The question of trustee pay is one that regularly stirs deep (and often divided) opinion in the charity sector. For many, it touches a nerve: raising issues of values, trust, financial stewardship, and equity.
In a recent column for Civil Society, journalist and sector commentator Tania Mason argues that the debate has been clouded by misinformation and unexamined assumptions. And it’s time we tackled it head-on.
“Much of the resistance to trustee pay is based not on evidence, but on outdated ideas and misplaced fears,” Mason writes.
What are the arguments against paying trustees?
Traditionally, UK charity trustees are unpaid, with many seeing this as a safeguard of altruism and integrity. The most common arguments include:
- Trustees are volunteers, paying them undermines the spirit of service.
- It diverts funds from front-line delivery.
- It may reduce public trust in charities.
But as Mason points out, these arguments don’t always hold up under scrutiny.
Most notably, other sectors don’t hold volunteers to the same expectations of fiduciary responsibility. Charity trustees bear legal liability, make high-stakes financial decisions, and are expected to navigate compliance, strategy, and risk, all for free.
And while some suggest that payment would open the door to conflicts of interest or poor motives, there’s little evidence to support this. In fact, in high-performing sectors, pay typically comes with higher expectations and accountability.
Why this matters now
The real issue, Mason argues, is access and equity. When trustee roles are unpaid:
- The pool of potential candidates becomes limited to those with spare time and financial security.
- People from lower-income backgrounds, or with caring responsibilities, are effectively excluded.
- Boards lack lived experience, diversity of perspective, and challenge, all essential for robust governance.
This creates a kind of polite homogeneity, which might look fine on paper, but lacks the dynamic insight and challenge that today’s charities need.
If we’re serious about inclusive governance, Mason writes, we need to stop pretending unpaid roles are fair or sustainable.
So what’s the way forward?
This isn’t about mandating trustee pay across the board, but about giving charities more choice, flexibility and honesty.
Many small charities won’t have the resources to pay trustees. But others, particularly larger ones with multi-million-pound budgets, might find that paying trustees opens doors to better governance, deeper scrutiny, and broader talent.
The Charity Commission already allows for payment in some cases, but the stigma and lack of sector guidance means most organisations don’t even consider it.
It’s time to change that.
What this means for funders and funding bids
At Fundin, we work with charities every day that are navigating board development and governance challenges alongside funding needs. One thing we see consistently:
- Stronger boards = stronger funding applications.
- Funders are increasingly interested in how boards represent and reflect the communities they serve.
- Lived experience, diversity, and governance capacity are no longer peripheral issues, they’re core to funder confidence.
Whether or not your trustees are paid, the question is: are they supported, representative, and equipped? That’s what funders want to see.
So if trustee pay could help address long-standing gaps, in skills, in representation and in inclusion, maybe it’s not just a financial issue. Maybe it’s a funding strategy.
