Hot Topics
Stay connected 
Feburary 2004
Government, Politicians, and the Use of the Word Volunteer
By Susan J. Ellis
All sorts of news items have recently surfaced in the US that have gotten me thinking about the nature of volunteering, particularly as the government relates to it. I'm not sure exactly what it all means, but let me share the information and ruminate about it and then ask you to join the discussion.
First, I just learned from colleague Reenie
Marshall that there has been a bill sitting in a Congressional Committee
since early last year to reinstate the military draft: H.R. # 163,
Universal National Service Act of 2003. The Act calls for drafting
both men and women, with very few exemptions, into either military
service or community service (if a conscientious objector to war).
Amazingly, there has been very little press about this. Reenie learned
of it through a newsgroup to which she subscribes (see the provocative
article at http://www.collegian.com/vnews/display.v/
ART/2004/01/20/400cb6a2c7dec )
and I did more research. The Common Cause Action Center gives more
details ( http://causenet.commoncause.org/afr/issues/bills/
?billnum=H.R.163&congress=108&size=full )
and I also checked with the staff of the Chairman of the Subcommittee
on Total Force, where the bill still lies after almost a year.
Since the end of the Vietnam war, the United States military has proudly called itself The All-Volunteer Army meaning, of course, that soldiers are not forced into service, not that they don't receive pay. They have not yet changed their marketing approach despite the obvious fact that the many National Guard volunteers now serving in Iraq were required to go overseas. The term volunteer soldier has a long history in the military, and is often used to legitimize uprisings such as the American War of Independence. But if a draft is indeed reinstated, we'll see the disappearance of the volunteer label.
Second, with little
fanfare, new California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declined to
accept the $175,000 salary that goes with the job (see http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/
7830085p-8770783c.html ).
With this he joins an impressive list of government officials who
have done the same thing, including John F. Kennedy and Nelson Rockefeller.
Surprised? Most people have no idea that one label they could use
for these well-known people is volunteer. The Sacramento Bee article
just referenced also notes that California 's new Secretary of Education,
Richard Riordan, is a multimillionaire who didn't accept a salary
as mayor of Los Angeles (though apparently he will take money for
the new job).
Funny, isn't it, how no one questions the legitimacy or competence of such unpaid public servants? But note that, in some cases, individuals choosing to forgo their salary must legally go on the books as employees and accept a token $1 per year. Maybe this is another manifestation of resistance to volunteers by the civil service and its unions. What is the implication of not allowing someone to volunteer his/her time? I don't know, but it seems worth pondering.
Colleagues in the former Soviet Union talk about how the Communist government misused the concept of volunteering by linking it to mandatory and unpaid days of labor on behalf of the state. The same concern is raised in many countries now by those who strongly oppose any mandated service, especially student graduation requirements or court-ordered alternative sentences coercion without financial remuneration.
The opposite argument freely chosen but paid is used to question whether Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, UN Volunteers, and similar sorts of programs should be considered part of volunteering. Some want to stress that the payment involved is mainly a stipend or living allowance, not a true salary. But where is the line between enabling funds for a volunteer and a really low wage? The combined value of all remuneration and benefits brings some Corps members to minimum wage level. If the government considers minimum wage to be a living wage clearly open to debate why do we insist on extolling programs such as AmeriCorps as voluntary sacrifice? What does this mean both to volunteering and to the poverty line?
Embracing volunteers is politically easy.
Public officials (everywhere in the world) make speeches about how
valuable citizen involvement is, although ironically, much of what
volunteers really get worked up about is what government is not doing
for the public good! Governments often embrace citizen volunteer
projects to make up for the deficits of poor economies and failing
public safety nets. Linda Graff articulated this extremely well in
her essay, Genetic Engineering
of the Volunteer Movement, which she wrote for our Rants and Raves
Anthology last summer (still available for free at http://www.energizeinc.com/xmlEi/
solo.php?fzg_navGrpBtn=5-211-E-1 ).
While we can applaud efforts such as the USA Freedom Corps or the UK
's Millennium Volunteers, and the emerging national volunteer centers
in places such as the countries of the former Soviet Union , is such
government interest in volunteering a wolf in sheep's clothing? You
decide.
Here's what I'm wondering about:
-
What effect, if any, does the use or neglect of the word volunteer in these situations have on those of us in field of volunteerism?
-
Which concerns us more: forced but unpaid or paid but freely chosen? Why?
-
I take it as a given that some participants in these sorts of programs will eventually make their way into regular volunteer opportunities. Clearly many students contribute more hours than their minimum school requirement; a percentage of offenders end up staying with agencies after their official hours are served; AmeriCorps and Peace Corps members develop a lifelong commitment to service, etc. So how do we make sure this happens as much as possible?
-
Should we be trying to illuminate invisible examples of volunteering such as Schwarzenegger's unpaid service? Would this raise the bar for expectations about who volunteers and why?
I am eager to hear what you think about all this!
Let's Hear What You Think
An international online journal to keep you current on trends, research, successes...
Learn more | Subscribe
Online training for individuals, organizations or corporations to work successfully with volunteers. Learn more
