So I went on a Tinder date this week and as with most of my dates I accidentally ended up droning on about politics (i’m an incredibly fun date if you can’t tell). My charming tinderee worked for a charity and so I threw out my usual line about some charity CEO’s getting huge salaries and how terrible and unjustified this was and how much I sympathised with her low pay predicament. I was obviously expecting this sort of sex talk to seal the deal, but instead she rebuffed me and confidently informed me that the CEO’s deserved what they got because ‘that’s what they would earn in the private sector.’ Which stumped me for a bit because, well, why isn’t she getting what she would earn in the private sector? I asked her this and she told me she was happy to be paid less because she felt she was doing something worthwhile. Her lack of financial compensation was made up for by how much she loved charity and giving (my hopes for the evening were raised). But then, I asked her, why doesn’t the same apply for the CEO? Why is he compensated to private sector level whilst you are stuck earning about half as much as your ‘less giving’ mates? Does working because you believe in something just stop at a certain age or management level?
When the Chief Execs of British Red Cross, Cancer research and Save the Children are all earning between £200k & 300k, isn’t it about time they recognised that working for less financial reward in an industry you love or care passionately about shouldn’t be the preserve of the young. Or maybe they simply aren’t as ‘giving’ as generation tinder.
Needless to say it turns out that political debate and logical rhetoric are not aphrodisiacs. Tinderee believes in some charity cases more than others it would seem.