I’m biased and naïve … to be otherwise would suggest that I’m all-knowing, yet without opinion.
As I look around, I see I’m not alone. J
A recent post by John Sumser, entitled What Is A Non-Profit?, left me puzzled. It was a good post, but I struggled to see the direct relevance to recruiting.
But then yesterday, David Manaster asked the question Why isn't DirectEmployers a federal nonprofit? Why David chose to ask the question in a public forum, rather than asking his ‘friends’ at Direct Employers, is equally puzzling to me; but taken together with John’s post, it would seem there is an underlying current of concern over Direct Employers non-profit status.
Unfortunately, David didn’t stop at asking questions … he went on to say:
“On April 12th, I realized that in spite of the DirectEmployer's Association very public trumpeting of their non-profit status, they never claim to be a 501(c) organization. John's column presents one possible reason (though definitely not the only one) why DirectEmployers is not already recognized by the IRS as a 501(c) organization. I hope that there is a better one - one that presents them in a better light. Given that a tremendous part of DirectEmployers brand and marketing is dependant on being nonprofit, and that they are now attempting to partner with the government's State Workforce Agencies to create a successor to America's Job Bank, they need to be above reproach on issues of governance.”
From my biased and naïve perspective, it seems that David is questioning the integrity and transparency of Direct Employers. I’m sure Bill and Chad will do a fine job of responding to the questions raised; but I’d like to offer a vendor’s perspective of dealing with Direct Employers … call it a character reference in rebuttal to questions of integrity and transparency.
Of all the contracts I’ve negotiated, my agreement with Direct Employers was hands down the easiest. Bill Warren has followed through, in a timely fashion without reminder, on every promise he has made to me. And this morning, the annual renewal payment arrived from Direct Employers … 20 days before it was due.
None of this makes Direct Employers, or Bill Warren, a saint. But when a company and its director shoot straight, play fair, and pay their bills early, then they’re definitely first class in my book. Whether they choose to be a for-profit, a non-profit, or a charitable organization is of no concern to me … what I really care about are the services they deliver, the value they provide to their members, and the integrity with which they honor their commitments. From my vantage point, Direct Employers is doing a great job in all three areas.
Thanks Bob, we appreciate the vote of confidence and the character reference. Coming from an gentleman like yourself, it really means something.
Posted by: Chad Sowash | May 30, 2007 at 06:42 AM
Bob,
If you're a taxpayer, and I assume that you are, then it should be a concern to you. If Direct Employers or any other organization is using a non-profit status to evade taxes that they should be paying then we should all be concerned. I am not saying that Direct Employers is doing anything wrong, but this is an area of concern for all of us.
Posted by: Steven Rothberg, CollegeRecruiter.com | June 08, 2007 at 01:21 PM
Steven,
Yes, I am a taxpayer. No, this is not an area of concern for all of us.
Last I checked it was the job of the IRS to ensure that organizations pay their fair share. So, since when did it become your or my business?
Posted by: Bob Wilson | June 08, 2007 at 07:30 PM