Dear Geraint,
I think you have hit the nail on the head - I too am reluctant to
continue paying union subs as well as cilip subs - I also don't think
that Unison will particularly back us librarians if push came to shove.
Maybe it is time we had a specialised library union to look after our
interests - I posted something to this effect on Lis-cilip-reg, although
not as detailed as your post!
Pam
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of jones, geraint
Sent: 16 January 2004 11:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: LIS gazette: Watson
There may be very good reasons why 'we' are confined to just wingeing
about our lot. I believe I'm right in saying that that most of us look
on Cilip as our main representative. Given this, is it not strange that
most of us are probably also represented either by some union or other
or by a staff association. I believe that, for the following reasons,
most of are reluctant to put our heads above the parapet in case we get
it shot off
The problem as I see it that Cilip seems to use the fact that we are
mostly unionised as an excuse not to get directly involved in the
workplace. They could claim some justification for this IF we were all
in the same union and had some collective weight. This is unfortunately
not the case. There is the further problem that in most unions we are,
especially if we have the word 'manager', 'director' etc., tagged on to
our job description, looked upon with deep suspicion. In short, as a
white collar workers and manager, I would not be holding my breath
expecting my - non-librarian - fellow union members to turn up at the
picket should I ever need them
It is my contention that we as a profession are largely unionised
because Cilip (and the LA before it) refuses to get directly involved in
direct workplace negotiations on pay and conditions. Personally, I'm
not in a union from choice and I certainly don't want to pay what is
effectively a double subscription for the dubious privilege of belonging
to one, but I feel I have no choice as I don't want to be left entirely
hanging in the breeze should I ever be in conflict with my employers.
I believe that we need to decide what we are . Are we professionals.
If the answer to this is yes, then we should automatically assume that
we have the RIGHT to remuneration at similar levels to other
professionals, especially if we have gone to the trouble of Chartering.
If we really are Cilip, - if WE the membership own Cilip, THIS belief in
ourselves as professionals is what we need to get clear in our
collective minds as a first step. I'm afraid that while our policy
making body appears not to believe this and whilst it continues to
behave as if direct workplace negotiations is somehow 'getting it's
hands dirty' or 'behaving like a Trade Union', it will make little
difference whether we 'prove' ourselves to our employers or not. On
this point of 'proving' ourselves and of 'demonstrating our
effectiveness in the workplace', - I do wish that Cilip members who
provide tight fisted employers with ammunition by constanly harping on
it would just stop!
Other professional associations seem not to have any problems with
direct workplace negotiations, - why should ours?
Geraint Jones,
Islay, Scotland
|