When "Just Ask a Volunteer" Becomes a Problem: Lacey Kempinski on Staffing Gaps and Goodwill

Photo by Christina Morillo from Pexels. Three diverse women having a meeting in a bright office

Lacey Kempinski and I have hung out in the same internet circles for a few years but finally met in person thanks to Maria Rio! Lacey is the Founder and CEO of Balanced Good,  a people-first consultancy that supports social impact organizations through times of change. We followed up with a few conversations around how nonprofits value labour and thought you might want to listen in…

JPP: I love that one of Balanced Good’s signature services is parental leave coverage! We know that women still do most of the parenting and caregiving. Since the nonprofit sector is a woman-majority sector, high-quality and dependable leave coverage just seems critical for consistent community care and team morale.  

When an organization is short-staffed during a leave, the instinct to "just ask a volunteer" can feel harmless in the moment. Where does that instinct start to become a problem? 

LK: At Balanced Good, we understand where that instinct comes from. Nonprofits are used to figuring things out with limited resources, and when someone goes on leave, people will naturally start looking for ways to fill the gap.

The problem starts when we stop asking what volunteers are there to do, and instead ask what work we're missing. Those are two different questions.

Volunteers choose to give their time because they want to contribute to the mission, not because they're there to replace paid staff. Once we're asking them to carry responsibilities that belong to an employee, we've crossed into a different conversation.

JPP: One of my mentors, Erin Spink, often uses the quote “volunteers support, they don’t supplant”. 

LK: Yes! And it reflects something bigger. As a sector, we've become so accustomed to stretching people that we sometimes lose sight of where the boundaries should be.

First, it's volunteers, then existing staff take on a little more, then someone works through lunch or answers emails after hours. Each decision feels small on its own, but together they create a culture where everyone's time starts to feel endlessly available.

A parental leave shouldn't depend on how much unpaid labour people are willing to give. It should depend on thoughtful planning and an organization that values people's contributions, whether they're staff or volunteers.

JPP: So, does this mean volunteer involvement during parental leave is never appropriate? 

LK: If a volunteer wants to help during a leave, the focus should stay on volunteer work. They might take on an extra shift, help with an event, or support activities that already fit within the role they signed up for. That's different from asking them to step into someone's job or become the solution to a staffing gap.

JPP: Tell me more about that. Where’s the line?

LK: The distinction comes down to purpose and responsibility. 

• Are they enhancing the organization's work as a volunteer?

• Or are they covering work that really belongs to a paid employee?

  
  

It's also important to remember that volunteers deserve the same clarity and care as staff. They should know what's expected of them, have appropriate support, and never feel pressure to fill a gap because the organization doesn't have another plan.

For me, the best volunteer experiences are built around choice, purpose, and meaningful contribution. Once the role starts looking like an unpaid staff position, it's a good sign to pause and ask whether we're solving the right problem.

JPP: So much volunteer engagement work involves expectation setting and management!  For me, that needs to be addressed through policies and procedures, honest conversations, and a culture that values both boundaries and collaboration.

At the same time, I’ve met volunteers who genuinely want to step up during a staffing gap and to do it pro bono. In a few cases, these folks were stewarded by past leaders who purposely kept boundaries fuzzy so the organization could… honestly, I have to say exploit here… so the organization could exploit their goodwill and deep connection. 

Those volunteers would, in turn, approach their service through a lens of martyrdom and resentment. So, how should leaders who want to do things more ethically handle these situations? 

LK: I think the first thing to do is thank them. Offers like that usually come from a place of genuine care for the organization and the people in it.

However, I would not think the right response is to accept it.

As leaders, our job is to protect healthy boundaries, even when someone is offering to cross them willingly. If the work is important enough that it needs to be done, then it's important enough to think carefully about who should be doing it and how.

Accepting an offer like that might solve today's problem, but it also sets a precedent. It quietly reinforces the idea that when staffing gets tight, unpaid labour is the backup plan. That's not fair to volunteers, and it's not a sustainable way to run an organization.

Instead, I'd thank them for their generosity and ask if there are ways they'd like to continue contributing within the volunteer role they signed up for. At the same time, I'd look at what work can wait, what work needs to be redistributed, and where the organization needs to focus or invest in proper coverage.

JPP: Thank you for bringing up organizational sustainability. I totally agree! When unpaid labour is the known and default backup, this erodes trust among volunteers, which can lead to reputational, legal, and financial repercussions. Volunteers talk, and volunteers donate. Volunteers have also sued and won cases against the organizations they serve with. 

Have you seen situations where the volunteer absorbed extra work during a staffing gap? 

LK: Yes, I have seen it, and I will say it is not always obvious.

Sometimes it's a volunteer who keeps saying yes because they care deeply about the organization. 

Other times, a staff member quietly absorbs another person's work and tells everyone they're fine. Everything looks like it’s working... for a while.

