I recently did a training with a group of volunteer centres and I asked how many of them utilise volunteers in their own operations.
The majority of them did not. And these centres were not alone. It happens a lot.
The reasons these guys had for not engaging volunteers in their own work were jaw dropping when you consider these were Volunteer Centres:
“the roles are too complex”
“we don't have time to train volunteers”
“we know we should have volunteers”
“we have one volunteer"
"we have found volunteers to be unreliable"
These are the very reasons community agencies use to argue why volunteers are not appropriate in their settings. The very agencies that volunteer centres are trying to encourage volunteering in. Volunteer centres refer members of the community to volunteer in agencies -but not their own operations? They offer training in how to engage volunteers but cannot do it themselves.
What sort of example are these centres setting if they cannot involve volunteers in their own operations? A CEO of one centre said to me: "we have a volunteer who works four days a week. Yet we say to agencies that volunteers must not work for them for more than two days a week. Its a bit naughty isnt it?" Naughty?
I know most volunteer centres are struggling to fulfil their mandates. Involving and engaging volunteers in their work may allow them to do more toward succeeding. Engaging more volunteers who can achieve more for the Centre will also set a good example.
The very institutions charged with promoting volunteerism should be the ones who engage volunteers first.
What do you think?
