Latest; $100 Boosts A Pet's Social Profile

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

3. Most, if not all, of the startup and development of this resource was done by people on a volunteer basis. They may be reaping financial reward now, but the early years would have been very lean indeed...

I'm conflicted about it. I have put hours of work into not for profits and I'd be mad if they suddenly started becoming "for profit" or strayed from what it was I thought I was working for.

And it would be clear as mud who owns what when volunteers made it without employee contracts.

It's a bit like when organisations start off being about preventing cruelty to animals and then end up causing it. You would want to split off and start again - with clearer written goals and intentions.

Tho Petrescue intentions are clear and if they're spending money on lawyers over copyright/IP where nobody is trying to impersonate them or present as them when they're not - and that takes away from dogs getting looked after and placed - erm. They will lose their core reason for being.

And people will go make other arrangements. Eg facebook or piggy backing on some other rescues system.

[melzawelza]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Edited June 4, 2016 by melzawelza

[tdierikx]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Agree 100%!!

T.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Would you continue to have volunteers doing the heavy lifting while you spend money on lawyers trying to get back something done by another volunteer?

I agree that it's nice if people working for charities got paid. But it does start to cause conflicts of interest. Some charities are better at managing the perceived conflicts and actual ones than others. That's when you start to look at the percentage of income (donations) that go to caring for and placing dogs vs that which goes on admin and lawyers.

[tdierikx]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Would you continue to have volunteers doing the heavy lifting while you spend money on lawyers trying to get back something done by another volunteer?

I agree that it's nice if people working for charities got paid. But it does start to cause conflicts of interest. Some charities are better at managing the perceived conflicts and actual ones than others. That's when you start to look at the percentage of income (donations) that go to caring for and placing dogs vs that which goes on admin and lawyers.

I can think of at least one large animal welfare organisation that spends more on legal and advertising than on what they say they are all about... meanwhile utilising a huge volunteer workforce to do the heavy (and often heartbreaking) work on the ground...

T.

[melzawelza]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Would you continue to have volunteers doing the heavy lifting while you spend money on lawyers trying to get back something done by another volunteer?

I agree that it's nice if people working for charities got paid. But it does start to cause conflicts of interest. Some charities are better at managing the perceived conflicts and actual ones than others. That's when you start to look at the percentage of income (donations) that go to caring for and placing dogs vs that which goes on admin and lawyers.

Shel was paid just like everyone else while at PetRescue (barring the start up years where no one was paid), and as far as I know there aren't volunteers doing all the heavy lifting - the staff are paid at PetRescue. We also have no idea whether they paid for the letter to be sent or whether the time was donated or heavily discounted by the solicitor in question. Even if it was paid, it does not cost much to have a cease & desist letter drawn up.

I'm not really interested in assessing the merits of the feud between Shel & PetRescue or taking sides - there's clearly plenty going on behind the scenes that none of us know, but I'm getting mighty irritated at the constant stream of people implying that PetRescue are doing the wrong thing by paying their staff. It isn't just 'nice' for employees of charities to be paid, it should be expected and we certainly shouldn't be shooting down those who have worked hard enough and been successful enough to achieve that goal.

I completely run myself in to the ground working a full time job to pay my bills and then working for free at another job running my charity. Because of the day job, I cannot dedicate the sort of time to the charity that I know could achieve enormous things if myself and my other volunteers could forget the day jobs and focus on it 100%.

It's not sustainable long term and if we do not get to the point of being able to pay staff within the next 5 years then it's likely I will walk away. I'm not ashamed or embarrassed of that. My time is valuable and I do extremely valuable work - I deserve to be remunerated for it and the charity deserves to have a Director that can focus 100% of her working energy on acheiving it's goals and isn't completely burnt out.

[melzawelza]

This is worth a watch.

[Steve]

You cant expect people to work indefinitely with a focus on building the service without payment . Its all good for a minute but You just cant maintain that and you have to have people who work at it as a paid job not just squeezing it all in when they get a minute from their paid employment.

Any rescue or any other animal related business will grow and perform so much better the quicker it can pay people for their time and skills. You get more donations, more corporate sponsorship, more income better admin and more reliable services if people are getting paid. Its a great resource - it helps find homes for thousands of dogs and cats and the rescue groups who use it don't have to pay to advertise themselves and the animals available there.

As long as there is no confusion about what people are donating to and they understand the money goes to supporting the pet rescue business and funds dont go to individual rescue groups who use the site its the only way it can be reliable and continue to offer the services they do.

