Category Archives: Community / Volunteer Engagement

Should the NFL involve volunteers for the Super Bowl?

Taking a break from promoting The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook to talk volunteers and the Super Bowl (for those outside the USA, that’s the National Football League’s championship game).

In a story by the New York Times, Alfred Kelly, the chief executive of the New York-New Jersey Super Bowl Host Committee, estimated that 9,000 people would serve as volunteers in the days leading to the Super Bowl . That is far fewer than the 20,000 who were initially contemplated. Those numbers are down because the NFL opted to hire temporary paid workers for positions in which volunteers had typically been used. The decision was an apparent response to a class-action suit against Major League Baseball in the USA, which did not pay volunteers at the All-Star FanFest in July 2013.

It took me a LONG time to find out what volunteers actually *do* for this billion-dollar nonprofit with millionaire staff. From what I can tell, volunteers are at sites like airports, hotels and various transportation hubs days before the game to direct city visitors to whatever they need – transportation, bathrooms, etc.  And if that’s the case then – hold on to your hats – I’m fine with those roles being filled by volunteers. Why? Because, in those situations, I think these roles are best filled by volunteers – people who aren’t there for any financial gain, who want to be seen as volunteers, specifically, in doing these tasks: I’m here because I want to be here, because I love football and love my city, and I want to make you feel welcomed. But if volunteers are asked to do anything else – selling anything, cleaning anything, moving or hauling things, etc. – I have a HUGE problem with having these roles filled by unpaid staff, because I don’t see why volunteers would be best of those roles other than the NFL getting out of not paying people.

Even if the NFL wasn’t, officially, a nonprofit organization (which, by the way, I find that outrageous, IRS!), I would feel this way about its volunteer-involvement. Why? Because if I truly believe that some activities are best staffed by volunteers, NEVER as a money-saving activity but, rather, because unpaid people are best in that roles, I have to believe it for every sector.

Back in the summer of 2010, I attended an event by Triumph motorcycles in the city where I was living at the time (Canby, Oregon). The company had brought about 20 motorcycles you could sign up to ride, on group rides, every 30 minutes. The Triumph truck traveled all over the USA to bring these events to cities all over, and these Triumph events were staffed primarily by VOLUNTEERS. Because volunteers are “free”? Nope (volunteers are never free!). It was because an event attendee talking to a volunteer — someone who owns at least one of the motorcycles in the line up, and owned at least one other probably at some point, who can speak passionately about the product, who wants you to get to have the experience they have been having, and who won’t get any commission from a sale and doesn’t rely on this activity for their financial livelihood — is in such contrast to talking to a salesperson or paid staff person. The few paid staff there stayed in the background, there to fill in blanks and maybe to make a sale, but volunteers were the official spokespeople. It gave the event a total no-sales-pressure feel from a customer point of view – it was just a day to enjoy Triumph motorcycles.

I’ve never forgotten that experience. And it’s one of the reasons why I’m not ready to condemn the NFL’s involvement of volunteers. At least not until I can see what exactly it is that they do.

UPDATE: an article from The Star Ledger about what NFL Super Bowl volunteers did in 2014. Note – 1500 ambassadors were paid. Did those paid folks do the SAME work as the volunteers, or something more/different?

And now, back to promoting The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook.

Also see:

Have you ever changed your mind?.

Learning, learning everywhere, a blog about where I find new marketing and volunteer engagement ideas (spoiler alert: it’s not at conferences or workshops)

accessibility, diversity & virtual volunteering

One of the many things I’m proud of in The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook, is that it features an entire chapter on accessibility and diversity.

That chapter, and the entire book, provide detailed advice regarding:

  • the benefits of having online volunteers representing a variety of socio-economic levels, neighborhoods, ages, cultures and other demographics
  • the benefits of accommodating a diversity of volunteers (an accommodation you make for one particular group often ends up benefiting ALL volunteers)
  • how to use language in such a way as to accommodate and welcome a variety of volunteers 
  • how to adapt online tools to accommodate different online volunteers, including those that may have physical disabilities
  • how to accommodate online volunteers with learning and emotional disabilities
  • how to recruit for diversity; and
  • how to track progress regarding diversity among online volunteer ranks.

