National Trust Members, is it true?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi,

I just do it online, pay by card, and they post it out to me in England. New Zealand dollar is about 50p, so it works out cheaper. But I don't do it for the money saving. I do it for the satisfaction of knowing I am Not supporting the English National Trust. - link: Membership: New Zealand Historic Places Trust Pouhere Taonga

The current Chief Executive was appointed in May 2006 and is currently employed in the
remuneration band $230,000-240,000 (2010: remuneration band $230-240,000).
Page 51 http://www.historic.org.nz/en/Publications/~/media/Corporate/Files/Publications/2011AnnualReport.ashx

= £120,338.49 at todays exchange rate
 
Sorry about all that but I just needed to get it off my chest.:heart:
 
The thing that surprises me about the salaries list is how low they are. Why do people expect top executives to work for peanuts just because they're running a charity? Some charities are massive organisations and need top managers just as any other organisation or business does.

Compare the salaries of many of those people with what's earned in the private sector or even in local councils where six figures is the norm.

Far better to pay someone £150K and get a top manager than £50K and get a second-rater. Sometimes I suspect that envy plays a big part in people's views when they whinge about anyone who earns more than they do.

Anyone can earn six figures. All you have to do is get a good degree, follow it up with an MBA and work hard and slowly climb the corporate ladder. Or you can mortgage your house, start a business and work even harder and one day you may be rich. Nothing to it really!

On the subject of photography I suspect that the NT bans it because many people don't know how to turn off their camera's flash! Most cameras use an auto flash system which fires the flash if the light is too low. How often do you see people taking flash pictures of something fifty yards away? The average compact camera has a flash range of about ten feet.
 
Last edited:
In answer to the question about taking photographs on/in NT property. I have received the following from :
Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant
National Trust (Heelis)



Thank you for your email of the 17 January.

In answer to your question, we permit photographers to take photos of our properties and places for personal use, but when it comes to commercial purposes we do require them to seek permissions first before any uses are granted.

We only request that any one taking photos for commercial purposes, such as using photos to promote a service or company, campaign, sell a product, or is part of a product for sale gain our permission before they take pictures at any of our places. Photos for private collections are of course no problem at all. If you happen to have lots of professional looking equipment, then a colleague might ask what you intend to do with your pictures.

I do hope this answers your question. Please do get back in touch if I can be of any further assistance.

Kind regards

Grace

Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant
Members & Donors, Whole Trust
National Trust (Heelis)
following from:
Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant
 
The current Chief Executive was appointed in May 2006 and is currently employed in the
remuneration band $230,000-240,000 (2010: remuneration band $230-240,000).
Page 51 http://www.historic.org.nz/en/Publications/~/media/Corporate/Files/Publications/2011AnnualReport.ashx

= £120,338.49 at todays exchange rate

You didn't say it was the New Zealand National Trust. In that case it sounds about right. New Zealand has a higher standard of lving than England, but the New Zealand National Trust Cheif Execs on about half the salary of the English National Trust, like their admission charges.
 
The thing that surprises me about the salaries list is how low they are. Why do people expect top executives to work for peanuts just because they're running a charity? Some charities are massive organisations and need top managers just as any other organisation or business does.

Compare the salaries of many of those people with what's earned in the private sector or even in local councils where six figures is the norm.

Far better to pay someone £150K and get a top manager than £50K and get a second-rater..

.... just like the Bankers eh?
 
In answer to the question about taking photographs on/in NT property. I have received the following from :
Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant
National Trust (Heelis)



Thank you for your email of the 17 January.

In answer to your question, we permit photographers to take photos of our properties and places for personal use, but when it comes to commercial purposes we do require them to seek permissions first before any uses are granted.

We only request that any one taking photos for commercial purposes, such as using photos to promote a service or company, campaign, sell a product, or is part of a product for sale gain our permission before they take pictures at any of our places. Photos for private collections are of course no problem at all. If you happen to have lots of professional looking equipment, then a colleague might ask what you intend to do with your pictures.

I do hope this answers your question. Please do get back in touch if I can be of any further assistance.

Kind regards

Grace

Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant
Members & Donors, Whole Trust
National Trust (Heelis)
following from:
Grace Ballance
Member Services Assistant

Interesting reply, Thank You.
But it conflicts with what I have been told by some English National Trust Stewards when visiting National Trust houses.
 
Your link is 'salary survey' dated 2003
Mine is to the Charity Commission audited accounts for last year

The point is not how much but the percentage of total income and the comparison to other charities salaries. Anyone can throw figures about without context.
No organisation can afford not to pay a realistic salary to it's top executives, I don't like it but that's the world we live in.
 
another link here The Daily Mail Song - YouTube


but I prefer to rely on the audited accounts on the charity commission website, in preference to 2003 newspaper surveys, or the Daily Mail.

The fact is that there are many people taking money from charities and they are not all good people, if you want to throw stones make sure you are not standing in the greenhouse.
 
You didn't say it was the New Zealand National Trust. In that case it sounds about right. New Zealand has a higher standard of lving than England, but the New Zealand National Trust Cheif Execs on about half the salary of the English National Trust, like their admission charges.

