Sept 24 - "Sitting Allowances"

From: David Zarembka
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 9:00 AM
Subject: AGLI -- Report from Kenya -- "Sitting Allowances" -- Sept 24, 2008

Dear All,

I think it will surprise many of you that international NGO's (non-governmental organizations) are not viewed favorably here in East and Central Africa. This includes not only the big aid organizations like World Vision, Catholic Relief Services, Action Aid, the Red Cross and others, but also NGO's that are much smaller in scope. I have been collecting comments on the dissatisfaction with these NGO's. At worst these are considered the newest form of neo-colonialism and exploitation of Africa. Hopefully I'll write an essay on this another day.

Today I am going to cover only one aspect of NGO aid to the region--paying "sitting allowances" for people to attend meetings, seminars, workshops, and other activities promoted by the NGO's. This might surprise you even more than my comment in the first paragraph--people are paid to be involved in learning opportunities for their own benefit. Sometimes this pay is significant. I have heard of $35 per day payments for attendance to participants when the daily wage is $1 per day!!! No wonder people want to attend and give glowing reports of how good the workshops were.

This payment is called by many names; "transport or travel" (even though people are only walking from nearby), per diem, stipend, "chai" (which means "tea" in Swahili and is a euphemism for "a bribe"), and sitting allowance.

It is AGLI's policy not to pay any "sitting allowances." In this we are at total odds with the prevailing custom of the other NGO's and the expectations of the people here. People come to the workshops expecting to be paid. I remember when we first implemented this "no sitting allowance" policy in Burundi in 2001. The trauma healing workshop was for teachers from Kibimba Primary School and Kibimba Secondary School. The teachers from the secondary school refused to come since they weren't being given a sitting allowance so the workshop was only half full. My own feeling at that time (and ever since) is that the teachers were coming for the pay and not for the learning. AVP and HROC workshops are voluntary and that is critical to their success. If people were paid it would be an inducement that renders them no longer "voluntary." Do those other NGO's who pay sitting allowances think that their activities are so meager that no one will come unless they are paid?

We have learned to tell people beforehand that they will not be paid. Sometimes people show up and expect to be paid and then leave when they realize that they will receive nothing but a good meal. Note that in IDP camps in North Kivu for example, the fact that a good meal will be served is an inducement in itself. But eating together is part of the reconciliation process because in the cultures here only friends eat together.

We have had many testimonies from people who came expecting to be paid yet decided to stay (at least for the first day) and by the end realized that what they got was more valuable than being paid. Here is one such testimony from Jérome Birorewuname: "One time when I was coming from the workshop, going home, they said, 'Where are you coming from?' I said, 'I'm coming from the workshop.' They said, 'Oh yeah, you must have received a big stipend for three days?' I said, 'Big stipend?' One said, 'Yes, of course if you are there for three days.' I told him, 'Yes, I got a lot out of the workshop.' I gave him this example, 'You know ugali [maize meal, mush]?' 'Yes, of course, I am Burundian, I know ugali.' 'Imagine that you have a lot of ugali in front of you, but your heart is bleeding, will the ugali take away the hurt and bitterness from the wound in your heart?' He said, 'No.' 'That's why I say it's a lot of money, because I come home with peace. Even if they had given us those big, big stipends, there would be no meaning to it for me because my heart was still bleeding, but now I have my heart. So peace is more meaningful than money."

Here are my reasons for not paying sitting allowances:

1. The workshop would no longer be voluntary, but would have an inducement. In a poor country this inducement can be more important than the content of the workshop.

2. If funds were given, could we trust the positive evaluations we receive and the motivations for requests for more workshops? Is it for the workshops or the funds that they offer?

3. When compensation is given people compete to get in. The recruiters (and these can be pastors or government officials, or other HROC participants) try to fill in the workshop with their relatives and friends.

4. In some cases, when participants are selected and a sitting allowance is given, the recruiter demands some or all of the allowance for themself.

5. Giving out small amounts of money is a real hassle and destroys the end of the workshop as people jostle to be paid quickly so they can leave.

6. Who really pays? It is not the organization (at least in AGLI's case) since we have a set amount of funds we can spend and when they are finished, there is no more. I calculate that if we gave the usual sitting allowance we would only be able to offer five workshops while we are able to do six workshops without the allowance. So 100 participants would be paid using funds that could instead have provided the workshop for another 20 participants. Those 20 would-be participants are the ones who would be paying.

7. When participants are paid it implies that they are in a victim role and AGLI/HROC or AVP facilitators are the rescuers. We want people's attitudes to change and not being paid to attend is the first attitude that needs to be changed. This becomes the first step out of the victim role. In Rwanda, which after the genocide was flooded with NGO's (and still is compared to say, Burundi) this habit has been the hardest to break. We have the least problem with this in up-country Kenya where NGO's are very thin on the ground (even during the recent crisis).

I have to admit that our refusal to pay sitting allowances (and we are even judged by how good the food is that we serve at the lunch) gives us a lot of problems. NGO's have spoiled the environment and we are trying to change the environment.

I hope that this report is not too esoteric or philosophical for you!

Peace,

Dave


David Zarembka, Coordinator
African Great Lakes Initiative of the Friends Peace Teams

****************************************************