How to ruin a charity auction

Bah. I didn’t want to post this on here. I hate it when real life collides with blog life. And in somewhere as small as Cape Town (and its notorious Southern Suburbs) collisions are unavoidable. I even bumped into Ashanti in the pub the other day. Seriaas.
Can you imagine how much fun that was? (And did you know that The Sun newspaper in the UK read my post and then rang them for a comment?)
(No – neither did I.)
(Obviously, I do now.)

But this has really annoyed me and needs to be got out of my system. And, bolstered by my Constitutional right to freedom of speech, I’m going to speak. Freely.
Please be warned that rude words may follow, although I’ll try to limit them as much as possible. After all, my Mum reads this blog.

Charity begins at home, but if you don’t have a home, that’s an absolute bummer. If you don’t have a home, you don’t have a kitchen and if you don’t have a kitchen, you’re likely to be going hungry. This lack of home, kitchen and food is all too common in South Africa and so I was delighted to help out in a silent auction via email for the Hopetown Soup Kitchen. When I say “help out”, I wasn’t organising or anything, I was bidding.
You can see a list of the items and the sponsors on that link above. Nice stuff; generous folks.

Bids were flying in from left, right and centre and we were ably kept up to date by organiser Nikki. Banter was exchanged, but all in good humour. With it being a long weekend, the auction was even extended by 48 hours so that people who had given work email addresses could get back to the office on Tuesday and not miss out. It was that sort of real friendly atmosphere: people enjoying a bit of healthy, fun competition against their friends while doing their bit for charity.
And then at 8pm last night, the silent hammer came down. Silently. The group email was sent out and R4,700 had been raised for Hopetown Soup Kitchen. Well done all.

And then, (literally) 2 minutes later, a second email. Updated results. An updated total. But how?
How, because apparently at 7:59, some [naughty word] – we will call him Martin – had added an extra R10 (“Ten” “Rand”) (90p) ($1.30) to each of three items and won them.
Honestly: ten rand? Ten. Rand.
What an utter [deleted].

So stuff which had been going up R50 or R100 per bid was sold for odd totals like R760 and R1010. And the joy of winning something and doing one’s bit for charity, which had previously been spread across a range of individuals, was cornered by one [censored] individual with his tight-fisted, over-competitive, last-minute greediness.

There will be those of you who will point out that Martin still has to pay up for the stuff he won with his extra R30, and that the money is all going to a good cause. And you’d be right on an absolute minimum of two counts. But he’s still picked up three rather nice items at well below their retail value with his unnecessarily competitive tactics.

To be honest, organiser Nikki handled it with graceful professionalism. But I’ll bet that was only because Martin had put a delivery receipt on his email and would have moaned if she’d not acknowledged his bids. Personally, I would have told him exactly where to stuff his R30 and let him know how utterly classless and distasteful his behaviour was. But maybe Nikki isn’t from Yorkshire.

Looks like it was Martin‘s lucky day in more ways then one, then.

Note: Martin‘s email address is available to the highest bidder in the comments section below.
All proceeds to the Hopetown Soup Kitchen. Reserve price is R31.

UPDATE: Group email calls on Martin to raise each of his R10 to at least R50 to save face.
Second group email describes Martin as “not ethical” and laments his “rough call”.

Striking nastiness

Not much from me tonight, but here is an interesting story on the current British Airways dispute.
To be perfectly honest, I haven’t paid a huge amount of interest as to what is going on between BA and the Unite Union, but as this is slowly boiling down to workers (and the public) taking sides in what seems to be becoming a personal scrap between BA’s Willie Walsh and Tony Woodley et al of Unite, I’m getting more interested.  

Sky News was reporting some pretty nasty stuff going on and reading the Telegraph article brought back some vivid memories of the 1984 Miners’ Strike. I lived in Sheffield at the time, and the papers were full of the violence that surrounded that strike, not least the infamous Battle of Orgreave on the other side of the city. And yes, again there was that personal element at the top – Thatcher versus Scargill.
But that was the dirty, grimy mining industry and these are the guys that offer you drinks on the night flight to Heathrow. That was 1984, in the rough North of England; this is 26 years on in the shiny corridors of Terminal 5.

So why on earth do I find myself reading stuff like this?

