Volunteering, if you’ve ever done it you know what I mean when I say it just makes you feel like a better person. The world seems rosier, the air fresher, the people nicer, the smile on your face wider. If you find yourself passionate about something (anything!!) then volunteering in some way related to that passion benefits you as well as those you are volunteering for. You feel elation, satisfaction and contentment – ‘giving’ is a really underrated way of making you feel better about your entire existence (in my opinion), as you get to make somebody else’s day better – somebody who really might need to have seen your friendly face or experienced your unrequited help. So why would everybody not want to do some sort of volunteer work?? Why would any sane person not want to make the world a better place by giving their time to support something they are enthusiastic about, making themselves feel great at the same time??
TIME…..time is the dirty word here!!! Well in my opinion anyway. Obviously, there are always going to be people who are just not into helping others or making the world a better place and that’s fine (as long as they don’t mind being crossed off my Christmas list…..). Haha.
So my question…..could libraries promote this kind of social change (where we start to care more about other people or animals) by providing their employee’s with valuable time to volunteer?? Ask yourself……”If your employer paid your salary or normal wage whilst you volunteered would it allow you the time and create the desire to do so?”
When I rule the … let’s just say ‘world’ but I mean a library… I will make it mandatory for every single staff member in my ‘world’ to volunteer for at least four hours a month (during work hours if necessary), in a not-for-profit registered charity of their choice, and as their ruler (or employer) I will be required to pay them their normal wage/salary for said four hours a month.
Now I know it may seem like paying an employee to volunteer defeats the purpose of volunteering entirely, (and of course there are those of us out there that don’t require payment) but, I feel like it is kind of a ‘distribution of wealth’ type scenario, where the means to the end isn’t the important part, just the end result is what matters. And surely my ‘world’ can handle the loss of somebody for four hours a month so that they can go and help another ‘world’ who can’t afford to pay them for their time. I just think it would start a chain reaction that would make the real world a better place for all of us? Or am I delusional, naive or just being too simplistic?
I feel like at this point I should shake both my hands in a ‘let’s go!’ type movement (like Nicholas Cage in ’60 Seconds’ when they play ‘Lowrider’ and he says “Let’s ride” before stealing all those cars!!)…….but maybe a simple “Discuss” or “Over to you” would suffice!