Why I oppose volunteerism at work
Summary
Volunteerism at work can do more harm than good. I believe that employees should steer clear of it, when possible.
Reserve volunteering for organisations that can’t afford your skills. Don’t volunteer for a for-profit corporation who should compensate you fairly for your work.
Companies are not families. It’s likely no one will remember your volunteer effort if your company decides to downsize.
Important work deserves funding. If employers expect some work for free, what does it say about its importance?
As professionals we must value our time and outputs. Free work for corporations, undermines our skill.
Time available for volunteering is a function of societal privilege. Let’s not forget that we exacerbate these privileges, even if there are career benefits to volunteering.
I’ve always been a sceptic about volunteering at work. But as times change, our views must change in tandem. In recent years, I’ve gone from being a volunteer cynic to being anti-volunteerism at work. At the risk of sounding pompous, I think it’ll be fair to say that I was a champion workplace volunteer when I was younger. A 16-hour workday was par for the course in those days. But that’s all in the past.
Last week, at the Social Now conference, I discussed my concerns about workplace volunteerism with a few people I met there. Those conversations helped me understand how much my views have changed. In this post, I want to tell you about my current position on this topic.
Why volunteer?
Fundamental as this may be, it’s worth asking why you’re volunteering. Traditionally, people have volunteered for charities, non-profits, NGOs, religious institutions, food banks and often their families. But why should anyone volunteer for a “for-profit” company?
I suspect people do it out of a sense of affinity towards their employers. Employers are also smart enough to invoke warm and fuzzy words, such as “community” or “family”, to encourage you to contribute your time to them. But companies are not families.
Is it a two-way street?
A family offers you a secure relationship. You receive unconditional love. It’s rather unlikely that your family can “un-family” you. But a company can fire you on a whim. If you’re a knowledge worker in 2024, I bet you know at least five people who were victims of layoffs in the last couple of years. I’d like to further bet that most of these people were performing well in their jobs, like Britney Pietsch.
This begs the question - if you volunteer for your company today, do they promise you “family-like” security, the next time there’s a round of layoffs? Let me place one more bet - the answer to that question is a resounding “No!”. For nine out of ten of us, for sure.
Now, if this “family” arrangement is only about unidirectional sacrifice, I reckon knowledge workers must be more practical in their approach to employment relationships. If some work is important, companies must fund it. Which brings me to my next question.
Why won’t they fund it?
Look around you. Companies think offices are important, even if most people don’t want to go into an office. So they fund offices. They believe M&As are important, so they fund M&As. They believe execs who fly around a lot deserve some comfort; so they sponsor business-class travel. Most companies have extreme faith in their C-suite - the average tech CEO earns 400 times that of their average employee. Here are a few examples.
| Company | CEO | Pay (in $M) | CEO: employee pay ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apple | Tim Cook | 99 | 1456 |
| Sundar Pichai | 226 | 764 | |
| Microsoft | Satya Nadella | 190 | 289 |
| Infosys | Salil Parekh | 7 | 565 |
| Accenture | Julie Sweet | 23 | 388 |
| TCS | Rajesh Gopinathan | 3 | 233 |
I don’t quarrel with where companies spend their money. Far smarter people make these decisions. But I think it’s safe to say that if companies see something as valuable, they will fund it. So, if the activity you’re “volunteering” for is important, why aren’t they funding it? Is it not as important as you think it is? Or is the company trying to pull a fast one, by employing free labour for a productive activity? Either way, it undermines your professional worth.
What about your professional worth?
Think about other professions you may have interacted with. Doctors work in 15-minute appointment slots. Lawyers charge you by the hour. For that matter, every service on Fiverr, charges either for project scope or for time and materials. The point is, that professionals place a value on their time and outputs. A monetary value.
You’re a professional too. Why shouldn’t you also place a value on your time? Why give it away for free, to a for-profit company?
By placing a value on your time, you’ll do your company more service than you think. You see when people give up their time for their employers; it subsidises the cost of certain projects. As companies get used to these externalised costs, they stop recalibrating their budgets to fund important work, adequately. Free labour normalises more free labour. Before long, you experience a culture of overwork. Mind you, not everyone can take part in such cultures.
Volunteerism amplifies privilege
The free time you have to “volunteer”, is a proxy for some privileges you enjoy. Let me give you two contrasting examples, to make my point.
Imagine a young bachelor in India, who lives with his parents. He doesn’t pay rent, doesn’t have to cook his meals, clean his house or take part in any chores or errands. Yeah, we Indian boys are a pampered lot! Now imagine a first-time mother who lives with her rather traditional-minded in-laws in India. She shoulders massive household responsibilities, which include cooking for the family and overseeing all housekeeping work. Sometimes her in-laws lend her a hand with child care, but she can’t afford a creche or a full-time nanny. Those of you in India will know how judgemental the previous generation can be if they think the mother is neglecting the baby. Men don’t face any of these judgements, mind you! It’s always the mother’s fault.
Tell me now, who is in a better position to volunteer? The young bachelor! For a moment, let’s imagine that both these individuals play the same role in the same company. Let’s also imagine that there’s some sort of two-way street in this company, where volunteers gain recognition, which then translates to pay hikes or promotions. But how fair is this?
When volunteer work becomes a reason to reward people in a company, we inadvertently exacerbate societal privilege gaps. If anything, companies should strive to level the playing field, if they care about diversity.
And that, my friends, brings me to the end of my arguments against volunteering at work. If you’re a workplace leader reading this piece, then I’d like to summarise my arguments through three suggestions.
Pay people for overtime work. Don’t expect free labour.
Measure everyone on their performance during their eight-hour workdays.
Don’t consider overtime contributions for rewards, recognition, pay hikes and promotions.
That last suggestion is important, especially if you don’t want to amplify the privilege gap.
If you’re an employee, I only have one suggestion for you. Reserve “volunteering” for organisations that can’t afford to pay for your skills. I assure you that you’ll do far more good in the world that way.