Sorry, if you opened the link you would see that it is the annual report for the NZHPT, or as you call them the New Zealand National Trust.
 
The point is not how much but the percentage of total income and the comparison to other charities salaries..

Well then The English National Trust must have too much income. If they halved their admission charges to match the New Zealand National Trust, they would be able to halve the executive's salaries to match the New Zealand National Trust as well.

Is there any reason to think the New Zealand National Trust is not managed as well as the English National Trust?
 
Well then The English National Trust must have too much income. If they halved their admission charges to match the New Zealand National Trust, they would be able to halve the executive's salaries to match the New Zealand National Trust as well.

Is there any reason to think the New Zealand National Trust is not managed as well as the English National Trust?

This is a pointless statement and I see no reason to continue
 
Decided to join the National Trust today after about a 10 year absence. I went for the latest offer to pay by direct debit so now will also have a spare pair of binos for the camper lol.

Thanks for posting Drew.
 
Decided to join the National Trust today after about a 10 year absence. I went for the latest offer to pay by direct debit so now will also have a spare pair of binos for the camper lol.

Thanks for posting Drew.

We might see you there when we visit with our lower price New Zealand National Trust Membership card

We won't miss the English National Trust binoculas because we have tried them and can see better without.

We prefer the comfort of knowing we are supporting a more egalitarian organisation.
 
Last edited:
Decided to join the National Trust today after about a 10 year absence. I went for the latest offer to pay by direct debit so now will also have a spare pair of binos for the camper lol.

Thanks for posting Drew.

Good for you :)

My new handbook has arrived, I'm looking forward to another year of enjoying my NT membership :dance:
......... and it wont be long until I start!

:drive:
 
Interesting article in todays Guardian showing National Trust directors with their £220k+++ incomes forcing others to live on 62p a day.
From Drews 2003 newspaper survey National Trust directors must have helped themselves to double their incomes over the last 8 years.
Keep paying your subscriptions and maybe they can double it again over the next?
Meanwhile the public can't afford to visit the properties which supposedly belong to them

Quote: Even better would be to allow more houses to be built in the south-east, over the objections of organisations such as the CPRE and the National Trust. Standard supply and demand tells us that more houses mean lower prices and lower rents. Lower rents mean lower housing benefit bills without making a single poor family suffer.

Housing benefit cap: can you live on 62p a day? | Tim Leunig | Comment is free | The Guardian
 
Last edited:
God, here we go again. Why are people so bitter and envious about anyone who earns a decent salary? The National Trust should be thanked, along with all those other organisations that oppose building on beautiful green belt countryside. If it wasn't for them we'd all be living in a concrete jungle.

The NT and others do not oppose building per se. They do not oppose building on the thousands of acres of brownfield sites, just where it will impinge on our ever-diminishing and most beautiful countryside, to the detriment of everyone, rich or poor.

Three things I've learned in life: All those who bang on about allowing more building are the most vociferous when the building site eventually ends up at the bottom of their garden.

All those who bang on about Britain's 'Compensation Culture' and Greedy Lawyers' are the first to run to a law firm when they've suffered an accident.

All those who bang on about greedy businesses and excess profits (I wish!) are usually the meanest and greediest people themselves who'll go to inordinate lengths to save a penny!

Funny old world isn't it, full of hypocrites and mean-spirited folk whose main passion is the politics of envy and who can accuse an organisation such as the NT of 'forcing people to live on 62p a day' just because they (the NT) believe that Britain will be a better place for all if we keep some green spaces! That's one hell of a leap of logic!

One thing's for sure, the owner of this site will never take a massive salary whilst there are people out there too mean to pay a measly fifteen quid a year to help support it. Perhaps they think that it's already making him a millionaire? After all, all businessmen are filthy rich aren't they? It's really easy in business and none of us ever go bust!
 
Last edited:
God, here we go again. Why are people so bitter and envious about anyone who earns a decent salary? The National Trust should be thanked, along with all those other organisations that oppose building on beautiful green belt countryside. If it wasn't for them we'd all be living in a concrete jungle.

The NT and others do not oppose building per se. They do not oppose building on the thousands of acres of brownfield sites, just where it will impinge on our ever-diminishing and most beautiful countryside, to the detriment of everyone, rich or poor.

Three things I've learned in life: All those who bang on about allowing more building are the most vociferous when the building site eventually ends up at the bottom of their garden.

All those who bang on about Britain's 'Compensation Culture' and Greedy Lawyers' are the first to run to a law firm when they've suffered an accident.

All those who bang on about greedy businesses and excess profits (I wish!) are usually the meanest and greediest people themselves who'll go to inordinate lengths to save a penny!

Funny old world isn't it, full of hypocrites and mean-spirited folk whose main passion is the politics of envy and who can accuse an organisation such as the NT of 'forcing people to live on 62p a day' just because they (the NT) believe that Britain will be a better place for all if we keep some green spaces! That's one hell of a leap of logic!

One thing's for sure, the owner of this site will never take a massive salary whilst there are people out there too mean to pay a measly fifteen quid a year to help support it. Perhaps they think that it's already making him a millionaire? After all, all businessmen are filthy rich aren't they? It's really easy in business and none of us ever go bust!

So eloquently put !!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top