The chapter on accessibility and diversity is referenced throughout The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook , because Susan and I did not want anyone thinking it was a chapter to take or leave.

I became an advocate for accessibility and diversity in volunteering and in computer and Internet use in October 1994 when I attended the annual meeting of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility at UC San Diego. There was a panel discussion called “The Meanings of Access,” and remarks during that talk, particularly by Deborah Kaplan, then of the World Institute on Disability, changed my life forever. I came to a realization of two things I’d never had before: accessibility is a human right, and accessibility brings me in contact with awesome people I would never meet or work with otherwise. I became an advocate right then and there.

In 1997, I got funding from the Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation for the Virtual Volunteering Project to explore how to make online volunteering as accessible as possible, and that same year, blew my mouth off at a conference in Austin, Texas about how disappointed I was that the panelists I’d just listened to, talking about the digital divide, never once mentioned people with disabilities, resulting in one of the greatest personal and professional relationships of my life, with Sharron Rush, who was also in the audience and later formed Knowbility, a nonprofit that promotes accessibility in technology tools and technology careers.

In 2008, I read “InVolving LGBT Volunteers,” published by The Consortium of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered voluntary and community organisations, based in London, the United Kingdom, and that solidified my understanding that making accessibility and diversity a priority in any program is about benefits for everyone in that program, not just people with disabilities or people who are from minority or under-represented groups. This publication is referenced in The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook, and remains one I return to frequently when preparing lectures or workshops about volunteer recruitment.

I have tried to put into practice all that I’ve heard about regarding virtual volunteering, including accommodations for a variety of people as volunteers and recruiting specifically to create a diverse volunteer pool. I won’t say I’m always successful, and I won’t say trying the methods we promote in the book is always easy, but I will say that it’s made my work experience oh-so-much richer and interesting, and it’s always been worth trying.

The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook is now available for purchase as a paperback and an ebook

Now available: The LAST Virtual Volunteering Guidebook!

vvbooklittleThe Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook is now available for purchase as a paperback and an ebook, published by Energize, Inc

The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook reflects all that has changed — and remained the same — since the first book was published online more than 10 years ago. Again co-authored with Susan Ellis and published by Energize, Inc.The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook still includes the basics for getting started with involving and supporting volunteers online, but it goes much farther, offering detailed information to help organizations that are already engaged in virtual volunteering with improving and expanding their programs. It also offers more international perspectives. The first book was focused on people who had never heard of virtual volunteering; this revised book still serves as the most comprehensive introduction to the subject available, but provides much more in-depth information and guidance for organizations already engaging online volunteers, who want to improve or expand their virtual volunteering activities.

New and advanced information includes:

  • More detailed advice on virtual volunteering assignment, including one-time “Byte-Sized” tasks (micro-volunteering), longer-term, higher-responsibilities and virtual team assignments.
  • A thorough look at various practices for screening and matching volunteers to assignments, with an eye to getting the most capable volunteers into your volunteering ranks and preventing incomplete assignments or burdensome management tasks
  • How to make online volunteer roles accessible and diverse
  • More details about how to work successfully with online volunteers, so that they are successful, your organization benefits and volunteer managers aren’t overwhelmed
  • Balancing safety with program goals
  • Respecting privacy of both the organization and online volunteers themselves
  • Online mentoring
  • Blogging by, for and about volunteers
  • Online activism
  • Spontaneous online volunteers
  • Live online events with volunteers
  • The future of virtual volunteering and how to start planning for oncoming trends

There’s also a new chapter just for online volunteers themselves, which organizations can also use in creating their own materials for online volunteers.

I’ve worked hard over the years to make this book worth the purchase price, and to be a resource you can turn to any time for support in your engagement with volunteers online.

In conjunction with the revised guidebook is the Virtual Volunteering Wiki, a free online resource and collaborative space for sharing resources regarding virtual volunteering. We are seeking a partner university or college that could recruit an intern from among students studying in its post-graduate program to keep this wiki updated.

