If hard data, anecdotal evidence, and common sense mean anything, Canada’s non-profit sector could soon be stripped of its best managers and professionals.

Educated, talented and experienced, it’s not hard to imagine that many professionals – a largely female group – are checking the want ads in the for-profit sector and the so-called “quango” or quasi-government sector (schools, hospitals, universities, etc.)

And why not? In most cases the pay is better than the non-profit sector. In fact, the quango sector’s median hourly pay rate is double.

The wage gap is a major theme highlighted in a recent report by the Canadian Policy Research Networks.

Ron Saunders

CPRN Work Network director Ron Saunders says that while he expected some differences in pay, the disparity caught him off guard.

“The gap was a surprise because it is clearly huge,” he says. “I think it is a major issue for the sector.”

Based on that disparity, round-table discussions with industry leaders and research academics, and supplementary research literature, Saunders says the non-profit sector may have reason to worry.

“I get the impression that there is some urgency here, that there is a growing concern . . . that people may be burning out, or getting turned off because they are being asked to do a lot in a precariously funded situation, and for pay that’s low.”

The final conclusions in the report were drawn from a series of CPRN research papers. Research focused on paid workers in the non-profit sector, looking at demographic characteristics, working conditions and human resources challenges the sector faces.

Drawing on information collected in the Workplace and Employee Survey released by Statistics Canada in late 2000, many of the report’s conclusions were positive.

Indeed, the nearly 900,000 paid workers – about eight per cent of all paid employees in Canada – do enjoy their work and the contributions they make to society. According to the report:

* Working conditions in the non-profit sector were considered above average.

* The percentage of employees with access to benefits, flexible hours, and training was higher than the for-profit sector.

* Staff was more involved in decision-making more than the for-profit sector.

* There was greater availability of personal and family supports, and a higher likelihood of a procedure for resolving workplace disputes.

Data also showed that the non-profit sector is predominantly female (74 per cent), older than the for-profit workforce and with a high percentage of well-educated professional staff. Managers and professionals also make up a high percentage of employment in the sector.

While 86 per cent of paid employees reported they were satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs in 1999, one group wasn’t happy.

Employees 45 years and older were more likely than those in the quango or for-profit sector to say they were “dissatisfied or very dissatisfied” with their pay and benefits.

According to the 1999 survey, the median hourly wage for a manager in the non-profit sector was $16.44 compared to $32.88 (quango) and $20.14 (for-profit). Rates for professional staff were $19.73 (non-profit), $26.16 (quango) and $23 (for-profit).

Common sense would suggest that dissatisfied managers and professionals might be ready to jump ship, especially to the quango sector that, in effect, has a similar public service mission.

And they may be welcomed with open arms. Baby boomers, especially those in government and the broader public service, will leave the workforce in large numbers in the next few years, creating openings.

“It’s another reason for concern,” Saunders says. “There is going to be heightened competition facing non-profit employers for skilled employees in the next five to 10 years. With the wage gap, are they (non-profits) going to be able to attract and retain talented people?”

In its conclusion, the CPRN report suggests that four areas of concern need to be addressed:

* The sector needs funders to consider longer-term, flexible funding rather than providing money for fixed projects. Such funding would help support core operations and investment in infrastructure and training. Non-profits also have a duty to educate their funders to describe the situation they face, their goals and constraints.

* A national human resources sector council needs to be established to help non-profit groups pool resources around HR needs, skill development and affordable training, outreach recruiting on a collective basis, and to help develop multi-employer benefit plans. (Note: A feasibility study has been launched on this issue.)

* Non-profits must promote their unique advantages when recruiting: A higher-quality working environment and the opportunity to serve the community and do fulfilling work alongside like-minded peers, and;

* Employers need to address the wage gap for highly qualified staff.

Saunders says the wage gap will be hard to address for some groups, but boards of directors have some responsibility to know what is being paid for comparable work, if not in other sectors, at least elsewhere in the non-profit sector.

“We also wonder if there isn’t a bit of an attitude issue,” Saunders says.

“People may need to do some soul searching based on our findings.

“There may be a view on the part of some . . . that if you come to work in the non-profit sector, you should be expected to work for a lot less money, because you are coming for the opportunity to fulfil a public-service mission.”

He questions if boards can continue to operate under that philosophy, especially if competition intensifies for qualified professionals.

While many people come to the non-profit sector out of a sense of public service – and find that element fulfilling – the bottom line is that at the end of the day, it’s still a job, he notes.

And there are other rewards to consider – money being one of them.

* Note: A summary of the report, Passion and Commitment Under Stress, can be downloaded at www.cprn.org