It can be revealed that some female cabin staff braved the threat of intimidation by union workers to go to work as normal yesterday.
Some of those who worked had received threatening emails on Friday night, one of which read: “If any of you go into work tomorrow, your life won’t be worth living.”

Nice.

There’s obviously more to this than just a row over whether hot towels should be dished out on short-haul flights. With the UK general election around the corner and Unite funding the Labour Party to the tune of £11million, with Charlie Whelan as Unite’s political director and with these ridiculous threats flying around, this is going to be a story worth digging deeper into.

I’m off to polish my spade.

UPDATE: Started reading on the Miners’ Strike instead of the BA one. But there are some thought-provoking and salient lines in there, relevant to the BA dispute:

Those who called the miners “the enemy within” might have won the war, but they did not win many hearts or minds.

Trouble is, I’m just not sure which side they’re relevant to.

Zuma’s Spousal Budget – Calm Down!

Huge uproar around South Africa today as it emerged last night that the country pays a “massive” R15.5m per year to support President Jacob Zuma’s three wives. According to Minister in the Presidency Collins Chabane, the money is spent on:

“…personal support staff – secretary and researcher – domestic air travel and accommodation, and international air travel and accommodation for official visits abroad approved by the President.”

The budget has increased from just over R8.1m in the previous year, when Kgalema Motlanthe was in charge – although he kept his private life private and his wife did not attend any public engagements.
In 2007/8, when Thabo Mbeki (remember him?) was in charge, the budget stood at R8.4m.

Everyone is up in arms, because obviously, if Zuma had less wives, we wouldn’t be paying as much, innit? How dare he follow his cultural path of polygamy. Of course, there are a couple of things that have been forgotten in all the fuss. Aren’t there always?

  • SA is effectively paying R5m per wife per year. Two years ago, we were were paying R8.4m for a wife we rarely saw.
    Last year, we were paying R8.1m last year for a wife we weren’t even sure existed.
    So where were all the complaints then?
  • R15m per year amounts to about R0.30 ($0.04 or 2½ pence!) per head of population per year. That’s 2.5c per month.
    And since you were already paying half of that without complaint before, you’re actually moaning about an increase of just over 1 cent per month.
    Tell me, in all honesty, did you have big plans for that 1c? Did you?

I don’t disagree that there are other things on which the money could be “better spent”: hospitals, education, housing etc etc. But isn’t that always the case? Why the huge uproar over this? 
No, this is just another misinformed and opportunist attack on Zuma’s lifestyle by the media, helpfully egged on by the DA.
When are they going to realise that their efforts would be better served on matters which they have the power (and democratic right) to challenge? Zuma’s polygamy is not one of them.

And if you’re one of those people who are being swept up by the sensationalism of it all before you’ve actually looked at the facts, well, maybe you need to sit down and think why you’re so upset: is it really that 30 cents a year you’re having to fork out or is there actually something else driving that anger?

Kortbroek goes probing

News in this morning’s Cape Times that Marthinus Christoffel Johannes van Kortbroek, South African Minister for Tourism has demanded a probe into allegations that some accommodation providers are hiking prices excessively for the World Cup.

“We have noted allegations that accommodation establishments in the tourism industry are not responsible, and are inflating prices excessively,” van Schalkwyk said.

Well done, Marthinus. The rest of us only noticed that fact a few months back. It’s good to see that you and your department have got your collective fingers so firmly on the pulse of what is going to be the biggest tourist event this country has ever seen.
My faith in the Government is restored. Unfortunately.

He said the survey would help safeguard the reputation of the tourism industry since South Africa is known as a “value-for-money destination”.
“Price-hiking could damage the reputation of our tourism industry. However, it must be kept in mind that June and July will be high season in South Africa, and tourists should not expect the normal low-season prices,” he said.

Absolutely correct, Minister. However, nor should tourists expect to pay mark-ups of over 300% as we recently noted at the Ashanti Backpackers Lodge in Gardens.

Grant Thornton has been commissioned to conduct the survey, which is expected to be completed in three weeks.

…leaving the Government with very limited time to do absolutely nothing about it. Meh.

This article prompted me to give Ashanti a call, just to see if they have any rooms left for the World Cup. I didn’t even have to fake a British accent, since I still have half of one of those.
“Plenty,” was the reply.

Goodness me. I wonder why?