If you read the book, I would so appreciate it if you could write and post a review of it on the Amazon and Barnes and Noble web sites (you can write the same review on both sites).

How Our Minds Mislead Us

I discourage those that are screening volunteers from going with their “gut.” I like to remind them that everyone in the Penn State/Second Mile scandal went with their gut instead of following good policy and procedures. I’ve also brought up times when I hesitated to involve a volunteer because of a gut feeling, then decided I needed to go with real observations and fact, and ended up involving WONDERFUL volunteers that I almost passed on because I realized I had some prejudices that I needed to work on.

This recent blog from Brain Pickings, which notes various scientific studies that have shown that intuition is “sometimes helpful but often misleading.” It focuses on a new book by John Brockman: Thinking: The New Science of Decision-Making, Problem-Solving, and Prediction. In the book, Nobel-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman notes:

“There is no sharp line between intuition and perception. … Perception is predictive. . . . If you want to understand intuition, it is very useful to understand perception, because so many of the rules that apply to perception apply as well to intuitive thinking. Intuitive thinking is quite different from perception. Intuitive thinking has language. Intuitive thinking has a lot of word knowledge organized in different ways more than mere perception. But some very basic characteristics [of] perception are extended almost directly to intuitive thinking.”

The essays and lectures in this book don’t discount intuition altogether; what this book, and others, are trying to show is that intuition is more feeling than fact, and that always trusting your intuition can have dire consequences – just as always ignoring it would.

I would love to read this book. I often find these kinds of books so much more helpful in working with volunteers than other books that focus on management, even volunteer management.

Also see:

Volunteer managers: you are NOT psychic!

Why I liked an anti-crowdsourcing Facebook page

On Facebook, I’ve just liked “Crowdsourcing Sucks,” which I originally found on Twitter under crowdsource666. Its motto: “Crowdsourcing, the scourge of the graphic design industry.”

How can a person such as myself that has been an evangelist for virtual volunteering, including crowdsourcing, since the 1990s, like this person or organization or whatever it is?

Because I do see his/her/their point.

I don’t trust a nonprofit organization that doesn’t involve volunteers in some way – but I also don’t trust an organization that talks about volunteers in terms of hourly monetary values of service given, as this says, “We involve volunteers because we don’t have to pay them! Look at the money we saved in not having to hire someone to do this work!” There is far greater value of volunteer involvement than that.

So, rock on crowdsource666.

Also see:

Traditional volunteering is now EXTREME volunteering

I laughed out loud at this!

The rise of ‘extreme’ volunteering, by Nesta, a registered charity in the United Kingdom.

Yes, now traditional volunteering is rebranded as EXTREME VOLUNTEERING. The author talks about the revolutionary idea of… ready?… ready?…. volunteers helping patients in hospitals! Or taking a year off to volunteer!

Sigh… okay, if you want to rebrand these traditional forms of volunteering, that require longer-term commitment and put volunteers in direct contact with clients, as EXTREME VOLUNTEERING, fine.

I laughed because, after being told over the last three years again and again that what people really wanted micro volunteering – short-term, no commitment, just a few minutes of helping here and there whenever they might maybe find a little time – and me pushing back and saying, no, what people really want are real connections, deeper connections, through volunteering, even leadership roles that require longer commitment, and that kind of volunteering is what organizations want as well, it’s nice to read that, at last, the “buzz” is changing and recognizing reality!

The reality is this: different people want different kinds of volunteering. Some want micro volunteering. Some want long-term volunteering. Some want volunteering they can do by themselves. Some want volunteering that brings them in contact with staff. Some want volunteering that brings them in contact with clients. Some want a group volunteering experience. And organizations that need and want volunteers may or may not be able to accommodate all these varieties of volunteering – it depends on their mission, their priorities, their staffing, their expertise and their funding.