Non profit simply means that anything left over after expenses are paid including wages isnt distributed to the members or the board and it goes into building the business to help more people and more animals.

We have to get over this idea that you need to be poverty stricken and work indefinitely for nothing when you provide services for pets.

The copyright thing in my opinion was done while she was working for petrescue and being paid for it so therefore they own it - cant see her winning but dont see why any of that should impact on how people see or wnat to use the service.

[melzawelza]

You cant expect people to work indefinitely with a focus on building the service without payment . Its all good for a minute but You just cant maintain that and you have to have people who work at it as a paid job not just squeezing it all in when they get a minute from their paid employment.

Any rescue or any other animal related business will grow and perform so much better the quicker it can pay people for their time and skills. You get more donations, more corporate sponsorship, more income better admin and more reliable services if people are getting paid. Its a great resource - it helps find homes for thousands of dogs and cats and the rescue groups who use it don't have to pay to advertise themselves and the animals available there.

As long as there is no confusion about what people are donating to and they understand the money goes to supporting the pet rescue business and funds dont go to individual rescue groups who use the site its the only way it can be reliable and continue to offer the services they do.

Non profit simply means that anything left over after expenses are paid including wages isnt distributed to the members or the board and it goes into building the business to help more people and more animals.

We have to get over this idea that you need to be poverty stricken and work indefinitely for nothing when you provide services for pets.

The copyright thing in my opinion was done while she was working for petrescue and being paid for it so therefore they own it - cant see her winning but dont see why any of that should impact on how people see or wnat to use the service.

Well said.

[Steve]

I also understand how hard it must be for Shel who has put so much of her life into building it from rock bottom and her continuing passion for how she can best help animals in pounds but come on we all know you cant take contact details with you and use them for your own benefit after you leave your job.

Getting into blabbing about their business model and how they operate behind the scenes,how they generate mailing lists etc just makes her appear to be a disgruntled ex employee. Yes she was instrumental with the pound program but when she worked on it and developed it she was an employee and cant expect she can leave and proceed to take it on as her own. Any business in Petrescue's position would need to react to what she is doing as they have done - the board's charter is to make decisions which protect and advance the non profit business.

As far as shouting themselves a lawyer - how else can they protect their interests? So far its cost em a couple of hundred bucks - how much business do they stand to loose if it continues?

Edited June 5, 2016 by Steve

[Sheridan]

Me, I think Pet Rescue and the rescues that post on it are a false advertising claim waiting to happen.

[koalathebear]

Me, I think Pet Rescue and the rescues that post on it are a false advertising claim waiting to happen.

Why is that? I can't speak to petrescue but I know that I am very careful to make sure that all of my listings about my foster dogs are very honest and that the owners know exactly what faults the dogs have. We also give a lifetime guarantee on all of our foster dogs and will take the dog back and personally (as foster carers) refund the the adoption fee (as our rescue group only refund if the two week trial period fails).

Or is there something else behind the scenes about the arrangements between the rescues and petrescue? As carers, we don't have visibility of the back end, we are just given details of how to create listings.

Edited June 5, 2016 by koalathebear

[mita]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Agree 100%!!

T.

Another, mostly agree. It's not unusual for there to be some shape-shifting as an organization providing a service, which started on a purely voluntary staffing basis, grows in size & public 'face'.

Also saying, I retain respect for Shel & her small team of volunteers who had the original 'vision' of meeting the need of a one -stop, viewing platform for pets with shelter & rescues (big & small). And it grew....

And an acknowledgement.... not a ticking off.... that most of the rescues are completely voluntary, with people juggling jobs, studies, families & other responsibilities. Even tho' I'd agree in the best of all possible worlds this might involve paid staff, in the meantime viability & consequences of that, would need consideration by those involved (not by roadside fusiliers, which would include me!)

[_PL_]

I don't care if they get paid. Couldn't give a rats.

I care that some of their income comes from people believing that donating to Pet Rescue the business is the same as donating to one of the tiny rescues who use their service. Tiny rescues who don't get paid and never will. Or don't want to grow into an unwieldy business.

PR are eligible for govt grants, private grants and corporate sponsorship which the bulk of us are ineligible for and that is where they should be focussing on generating their income, not from the (lets face it) the small pool of private donations small rescues do compete over.

I care that there are legal rumblings, pro-bono or not it still costs time and money and I don't believe many of the "950+" members would regard that as appropriate use of resources. Nor that we are now de-facto participants or an excuse to protect the PR Brand.

In return for being able to use their site for free, we have no say and cannot even question the small things like a donation button on every single one of our listed pets. Basically it's; suck it up Princess and if you don't like it, there's the door. And the rescues who have been in the position to walk have done exactly that.

