"Unpaid volunteer"

I have a love-hate relationship with tautologies. There are the harmless unintentional ones (hello ‘ATM machine’ or ‘forward planning’), and whilst I don’t love these, I smile politely whenever they’re uttered, since they’re often uttered in ignorance. To do otherwise (eg. by interrupting the speaker post-tautology and pointing out the error) often only provokes spluttered dismissiveness, the strength of which has been summoned in order to counteract the rudeness of the original tautological observation.

And then there are the hate-hate me-tautology relationships. ‘Past history’: what else is history going to be?! ‘Added bonus’: it’s already a bonus!! ‘Unsolved mystery’: that’s why it’s a mystery!! And ‘unpaid volunteer’: this must rank among these other monstrosities. It’s a recent discovery (again, whilst driving – coincidence?), and was plastered on the back of a garish fluorescent vest, the kind that accompanies the International Noise for Fundraising: money rattling in tin. I can’t remember what the cause was this time, and I don’t say ‘this time’ with any sense of denigration or resentment, but gosh: could you find a single traffic light in this town unmanned by a sunglasses-and-heart-on-sleeve-wearing devotee on any given bright Saturday afternoon? I think not.

(Perhaps I’ve got compassion-fatigue… Speaking of which, has anyone else noticed the strange logical follow-through here? When you’re fatigued usually, you’re meant to stop whatever’s tiring you out. Ipso facto, are we licensed for malice & callousness for a prescribed time? )

In any case, walking the well-trodden path shared by pedestrian & motorist was this “unpaid volunteer”. Now, I can deal with the tautology readily enough, gritted teeth notwithstanding. I understand the respective charity/organisation/cause is attempting to convey that these salt-of-the-earth men & women are giving up their own time to be there, with little more than an overheated water bottle & fold-up chair to keep them company.

What gets me is the fact that these ‘unpaid volunteers’ are being branded as such whilst asking for money. What an oversight from those at the higher echelons (…or whoever orders the garish vests)! Have Mr. & Mrs. Citizen become so untrusting that it’s not enough to call them volunteers but rather ‘unpaid volunteers’? Am I to be persuaded more forcefully to donate because of the fact that my $1.15 won’t be pocketed by the smiling bandit at my car window? Do I really need reassuring that my hard-earned dollars are going straight to the charity coffers, rather than to buttressing a kind of volunteer paradise where champagne & truffles flow on the corner of Smith & Johnson Streets? Is the absence of pay to be worn as a badge of honour, as distinct from those-dodgy-you-can’t-be-sure-about-them-‘volunteer’-types at the local Salvos? Am I so dim-witted that I can no longer do the mental math on what ‘volunteer’ means but rather need fluorescent reiteration? Does not this ‘unpaid volunteer’ label undermine the very Aussie spirit it is seeking to trade on, turning what was once regarded as ‘doing a good turn’ into ‘making sure everyone knows we’re doing this out of the kindness of our hearts… the KINDNESS of our hearts, did you hear?’?

As with all tautologies, I am thankful for the deafening clarity ‘unpaid volunteer’ brings, superfluity aside. Better this than ‘working for the dole’.