Also see:

Questions for programs sending volunteers to developing countries

For a research project I’m working on with various EU-based NGOs through February 2014 or so, I’m gathering info on three related areas:

  • Volunteer-to-volunteer support online. How organizations that send volunteers to developing countries do, or do NOT, support these volunteers to interact with each other, or returned volunteers / alumni, online. I’m looking for strategies, procedures and policies, as well as assessments, formal or informal, about what’s working and what’s not.
  • Alumni networks. How these organizations set up and manage their alumni programs for returned volunteers – or if they don’t, why not, and if they don’t, would they be interested in such. Again, I’m looking for strategies, procedures and policies, as well as assessments, formal or informal, about what’s working and what’s not. For instance, there is a long-established alumni network for returned Peace Corps members, National Peace Corps Association, that is independently run from the actual Peace Corps program.
  • Online volunteering support. How these organizations support connections between volunteers currently serving in the field and online volunteers that have the expertise these volunteers to support them in their work – or if they don’t, if volunteers are engaging with such online volunteers on their own. For instance, Cuso International has a formal program, E-Connect, an e-volunteering pilot program that “welcomes new and returning volunteers to work with our in-country program partners remotely.” By contrast, the UNV program encourages currently-serving UN Volunteers to use its Online Volunteering service to recruit online volunteers to support them in their field work, but does not have a formal program to track or support this specific engagement.

It’s a challenging project because: 

  • So many organizations do not track these activities at their own organizations. For instance, when I worked at the United Nations Volunteers program from 2001-2005, I knew of program officers, each with a responsibility for a particular country or region, that had set up YahooGroups for the UN Volunteers they worked with in a specific region – yet, if you asked senior staff if online communities existed for currently-serving UN Volunteers, for peer-to-peer support, they would say no, because these activities weren’t well-communicated.
  • Language. If I say, “Do you have an online community that allows your volunteers to support each other?”, many staff will say no. But if I say, “Are you a part of any GoogleGroups or YahooGroups or Facebook Groups?” they will say yes, and if you ask “What are the groups”, you will find out that, indeed, such groups are for currently-serving volunteers and/or volunteer alumni.
  • No one person knows it all. There’s rarely one person at the organization that knows all of the online activities or alumni activities in which different staff is engaged. If you talk to one staff person at an organization, they may give you entirely different answers to your questions about online communities and alumni associations than another staff person.
  • A lot of online peer-to-peer support of volunteers in the field may not happen through an online community specifically for volunteers but, rather, through a subject-based online community for anyone, volunteer or paid, full-time employee / consultant, such as those engaged in evaluation activities using ALNAP’s Humanitarian Evaluation Community of Practice, or those engaged in water and sanitation programs.

That said, if you have info for me,  please email me at  jc@OINKMOOcoyotecommunications.com (remove OINKMOO from the email address).

A new “cyber” volunteering platform for small NGOs

The Cibervoluntarios Foundation is looking “to develop a cybervolunteering platform, made for little organizations worldwide.” They have a fundraising campaign at GlobalGiving to raise money for the platform, which includes a link to an 11-page document that provides a bit more information. Neither volunteers nor host organizations would be charged to use the platform.

I’ve tweeted the organization to find out how this proposed platform will be different from the United Nations’ existing Online Volunteering service, the world’s largest virtual volunteering platform for NGOs to recruit online volunteers. They tweeted back that cyber volunteering is different than online volunteering – but didn’t say how. I don’t yet see a difference. Cyber volunteering, in English, has been used since the 1990s as another word for virtual volunteering. 

Not that I don’t think  there’s room for new approaches to online volunteering – but given the over-abundance of platforms allowing organizations to recruit traditional volunteers, and how that has made it harder to recruit volunteers, not easier, I would hate to see the same thing happen with virtual volunteering.

According to the web site, “Cibervoluntarios” are:

agentes de cambio social que contribuyen, de forma desinteresada, a fomentar el uso y conocimiento de herramientas tecnológicas entre la población con menores oportunidades de acceso y/o formación… los Cibervoluntarios usan la tecnología desde una perspectiva social y contribuyen a eliminar brechas sociales mediante la sensibilización, información y formación de forma presencial, online y a medida para satisfacer las necesidades de cada persona o colectivo social con el que trabajamos. Los cibervoluntarios dan conocer las posibilidades que ofrece el uso de las Nuevas Tecnologías de una forma útil, sencilla, bien a través de la red, bien en persona, de tú a tú, mediante cursos, charlas, conferencias, talleres, eventos, seminarios, entre otros.