[_PL_]

Me, I think Pet Rescue and the rescues that post on it are a false advertising claim waiting to happen.

Why is that? I can't speak to petrescue but I know that I am very careful to make sure that all of my listings about my foster dogs are very honest and that the owners know exactly what faults the dogs have. We also give a lifetime guarantee on all of our foster dogs and will take the dog back and personally (as foster carers) refund the the adoption fee (as our rescue group only refund if the two week trial period fails).

Or is there something else behind the scenes about the arrangements between the rescues and petrescue? As carers, we don't have visibility of the back end, we are just given details of how to create listings.

Nothing interesting behind the scenes

It's in the Terms Of Use that PR aren't responsible for anything. But will take credit

I'm not sure what Sheridan means but there's always been iffy advertising on PR because it's a marketing platform with plenty of 'real estate speak' - particularly of dogs who should never be placed into a home.

[_PL_]

http://rescuedpets.com.au/

[Andrea]

For those of you who didnt even know what 'dog (& cat) rescue' was when petrescue started, this is my recent post of Shel's 'Saving Pets' fb page.

in reference to the thread on DOL November 2014, that Powerlegs posted a link to here in the first post in this thread....

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/260176-a-donation-button-next-to-our-dogs-on-petrescue/page__p__6589778__fromsearch__1#entry6589778

.... "You have posted above "But it can't all be one way - that they use the combined force of a united rescue community, but then keep all the revenue generated themselves?" irony here is in 2003 you joined the then forum called Ozdogrescue and asked struggling active rescuers 'how you could help?' At the time, most had no website or internet presence, so the resounding solution was a website where the smaller rescues could advertise their pets to get more exposure in a central place.

At the time you said there was no personal gain for yourselves in doing this.

Over the next 10 yrs, we have watched Petrescue get the bulk of donations, register themselves as a charity (under the guise to pay for one website and then to claim salaries), and Petrescue even managed to claim to rescue themselves when the still struggling self funded rescues continued to do the 'coal face' work at the benefit of Petrescue! All this time you were at the helm, were you not?

The thread I posted above is you defending Petrescue's fundraising techniques to the very same self funded rescues that are listed on Petrescue! Those rescues who all the way back then in 2014, were trying to point out the unfairness of you 'keeping all the revenue generated' at Petrescue."

[Malti]

Pet Rescue is not now 'for profit'. Paying staff is not only completely acceptable within a not for profit model, it should be the ultimate goal of the vast majority of charities and not for profits, including animal-related ones.

Our work is valuable as all hell and we deserve to be remunerated for it as much as any other job (if not more so). On top of that, if we were all able to dedicate 38 hours per week to it, rather than burning ourselves out trying to fit it in around a full time job that pays our bills, imagine what we could actually achieve.

Would you continue to have volunteers doing the heavy lifting while you spend money on lawyers trying to get back something done by another volunteer?

I agree that it's nice if people working for charities got paid. But it does start to cause conflicts of interest. Some charities are better at managing the perceived conflicts and actual ones than others. That's when you start to look at the percentage of income (donations) that go to caring for and placing dogs vs that which goes on admin and lawyers.

Shel was paid just like everyone else while at PetRescue (barring the start up years where no one was paid), and as far as I know there aren't volunteers doing all the heavy lifting - the staff are paid at PetRescue. We also have no idea whether they paid for the letter to be sent or whether the time was donated or heavily discounted by the solicitor in question. Even if it was paid, it does not cost much to have a cease & desist letter drawn up.

I'm not really interested in assessing the merits of the feud between Shel & PetRescue or taking sides - there's clearly plenty going on behind the scenes that none of us know, but I'm getting mighty irritated at the constant stream of people implying that PetRescue are doing the wrong thing by paying their staff. It isn't just 'nice' for employees of charities to be paid, it should be expected and we certainly shouldn't be shooting down those who have worked hard enough and been successful enough to achieve that goal.

I completely run myself in to the ground working a full time job to pay my bills and then working for free at another job running my charity. Because of the day job, I cannot dedicate the sort of time to the charity that I know could achieve enormous things if myself and my other volunteers could forget the day jobs and focus on it 100%.

It's not sustainable long term and if we do not get to the point of being able to pay staff within the next 5 years then it's likely I will walk away. I'm not ashamed or embarrassed of that. My time is valuable and I do extremely valuable work - I deserve to be remunerated for it and the charity deserves to have a Director that can focus 100% of her working energy on achieving it's goals and isn't completely burnt out.

