Not in the strictness sense of the meaning. Those who have experienced
filling in means testing forms will understand my concerns.
Jane
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Oppenheim [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 June 2004 11:51
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: New flat-rate subscription for CILIP
surely the current method of charging is already means testing?
Charles
Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU
01509-223065
(fax) 01509-223053
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jane Tomlinson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: New flat-rate subscription for CILIP
> How is Cilip going to determine what is a low wage? What may be an OK
> wage for a single person with no dependents will not be OK for a
> single person with dependents (those with caring responsibilities or
> children). Is CILIP going to introduce a form of means testing - is so
> I for one will not be renewing my membership. Jane Tomlinson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Harper [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 07 June 2004 10:34
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New flat-rate subscription for CILIP
>
>
> Agree absolutely, Laura; it is utterly regressive.
>
> Perhaps the CILIP page should have a balancing set of FAQs: "what are
> the advantages of the present system?" Here are some rejoinders to the
> answers currently presented:
>
> Why does CILIP's subscription system need to change? Because the
> present system is over-complicated: [it's been in existence for
> decades - surely IT should make it easier to administrate? And, it's
> complicated for perfectly valid reasons - who says it's
> "over"-complicated?. Having a 3-year transition period - now that
does
> sound complicated]
>
> , hits members particularly hard at Christmas time,
> [erm - I don't want to be churlish, but if you pay the lot in one go,
> it's going to hit hard whenever it happens. Summer holiday time could
> be just
as
> bad. If that's a problem, there's surely already the means to spread
> the burden. And, apart from new members, it would appear that
> Christmas is
still
> going to be when the bill appears]
>
> and results in subscriptions continuing to rise as your income does,
even
> though CILIP provides no additional services in return. [if CILIP has
> had any success in raising the income levels of its members, then it
> has automatically provided an extremely valuable service to those
> benefitting from higher incomes. The beauty of the current system is
> that, provided
the
> actual rates for each band don't rise, but bands are merely added at
> the
top
> of the tree, CILIP's income will increase together with the income of
> its members.]
>
> How will the new system work? Most personal members ..... will no
> longer have to tell CILIP each year how much you earn. [If the choice
> is between the laborious task of ticking a box on the renewal form,
> and paying a substantially higher flat rate, I think many will
> cheerfully opt for the former]
>
> Can I get a discount even if I don't pay it all at once? Yes - if you
> go onto Direct Debit. Then you will be able to pay by instalments
> throughout the year if you wish, and still receive a discount on your
> subscription.
[If
> this doesn't already exist, it can be introduced without restructuring
> the fees]
>
> Are there any other ways I can save money on my CILIP subscription?
[Hint -
> negotiate through your union for employers who insist on CILIP
> membership
to
> repay all your fee]
>
> Personally I would like to see lower income bands paying far less -
> even free as Paul Catherall suggests. I'm also a bit perplexed by
> everyone's nervousness about stating income range. How many people
> have access to
this
> information? Interesting that those on very low incomes are still
> going to have to make a declaration - unfortunate discrimination if we
> really are
so
> sensitive about it.
>
> Apologies for length of this!
>
> Derek Harper
> Programme and Information Coordinator
> South West of England Regional Development Agency
> 01392 229358
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tassoni, Laura [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 04 June 2004 17:20
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: New flat-rate subscription for CILIP
>
>
> http://www.cilip.org.uk/member/newsubscription.html
> Hi everyone, what do people think about these changes to the CILIP
> subscription system? Seems rather regressive to me. Have we had a
> consultation?
>
> Laura
> ----------------------
> Laura Tassoni
> Information Adviser
> Learning Centre
> Sheffield Hallam University
> 0114 225 4700
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> Receipt of this e-mail is subject to conditions:
> Click link to view the disclaimer--> <a
>
href="http://www.southwestrda.org.uk/email-disclaimer">http://www.southwestr
> da.org.uk/email-disclaimer</a>
> *********************************************************************
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
> **********************************************************************
> **
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.
> ************************************************************************
> If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
> delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this
> message to anyone. In such cases, you should destroy this message, and
> notify us immediately. If you or your employer does not consent to
Internet
> email messages of this kind, please advise us immediately.
>
> Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message
> are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise
> indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message.
>
************************************************************************
Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.
************************************************************************
If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone. In such cases, you should destroy this message, and
notify us immediately. If you or your employer does not consent to Internet
email messages of this kind, please advise us immediately.
Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are
not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by
an authorised representative independent of this message.
|