My translation:

social change agents who contribute selflessly to promote the use of technological tools and knowledge among people with fewer opportunities to access and / or training… Cibervoluntarios use technology from a social perspective and help eliminate social gaps through advocacy, information and training in person, online and customized to meet the needs of each person or social group with which we work. The Cybervolunteer knows the possibilities offered by the use of new technologies in a useful, simple, either through the network, either in person, face to face, through courses, lectures, conferences, workshops, events, seminars, among others.

So, perhaps for this organization, cibervoluntarios or cyber volunteers are what are called, in English, circuit riders or ICT volunteers – volunteers that help both individuals as well as staff at nonprofits regarding using computer and Internet-related tools, and such volunteers can be both onsite and online. Examples of this would include all volunteers that help teach people computer skills at initiatives like Austin FreeNet (Austin, Texas), FreeGeek (Portland, Oregon), EmpowerUp (Southwest Washington state, Vancouver area), and World Computer Exchange – and even PeaceCorps and VSO. HandsOn also has several IT volunteer tech initiatives, which they brand as skilled-based volunteer engagement:

HandsOn Tech Pittsburgh, Pennsylvannia. Follow on Twitter at @HandsOnTechPGH,
HandsOn Tech Atlanta, Georgia. Follow on Twitter at @HandsOnTechATL
HandsOn Tech Boston, Massachusetts. Follow on Twitter at @HandsOnTechBOS
HandsOn Tech Chicago, Illinois. Follow on Twitter at @HandsOnTechChi
HandsOn Tech New York City, New York. Follow on Twitter at @NYCHandsOnTech
HandsOn Tech Detroit, Michigan. Follow on Twitter at @HandsOnTechDET

One of the first such ICT volunteering initiatives was through what was called CompuMentor, now TechSoup (that part of TechSoup’s programming has moved entirely online, via the TechSoup forum, and the nonprofit still publishes Working with Technical Volunteers: A Manual for NPOs free online). The United Nations Information Technology Service (UNITeS) tried to track all of these various ICT volunteering initiatives globally once upon a time – UNITeS both supported volunteers applying ICTs for development (ICT4D) and promoted volunteerism as a fundamental element of successful ICT4D initiatives. UNITeS was launched in 2000 by then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, and was hosted by the United Nations Volunteers programme.

If the Cibervoluntarios organization is looking to develop an online matching service for IT volunteers or circuit riders, where volunteers would provide service onsite and or online to individuals and nonprofits, it might work – though I’d prefer to see this type of volunteering incorporated into the plethora of volunteer matching sites worldwide, or even just in Europe – or even just in Spain! I hope they will look over the UNITeS web site and TechSoup manual for tech volunteers, and provide lots of similar resources for both IT volunteers and the nonprofits that need them. And the organization is welcomed to translate and adapt my resources related to this subject for their web site, as long as I get credit somewhere:

  • Finding a Computer/Network Consultant (volunteer or paid)
    What can mission-based organizations do to recruit the “right” consultant for “tech” related issues, one that will not make them feel out-of-the-loop or out-of-control when it comes to tech-related discussions?
  • Short-term Assignments for Tech Volunteers
    A list of short-term projects for “tech” volunteers — assignments that might takes days, weeks or just a couple of months to complete.
  • One(-ish) Day “Tech” Activities for Volunteers
    This page provides advice on how to put together a one-day event, or just-a-few-days-of activity, for a group of tech volunteers onsite, working together, for a nonprofit, non-governmental organization (NGO), community-focused government program, school or other mission-based organization – or association of such.

Too many volunteer matching web sites?

This blog was written in 2013. Note the January 2025 update at the end of the blog 

Here is a phrase I think I could live the rest of my life without reading or hearing again:

A new web site has been launched to match volunteers with non-profit organizations/NGOs.