Is your charity going to be relying on other charities to keep yourself afloat, I guess that is what it comes down to. PR do not exist without the rescues putting their dogs on their site, or referring people to their site to look at animals on there. They get so many other financial resources that rescues don't, and I am not sure how many people want to donate to a rescue when their donation will pay wages instead of going to a vet bill except in the larger rescue organisations like the RSPCA.

[Steve]

All rescues have choices they can make to get the same financial resources and more that PR have access to. In fact with a good approach small rescue could access better and more funding than they can. If some rescue groups choose not to grow their businesses in this way they can hardly blame PR for that . In fact its quite ridiculous. PR allow anyone who qualifies to advertise for free the ability to do so and utilise their resources [library etc] including those who are not set up as non profits but also those who are for profit and those who are not incorporated as either.

Sure their intent is to be a specialty advertising space for rescue only rather than like gumtree that has numerous categories

I just went through the process to donate money - its very clear that this money goes only to them and what services they provide using the donations. At no time does it get anywhere near saying the money goes to small rescues who may or may not be incorporated so even if someone does think the button on the right is money for the rescue who is advertising the dog on that page seriously no one could complain that they are taking money under any where near false pretences in my opinion.

The things they do sound like a very good thing to me to make donations to and their activities lift the profile and support for rescue in general

Looks to me that the rescue world has benefited enormously for a long time and whats more the ads are allowed to solicit for individual donations to the group that is advertising the dog anyway.

7 ways your support makes a difference

How your awesome support saves lives

Every companion animal has the right to be loved and cared for for life. When you make a donation to PetRescue today, your gift is funding all these life-saving projects in your community – projects that make it possible for all PetRescue pets to find a forever home.

Giving pets a free listing on PetRescue.com.au

You're enabling rescue groups, pounds and shelters to list their pets for adoption for free and helping pet seekers find their new best friend online.

Helping all pets survive the pound system

You're supporting our Safe & Sound Pound Program that promotes direct-from-pound adoption and best practice in animal care to help Australia work towards a no-kill future.

Finding more foster homes

You're supporting our foster campaigns and community events to encourage individuals and workplaces to consider pet fostering, enabling rescue groups to save even more lives.

Improving the adoption experience

You're helping to develop a faster, more efficient and responsive online adoption process so that all Australian pet seekers can save a life and discover the joy a rescue pet brings.

Supporting adoption & foster events

Your gift puts homeless pets into the hearts and minds of the community by bringing pets out of the pounds, shelters and foster homes for a friendly meet-and-greet in pet stores nationwide.

Offering interstate rehoming

You're helping PetRescue and Jetpets to arrange free interstate flights for three homeless pets every month, ensuring distance is no barrier to adoption and happiness.

Giving free advice to help all pets

You're helping to grow our Library, providing more free resources to pounds, shelters, rescue groups, foster carers and pet seekers that ultimately saves lives and keeps pets happy in their homes.

Just like all websites that collect data you get a chance to opt in or out , legally they cant spam you and at any time you get to say take me off your mail list.

And Shel at a minimum helped set this up - its not like the donation button is a new addition.

Im at a loss to understand what you would do or expect anyone else to do if someone were damaging your rescue service's reputation,taking your programs for their own gain and putting at risk everything you had worked for years to do other than see a legal person to see what could be done with the least amount of pain.

The good news is its a free enterprise country and if you don't like PR then you don't have to use it but looks to me that if you dont its throwing away a very good free resource. looks like someone who doesn't want people to know who they are is setting up their competition and soliciting for email contacts without showing any terms and conditions but it still makes no sense for those who don't pay for the service and who don't donate to PR to change anything they are doing as I'm guessing that if some do leave it wont be much skin off their noses financially and those who choose not to advertise are the losers.

Great idea to go with the new one but you loose if you also leave the old one not them. For everyone they loose out of this they will some up and Im more likely to donate to them now than Ive ever been before.

Edited June 7, 2016 by Steve

[shel]

Hey guys,

Thanks for your feedback! The guidebooks have now been taken off PetRescue, so there seems to be no longer a dispute over ownership.

I will keep this project moving forward. Educating the community about how to reform their local pound is too important a project to be discarded - I'm excited about the challenges ahead!

There's not much else to say about the rest of the info on the thread, except to agree with a lot of it. I have probably chalk some of it up to personal inexperience; I was trying to create a movement - and in reality created an organisation.

(The learning curve on grassroots ---> major charity in ten years is an unimaginably steep one!)

For those who do support me - thank you from the bottom of my <3 !

x

Shel :)