"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars
But in ourselves that we are underlings"
- Julius Caesar, I.ii.134
Those of us with the ambition to earn the average or more need to put
ourselves out a bit, be prepared to move away from home, take on
responsibilities and perhaps long hours, pick up new skills, apply for
better jobs. Most professions have some bottom rungs with quite a lot of
people doing less well than the others, and I don't expect it is a whole
lot cushier for them, unless they are in a field where demand exceeds
supply of trained people. From our professional association we should
look for support in improving our skills, sharing experiences with
others, keeping up with developments. But it is no use relying on CILIP
for personal advancement.
That said, let's continue to press CILIP to do all it should be doing! -
without incurring costs that unnecessarily raise our subscription
levels. No-one so far seems to have raised the question of whether CILIP
really needs to be costing as much as it is. Are they spending our money
wisely and effectively? Do they need so many staff? Maybe some judicious
economies could cut subscription levels for all of us.
*****************************************************
Stella Dextre Clarke
Information Consultant
Luke House, West Hendred, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 8RR, UK
Tel: 01235-833-298
Fax: 01235-863-298
[log in to unmask]
*****************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Buckley Owen
Sent: 29 October 2004 15:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Re : 44% of us earn #17K (or less) - the figure is actually
36%
Just on a point of information again...
It is actually 36% of CILIP members who are on income-related
subscription rates and who declare incomes of 17,000 or less - not 44%.
The 44% figure refers to income-related subscription payers who earn
between 17,000 and 22,000, and finally there are 20% earning above
22,000.
N.B. These percentages refer only to those members who are on
income-related rates, and don't take into account categories such as
affiliated or supporting or expatriate members, who are on a flat rate
already.
Tim Buckley Owen.
-----Original Message-----
From: Julia Johnson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 29 October 2004 15:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re : 44% of us earn #17K (or less)
I was horrified to learn that 44% of CILIP's members are on ?17K or
less.
Leaving aside the contemplation of salaries of ?10K- 12K.
As those of us who work in London know, a second-jobber secretary with
A-levels (and secretarial college, I assume) can earn more than that (My
employer is seeking someone of that ilk, and I believe the salary is
?25K-?28K)
If I had my time over, I would make sure I had decent IT, document
production and related skills. I think that I might never have been
unemployed, while I looked for information work. If I had been lost to
the
profession, then that would have been the operation of "market forces".
Regards
Julia Johnson
|