I think I’ve read or heard this phrase 20 times in the last 20 years.

In the USA alone, we’re swimming in volunteer-matching web sites. Nationally, we’ve got  VolunteerMatchIdealist/Action Without Borders, HandsOn Network, Volunteer Solutions and All for Good/United We Serve/usaservice.org (and more, but those are the most well-known – and there are even more that have come and gone!). Many USA cities have their own volunteer-matching web sites as well. Plus, online social networking sites allow organizations to recruit volunteers as well.

Why is that a bad thing, to have so many platforms trying to serve the same organizations and volunteers? Because the vast majority of volunteer-involving organizations don’t have time to put their volunteering opportunities into each of those services, but a volunteer may use just one or two of those services and, therefore, will miss out volunteering opportunities posted to platforms he or she didn’t use. The result: less volunteer matching, not more.

I like hearing about new sites launched in other countries where such web sites don’t already exist and serve a region specifically, that are in the local language, or sites focused on a particular type of volunteering: financial management and fundraising, communications and marketing, web site development, language translation, web site development, micro volunteering, etc. Those are needed! And I really like when existing volunteer matching web sites announce that they will allow volunteering opportunities to be tagged as virtual or online, and allow their databases of opportunities to be searchable regarding such.

Before you develop yet another volunteer-matching web site:

  • Make sure there isn’t one already in existence that well serves the communities you are targeting. That means visiting existing volunteer matching sites and assessing what audience you think the site is not serving, or what service the site is not offering, but is very much needed.
  • Ask volunteer-involving organizations you want to use your service if they would use your service, instead of or in addition to what they are already using online. Ask them what they need from your service. Build your site based on their needs – not on what you think they need.
  • Get agreements with a core-group of volunteer-involving organizations, committing them to use your newly-launched service. Their involvement will add credibility to your effort. Representatives from at least some of this core group should serve on your advisory committee for this volunteer matching service.
  • Don’t create a roster of available volunteers. It never works – volunteers won’t keep their information up-to-date. A roster of volunteering opportunities, where volunteer choose tasks to be involved in, always works better than a roster of volunteers that organizations search through looking for available experts.
  • Be ready to say how this service is different from what is already out there – to the press, to donors, and to the organizations that already provide similar services.

Why not pursue the development of an online resource the volunteer-involving sector really needs! For instance:

  • a site that lists all of these volunteer-matching sites, and allows users to comment about each, rate the effectiveness and usefulness of each, etc. The site could also offer advice to both organizations and to potential volunteers on how to use volunteer-matching databases, to get the most out of them.
  • a site with a database of organizations, where each can update their information to talk about the impact volunteers have for their organizations and clients. The information would never be out-of-date, and the information could help other organizations get ideas on new ways to involve volunteers.
  • a site that offers a searchable database allowing organizations to share their volunteer policies, forms and other materials as models for other organizations. Organizations would be thrilled to use such a database to find sample volunteer orientations, volunteer applications, and other policy documents.
  • a site that offers legal and professional commentaries about state and national laws that could (and do) affect the involvement of volunteers.

I would use all of those sites!

Also see:

Using Third Party Volunteer Matching Web Sites & Apps to Recruit Volunteers

January 2025 update:

The long-time industry leader in volunteer matching web sites, VolunteerMatch, will soon be going away; the URL and assets are still there, as I write this, but the URL will eventually point to Idealist, a volunteer matching site that has floundered for years in the shadow of VolunteerMatch.

I’m stunned that VolunteerMatch could not attract the funding it needed to continue, especially in this time when we so need people to come together regarding common causes we care about and to start caring about each other again. And it’s difficult news, because I was involved with VolunteerMatch when it first launched and was called ImpactOnline, because that association is why I was chosen to direct the Virtual Volunteering Project and then went on to work for the United Nations directing its online volunteering service, and because I have relied on VolunteerMatch so much in the last three years to recruit local volunteers for the local Habitat for Humanity affiliate where I work.

