As I said in my earlier email, I had expected something from Cilip following the last lengthy email debate on these issues and around the subscription. A membership organisation needs to be in tune with (and sympathetic to) the thoughts and concerns of members, and we should not have to depend upon some sort of séance to get to know if these things are being discussed at Cilip, by the Exec, by the Council., do Cilip care that (and this is probably an iceberg), many of their members are dissatisfied, and if the policy is NOT to respond to members emails on members email list, then lets know that out in the open?
f
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Armstrong
Sent: 15 February 2005 11:44
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Gazette Feb 11th
I agree with Malcolm's last posting. I think three things should be
happening:
* CILIP should be keeping statistics on 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable'
adverts (they may be doing this already)
* CILIP should make representations to any 'unacceptable' advertisers (but accept the advert. I, personally, like the kite mark idea, but I can see disadvantages to it as well.)
* As many members as possible should send letters indicating that they would have been interested in the post if the salary had been appropriate, & advising them of the CILIP recommended salary. Although, note that only a small percentage of CILIP members have been active in this debate so far, so this may not be very effective.
The last point is particularly important as CILIP is a member-organisation; we ARE CILIP - so we should be doing something, as members. Members could also lobby their group or branch Councillors, requesting that their views are taken forward at the next Council meeting.
I also think, again, that CILIP should be taking a part in this discussion on LIS-CILIP.
Chris Armstrong
National Councillor
|