whom act with impunity even when caught breaking local and international laws because they know there are no serious consequences
low level employees were fired, their names were not given to the charity commission to prevent them working in the sector in the future, executives were not fired but allowed to do the same job in other placesPeople have been fired, that is a serious consequence
Surprised they didn't. Just a CYA, saying, "these employees violated their contracts and were fired" would have killed the PR on this before it began.You'd think they would be able to include morality clauses in their contracts, but they are still subject to employment law.
I said before though, as ambassadors of the charity, they should be sackable under a broadbrush bringing the charity into disrepute clause if they engage in illegal activity.
Asmita Naik said:Aid is delivered in an unaccountable space – those who pay for aid in developed countries are too removed, those who receive it in developing countries too powerless. Donor governments like ours play a critical role in holding aid agencies to account, which may mean (responsibly) withdrawing funding. There is no reason why an agency’s track record in safeguarding beneficiaries cannot be a key criterion in making grants – the money should surely go to the best. Those who claim that “good works” will be undermined fail to understand the competitive world of aid, and short-change the victims by suffocating their calls for justice. If donor governments can exercise their financial clout, they will be doing us as taxpayers a favour and more importantly, protecting those we want to help.
Sex tourism is a crime?low level employees were fired, their names were not given to the charity commission to prevent them working in the sector in the future, executives were not fired but allowed to do the same job in other places
that is not a serious consequence, a serious consequence would have been to report them for sex tourism to the UK police authorities, give their names and details of their actions to the charity commission so they can not find employment at other charities
their actions have only been exposed to relevant authorities because of a whistleblower, with the charity facing no consequence for the cover up
yesSex tourism is a crime?
I thought sex tourism was travelling somewhere to engage in sex with underage victims, no?Sex tourism is a crime?
For having sex with kids, sex tourism with adults isn't a crimeyes why do you think gary glitter went to prison
the internal oxfam report could not rule out children being used, they should have reported it to police to investigate furtherFor having sex with kids, sex tourism with adults isn't a crime
I'm sure they will in the future, problem solvedthe internal oxfam report could not rule out children being used, they should have reported it to police to investigate further
no it is not, it means that other charities keeping the same secrets can do so with impunityI'm sure they will in the future, problem solved
Totally agree, if they are not punished with all means legal this problem will never get better.no it is not, it means that other charities keeping the same secrets can do so with impunity
make an example of oxfam and force charities to out their sexual predators instead of waiting for whistleblowers
A number of other charities disclosed how many people they had disciplined for similar incidents following the Oxfam revelations so there no needno it is not, it means that other charities keeping the same secrets can do so with impunity
make an example of oxfam and force charities to out their sexual predators instead of waiting for whistleblowers
oxfam did the same thing in 2011, self-reporting that they were investigating reports of sexual abuse in haiti, but we know they covered up for their executive branch and did not give details to the charity commission, police, or the governments who fund them, there is little reason to believe this is uniqueA number of other charities disclosed how many people they had disciplined for similar incidents following the Oxfam revelations so there no need
I think this is just the tip of the iceberg...Makes you despair. These are supposed to be the good guys.
So ongoing you create a mechanism for reporting and you carry on the charity's workoxfam did the same thing in 2011, self-reporting that they were investigating reports of sexual abuse in haiti, but we know they covered up for their executive branch and did not give details to the charity commission, police, or the governments who fund them, there is little reason to believe this is unique
I guess drugs are illegal though- might be more tricky if prostitution is legal in some coutries?That's a weird one. Loads of employers have a complete ban on recreational drug use. Testing and all.
EDIT: Always worth reading the whole article, mind you.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5656498/clare-short-oxfam-sex-abuse-haiti-smeared/She said the story was being whipped up by critics of Britain’s £13 billion a year overseas aid budget.
She told the BBC Radio 4’s The Week in Westminster: “This is no excuse, but it’s a crazy, crazy, hysterical, distorted story.
"Very hard not to think it’s part of the anti-development, anti-aid agenda.”
In a programme to be aired on Saturday, she saiad: “Of the ten thousand Oxfam staff, one, plus a few more, used prostitutes – horrible – in Haiti and were sacked in 2011. That’s the story."
"And now Oxfam is smeared, international development is diminished.
"Of course I don’t like the idea of anyone in a disaster area using prostitutes. “But - what is the estimate? - 11% of British men between the ages of 16 and 74 at some time at least once used a prostitute.”