I have a list of every volunteer matching web site I know of, in any country, here. If you have one, and it’s existed for more than three months, let me know in the comments and I’ll add it. Be sure to let me know if it serves a particular region or is for a particular type of volunteering. And let me know if it’s a web site or a phone-only app.

Also, here’s a list of all of the various volunteer recruitment / volunteer matching web sites of 1999. There are more than 30. Most are long gone. You can see what they looked like if you look them up on archive.org. Before you develop yet another one, have a look – what’s different about yours?

Making certain volunteers feel unwelcomed because of your language

Many volunteers are motivated by religious reasons to donate their time and expertise, and enjoy religious messages in association with their service. But many of these volunteers don’t realize that their messages regarding their belief and volunteering, made to other volunteers, can make those that are not of the same religion, or not religious at all, quite uncomfortable – even unwelcomed.

Take this message posted to the Volunteer Firefighters Facebook page, which assumes all volunteer firefighters are religious or, if they aren’t, they should be:

inappropriate

In case you don’t get it, the message literally means if a firefighter is faced with something challenging in his or her firefighting or in life in general, that person should pray to God (or Gods or Goddesses, perhaps?). The responses to the message are mostly “amens” — confirming the religious nature of the message.

Remember, this isn’t a Facebook group specifically for Christian firefighters or Muslim firefighters or Jewish firefighters or Hindu firefighters, etc. – the group is called Volunteer Firefighters. The assumption from the title is that it means ALL volunteer firefighters, not just religious ones.

What does this message say to non-relgious firefighters? It says: “You should believe in God. If you don’t, you should. Religion is how you can handle tough situations.” Imagine, for a moment, how that makes non-believing volunteer firefighters feel. If you can’t, then can you imagine if the administrators posted a message that assumed all volunteer firefighters are atheists and, if they aren’t, they should be? If a message was posted saying that the best way to handle challenging situations in life was to NOT believe in a god? Can you understand how that kind of message would be completely inappropriate for a group for all volunteer firefighters, not just religious ones?

As I noted in my earlier blog, Do you welcome people with your language?, inspired by a similar incident: most people who have been made uncomfortable by the mixing of religion and volunteering at an otherwise secular event or in an otherwise secular group are probably never going to say anything about their discomfort when the activity is infused with religion, particularly from the group’s organizers or administrators. No one wants to be seen as ruining an event or a feeling for others, even if the activity makes them feel less a member of the group – and they also don’t want to be singled out for “saving” later. Also, if you haven’t heard any complaints about these type of religious messages on your group, could it be because you’ve created an atmosphere where non-believers/other-believers don’t feel welcomed to be a part of your group – or to volunteer at all?

Sadly, this blog will be used to say I’m against religion and against religiously-motivated volunteers. I’m not, at all.

May 6, 2014 update: 

The administrator of the Volunteer Firefighters Facebook page didn’t notice the link to my blog post that I made on his group until just a few days ago, and decided to repost it to encourage people to comment. And comment they did – as you can see below. The comments started off overwhelmingly negative – just as I predicted, I was accused of being anti-Christian. Which is fascinating, as, today, I once again did a presentation for a Christian-based nonprofit regarding volunteer engagement, per their request. They do great work regarding social justice, human rights and poverty alleviation, in my opinion, and as their stated motivation is their religion, they do a lot of praying and references to their beliefs in their work with volunteers. And I have no problem with that at all – they are a religious organization and, as such, they know they are exclusionary, they are honest and upfront about that, and I respect it – and am still able to give them advice about how to improve their volunteer engagement. If I were anti-Christian, I’d refuse to work with them.

If the Volunteer Firefighters Facebook group isn’t going to focus on welcoming ALL volunteer firefighters, and is going to assume that, because most of their members are religious, then promoting religion is just dandy, then I hope they change the name of their group to Christian Volunteer Firefighters or the Religious Volunteer Firefighters. Why not be truthful and upfront about what you will – and won’t – include in your organization?

Big thanks to the Friendly Atheist for picking up the story, which resulted in the counter comments here and far more on his blog.

Also see:

Time Magazine asserts there are no organized Atheist volunteers

Do you welcome people with your language?

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site or my YouTube videos and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help.