Page 1 of 1

2017 Australian Human Resources Institute accounts

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:27 pm
by JWheldon
Have attached the 2017 accounts for the Australian Human Resources Institute.

Maybe the members of ARHI would want to take a closer look at the financial accounts.

This entity was started in 2006. On 29 June 2009 it was granted income tax exempt status. Registered as a charity?

Only about 15,000 members, yet it has about $11 million in reserves

It generates around 2.5 million to about 3 million in sponsorship. Is Qantas one of its major sponsors? Did CPA Australia sponsor them?

Sponsorship 2013 $2,725,578, 2014 $2,665,286 , 2015 $2,610,700, 2016 $2,648,460


Goodwill of $2,118,092 ????

Peter Wilson Base Salary (Inc Super) $188.510 plus committee Fee $4,250 = $192,760


What do others think?

Re: 2017 Australian Human Resources Institute accounts

Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:44 am
by Stomper
So looks like the poor old Directors miss out with fees of $29,500 while the Chair creams off a tidy $188,510 - not bad for 6 meetings a year!

Re: 2017 Australian Human Resources Institute accounts

Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:09 pm
by Brett Stevenson
Its amazing really. Try to ask yourself what is the purpose of the AHRI organisation?
Its pretty rubbery and my guess would be that if it did not exist there would be no great loss. That is a critical indicator of an organisation.
Brings to mind Jeffersons quote that governments exist to serve the governed not the governors.
CPA managed to turn that on its head such that the governors reigned supreme. Methinks AHRI shows signs of a similar problem.
From the annual revenue of $14.4 million, it spends only about 43% on providing services directly to the members, the rest i.e.about 57% or $8 million is spent on administration and internal costs.
And of course the largesse provided to the Chairman of $192,000 is enormous when you consider that the CEO's salary is just $236K (plus possible $30k bonus).
No wonder Peter Wilson has been in the 'job' for so long. It comes across like another example of an organisation being run for the benefit of the board and staff. Almost 1.4% of total revenue goes to the Chairman. That is incredible. Just relate that to ay other organisation's revenue and you will see it is very very high.
Of course the other directors at $29K clearly are not up to the same high quality if remuneration is any indicator. It would be very telling to dig a bit deeper into the expenses of this organisation to see just who benefitted from them. My guess is conflicts of interest would abound.