Sorry, but this really isn’t a good look, @ActionOnHearing.

Advertising a *voluntary* role with the aim of increasing your engagement, delivering your social media strategy, and producing content “with a focus on #deaf awareness” is pretty shocking. https://actiononhearingloss.org.uk/get-involved/volunteer-with-us/opportunity/home-based-social-media-assistant/

Given that your Twitter account has had a few blips in recent weeks (see this now deleted tweet), it would appear that the role has been created to get a #deaf person on board to help with social media content, and make sure it’s sensitive and appropriate. https://twitter.com/deafmemesexe/status/1306342753735933952

We see this in the description for the position, where you say “it would be good if applicants: have a developed understanding of deaf awareness, Deaf culture and issues affecting D/deaf people and those with hearing loss and tinnitus.”

People who have a strong level of understanding about these topics are #deaf people themselves, @ActionOnHearing, and deaf and disabled people should always be paid for sharing their knowledge, and their lived experiences.

I note that the description says it’s a 2-5 hour a week job, but when you look at what this entails and the level of detail required, it not only reads like a paid role, but it looks like quite an intense list of regular tasks to complete in such a tight timeframe.

Then there’s the matter of what said volunteer would get in return for lending their time. If you look at the below list, only two of these read as advantages to the individual - the rest directly benefit the organisation. This does not look like a fair balance, @ActionOnHearing.

So you have two options, of which the second is more preferable:

1. Either the current social media team - which I’m assuming are predominantly hearing - receive some #deaf awareness training.

Or:

2. You hire deaf members of staff to help influence company decisions.

I can see that this was likely done in response to recent criticism, @ActionOnHearing, and I appreciate that there is a desire to do better (I note you’ve said words to this effect in the past), but I’m afraid this really isn’t the right approach at all.

This is also an important point. The ‘what’s in it for you’ section states that the volunteer will help @ActionOnHearing be deaf aware.

As a leading #deaf charity, the organisation should be deaf aware already. https://twitter.com/insideoutsox/status/1313176726625808384

Response from Action on Hearing Loss’ CEO, Mark Atkinson https://twitter.com/markataction/status/1313177916168187904

Hi Michael, I appreciate this response, and that there is a clear desire here for the charity to do better. However, the balance between what the volunteer contributes and gets from the position leans far towards the former. Payment would address this disparity. https://twitter.com/thatmichaelw/status/1313182195281002496

Also, given the responsibilities of this role, I feel this differs from the charity’s wider volunteer network, who are contributing in other areas, which may not require in-depth knowledge of deaf culture and/or social media marketing skills.