JPP: Ooh… they’re donating that extra time because they care… but resenting it on the inside!

LK: Yes, and over time, the impact becomes noticeable. People become tired. They're less engaged. They stop bringing the same energy or ideas they once did. Sometimes they leave altogether, and everyone wonders what happened because there wasn't a single breaking point.

From my perspective, that's one of the risks of relying on people's goodwill as a staffing strategy. Goodwill is a wonderful thing, but it's not an unlimited resource.

In my opinion, one of the biggest misconceptions in our sector is the assumption that because people are passionate about the mission, they have unlimited capacity. They don't. The people are part of the mission too.

JPP: That’s a great way of thinking about one of my biggest pet peeves about this sector: that nonprofit workers get paid in warm fuzzies, so real compensation isn’t as important. So what needs to change?

LK: In working with many organizations, our team has learned that the healthiest organizations don't assume people will keep giving more. They notice when someone has been carrying extra weight, they acknowledge it, and they make a plan before temporary support quietly becomes the new normal.

JPP: So, when an organization notices that a staff member has been taking on extra, what are their next steps?

LK: When someone takes on meaningful responsibilities beyond their role, I think it's important to stop and ask whether we've changed the job. If the answer is yes, then we should also be talking about whether their compensation or scope should change.

That doesn't mean every temporary task comes with a salary increase. There are always moments when teams pitch in and help each other. That's part of working together.

The difference is when having to pitch in becomes carrying out another person's responsibilities for weeks or months. At that point, it's no longer a small favour. It's a different workload, and it deserves to be acknowledged.

JPP: But of course, that doesn’t always happen. What are the barriers? 

LK: I think what gets in the way is that nonprofits are often operating under real financial constraints. Leaders worry there isn't room in the budget, or they don't want to set a precedent they can't sustain. Those are definitely real concerns.

But I also think there's sometimes an unspoken expectation that because people care deeply about the mission, they'll simply absorb the extra work. The mission matters, but so do the people doing the work.

Even if additional compensation isn't possible, there should still be an honest conversation. Be clear about what's changing, how long it's expected to last, what support is available, and how you'll recognize that contribution. 

JPP: I love that advice. Transparency and recognition! Yes!

LK: What else should nonprofit leaders consider when deciding how to cover a leave? 

My recommendation is that they start by asking, "What actually needs to happen while this person is away?" 

Not everything has to continue exactly as it did before.

Sometimes we put pressure on ourselves to maintain every project, every meeting, and every commitment, when a leave is really an opportunity to step back and ask what's essential for the next few months.

JPP: Ooh, yes, not accepting that the status quo is the best and only way. What’s next? 

LK: From there, I'd be thinking about a few things:

• Is the work being shared fairly? 

• Does anyone have the capacity to take on more? 

• Are we asking people to stretch for a short period, or are we quietly changing their jobs? 

• And if we're redistributing work, how are we recognizing and supporting the people taking it on?

  
  

I'd also be thinking about the person going on leave. They should be able to step away knowing the organization has a plan. That's part of creating a workplace where people feel supported through different stages of life, and are excited to return to work when that time comes.

The hope is that a good leave plan isn't about squeezing the same amount of work out of fewer people. It's about making thoughtful decisions, setting realistic expectations, and caring for the people who stay, as well as the person who's away.

JPP: Bringing it back to volunteer engagement before we wrap up, what’s your advice on how organizations should communicate with volunteers about staffing gaps and leaves? 

LK: My approach, and our approach at Balanced Good, is to always start with openness. Volunteers don't need every detail, but they do appreciate knowing what's changing and how it might affect them.

If a volunteer works closely with the person going on leave, it's important to let them know who their new point of contact will be, whether anything about their role is changing, and who they can reach out to with questions. That helps create continuity and reduces uncertainty.

For volunteers who don't work directly with that staff member, the communication might be simpler. If the leave affects an event, a timeline, or the way they contribute, let them know what to expect. If it doesn't affect them, there's no need to overcommunicate.

What I wouldn't do is leave volunteers to piece things together on their own. They're part of your community, and good communication helps people feel included and respected.

JPP: It totally grinds my gears when volunteers are the last interest holder group to know! Too many times, they hear about things that impact their work through overhearing staff conversations or because they are a donor or service user too.

LK: I'd also be clear that while there may be some changes, we're not asking volunteers to fill the role of the person who's away. Their contribution is already valuable. They don't need to become the backup staffing plan.

JPP: Yes, that’s excellent advice! Thank you, Lacey, for your insights and the great conversation! Where can people find you and Balanced Good?

LK: You can connect with Balanced Good through our website or on LinkedIn. 

We also have a growing community of nonprofit leaders who receive our newsletter, where we share practical ideas, workplace insights, and stories from across the sector. If today's conversation resonated with you, we'd love to have you join us.