Money. Money. Money.
In my last blog I answered the question of who is ultimately responsible for your career - and we learned that while that responsibility rests with you, the organization you work for also has responsibilities.
When it comes to money, the answer is similar. While you are the only one who can determine if you are satisfied with your income and are also likely the only one who will advocate for yourself regarding your income, your organization also has obligations in this area.
First, since I write these blogs for animal rights activists, it is safe to say that pretty much all of you are underpaid, and you could all very likely make more money than you do if you were to work in the for-profit sector, government, or another large institutionalized organization. But, alas, I, like you, could not imagine doing anything else except working for animals, and as such, we must navigate our income within the world where we live.
That said, it sometimes feels as if our Movement reveres those who operate with a scarcity mindset. Some of us have been led to believe that being financially comfortable is not something that we deserve to enjoy while animals standby, suffering immensely. Further, the message continues to imply that if we are comfortable we must not truly love animals. To be clear - I reject that notion in its entirety. Money is not a bad word. It is, in fact, a pretty good word. We need money to live. We need money to stay safe, to buy food, to put a roof over our heads and the heads of those we love. We need money to care for our four-legged, scaled, and winged companions. We need money to care for our partners and children. We need money to pursue educational endeavours so that we can do specialized work for animals, and we need money for countless other things from dental care to vacations. Oh, and on that topic, yes, we are allowed to go on vacations! In short, money is necessary to make the world a better place.
So, while we do this work for the animals, not for the money - that does not mean that we should be living below the poverty line and that we shouldn’t be able to work towards owning a home if we want one, that we shouldn’t be able to be the primary wage earner in a household if we choose, or that we shouldn’t be in a position to build a healthy retirement plan. Being in this Movement should not necessitate deprivation. Deprivation does not serve animals. It contributes to burnout, high employee turnover, and losing good activists to industries and organizations that allow them to create a financially comfortable life. Healthy workplaces and healthy employees serve animals.
So, now that I’ve said that, let’s turn our attention to what it is that organizations should be doing regarding your remuneration - how you are paid.
All organizations should have a clear compensation philosophy. A compensation philosophy is a written statement which documents the organization’s position about how they remunerate their employees, and also describes why the organization remunerates employees in the way that they do.
Employers should use their compensation philosophy to attract, retain and motivate employees.
A well-designed compensation philosophy supports the organization's strategic plan and other initiatives, and it is also something that should be reviewed and updated from time to time to reflect any changes that the organization may undertake.
Compensation philosophies consider factors such as:
the financial position of the organization
business objectives and other unique aspects of the organization (e.g. strategic goals)
location and size of the organization
industry affiliation of the organization
the difficulty (or ease) with which the organization is able to find talent
whether there are any exceptions to the overall philosophy for a particularly unique and scarce skill set
how the organization wants to be perceived relative to other groups who do the same or similar work (e.g. do they want to pay better, the same, or lower than other groups), this is sometimes referred to as external equity or external benchmarking
how the organization will balance direct remuneration (e.g. pay), and other forms of indirect remuneration (e.g. paid time off, benefits, retirements plans)
what kinds of medical benefits they will offer
how the organization intends to treat internal pay equity, which refers to how they will pay senior staff relative to more entry level staff
whether the organization will determine increases based on length of service, annual goals, level of responsibility, overall fundraising success, or some combination of those factors
In addition, organizations must make their compensation philosophy clear to their employees, and be transparent about how that philosophy is translated into dollars and cents. This includes explaining how the various elements of your pay were decided and what you need to do to qualify for an increase. They should also provide you with very clear parameters regarding how your remuneration structure is positioned within the overall organization. That does not mean that you need to know exactly how much money your colleagues are paid, but it does mean that that you should understand how pay decisions are made, and you should feel confident that you are being treated fairly based on your skills and responsibilities.
One of the critical factors in reducing workplace burnout, something I have written about at length, is fairness. Fairness is one of the six domains that coalesce to describe the factors involved in workplace burnout. And there are fewer more important components of fairness than remuneration. If you feel fairly remunerated, you are likely to work harder, work smarter, and stay committed to the animals for longer - you are likely to be more engaged.
So, if you don’t understand how and why you are paid what you are paid, if you don’t know the compensation philosophy of your organization, and if you perceive that there is a lack of fairness regarding remuneration practices - go talk to your manager.
The organization’s compensation philosophy must be transparent to you.
I want to help to empower you to be the best activist you can be. Please reach out with any questions and I’ll try to answer them in future blogs, anonymously of course!
Always for the Animals,
Krista
The following information is provided for general information purposes only. It is not intended to provide legal advice or opinions of any kind. No one should act, or refrain from acting, based solely upon the materials provided on this website, any hypertext links or other general information without first seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice.
The intention of this blog is to promote the longevity and engagement level of the ACTivist community within the Animal Advocacy Movement (AAM). The majority of the advice will be geared towards employees within the AAM in Canada and the United States, but may be applicable to other countries. All information provided assumes that the employee works within a non-unionized environment.
Krista is the Executive Director of For The Greater Good where she consults with animal protection organizations across North America on matters of organizational development and governance. In addition to holding five degrees and designations in human resources, including a master’s degree in organizational development and leadership, she is pursuing her doctorate focused on the employment experiences of animal rights activists in Canada and the United States. Krista first joined the Animal Advocacy Movement as the VP of Mercy For Animals in Canada where she led twelve undercover investigations into factory farms and slaughterhouses. Krista also served as the President of the Board for Happily Ever Esther Farm Sanctuary for over five years, also now serves on several other Boards including One Protest, The Rancher Advocacy Program, Egg-Truth, and Dairy-Truth. Krista is also a member of Womxn Funders in Animal Rights. Krista is a peer reviewer for the Journal of Critical Animal Studies. Prior to joining the Movement, Krista founded a boutique employment and labour law firm in Toronto where she consulted to employers across Canada and the U.S. for a decade, and before that she spent fifteen years in human resources including as the Vice President of HR for one of the largest software companies in the world.