JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for LIS-PUB-LIBS Archives


LIS-PUB-LIBS Archives

LIS-PUB-LIBS Archives


LIS-PUB-LIBS@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LIS-PUB-LIBS Home

LIS-PUB-LIBS Home

LIS-PUB-LIBS  December 2007

LIS-PUB-LIBS December 2007

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: CILIP announces new Board of Trustees: For the attention of those new Trustees and Cilip CEO etc

From:

"CHAPPELL, Jane" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

CHAPPELL, Jane

Date:

Thu, 6 Dec 2007 16:20:49 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (282 lines)

Some very fair comments here!  Thanks for taking the time out to say what we are thinking!

Jaz



-----Original Message-----

From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries

[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Frances Hendrix

Sent: 06 December 2007 15:09

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: FW: CILIP announces new Board of Trustees: For the attention of

those new Trustees and Cilip CEO etc





 

For some reason this email has been rejected as spam by lis prof (could

be a put up job)., anyone who can send it and get it accepted or tell me

what to do, I would appreciate it



Many thanks

f

-----Original Message-----

From: Frances Hendrix 

Sent: 06 December 2007 11:50

To: 'Johnson Gareth'; [log in to unmask];

[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]

Subject: RE: CILIP announces new Board of Trustees: For the attention of

those new Trustees and Cilip CEO etc



 Dear All list readers and Dear New Trustees 



The following message was posted by me on Lis pub Libs when I read of

the new trustees, but more importantly the very low turn out of voters.



I repeat



'I have just looked at the Scrutineers' report for the election of

Councillors to the new Cilip Council.

 

How very sad and worrying that only 21.8% of the electorate bothered to

vote. members were sent easy packs of voting papers with excellent

details on the candidates. Cilip has looked at its navel and changed

many things in order to become a more 'fit for purpose' organisation in

the last year (something that desperately needed doing), but still only

4000 of a possible 18,334 members bothered to send back voting papers.

 

There is obviously a lot still to do to get members to participate in

and be committed to the organisation. More changes, better leadership,

better and genuine involvement of the members. It is not a healthy sign

to see this lack of commitment and I call upon all those elected to

council, to the President of the association and to the Chief Executive

to  actively work to turn this worrying state of affairs around, and

make the association 'fit for purpose' for the profession in the 21st

Century, and bring the people, members and non members, on board!

 

Congratulations to all those elected, but start work on those who did

not vote at all!'



I was suggested to me that I should post to Lis professional, and I have

now done so. However I have received a number of off list responses to

the posting which I would like to bring to Cilip and its new trustees

attention.



First of all of course the low voting numbers were of those who are

members, and a lot of people appear not to be.



There is obvious disaffection and the emails I have received have

outlined a number of issues you need, as trustees, to consider.



I will honour the fact that the respondents did not wish to go public on

the list, this in itself worries me as people are concerned, and some

have expressed this, at the reaction they get from lists if they dare to

mention anything unflattering to the organisation (and we can all recall

reactions like this from the top down at Cilip)  



Examples of comments are:-



1.Possible [other models or organising Cilip] models include the way

unions have largely become learning and financial services providers for

members, while some charities have rebranded to be clearer about what

they do eg NCDL became Dogs Trust (I'm not choosing that as a facetious

example) - on the other hand others have become more euphemistic eg

Scope. Cilip needs to avoid the Post Office model - a failing business

flailing around for ways to save itself which will do or sell literally

anything on a short term basis if it sniffs a quick win. Does nothing

for the self respect really. 





2.Disaffection? I doubt it, for the really disaffected have left CILIP.

More likely a combination of low key satisfaction, boredom, can't be

bothered and the usual human confusion which have led to a decline in

voting, eg, House of Commons, Local government. 21,8%?  'Twas ever thus,

par for the course.  If you want to get members to express an opinion,

wait for or provoke a Real Crisis such as that which led to some

Determined Ladies to call successfully in 1982 for an LA Emergency

General Meeting with 600+attending; it demanded a management audit of

the LA. 

 

And rather than ask our new Trustees/Councillors to use their Senatorial

powers and impacted wisdom to get members genuinely involved, they might

start to consider how to get members of all our professional committees

-Branches, Groups, etc who probably number some 3000 - to do more work

on the ground to 'make a change' as current jargon has it. Their

Committees, however, usually don't actually do anything, but think up

work for others to do and ways of making more effective the work of

these others - the few hundred hard core activists making changes -

might produce results.

 



3. I am very proud of what I do.  We need to ensure that the profession

does survive.  I am sure you will get a number of intersting replies.

The healthy debate issues is a problem.  I have noticed  on a number of

occasions how some issues seem to get very personal, very quickly when

discussed openly on the discussion boards. It can be quite off putting.



4.I gave up "buying into" CILIP some years ago, around the time of the

melding together of the two institutions.  Not that in itself it was a

reason so to do. However, it was about the time I became aware of a lack

of support for the Library worker, or as in the general parlance "the

professional". 

There was nothing to help us on our electronic way [during the People's

Netowrk birth pangs], no guidance and advice around the real issues of

then - how to create a user profile in Win 2K operating systems would

have been a HUGE help at the time.  Real on the ground in the frontline

support - a framework of "how to" would have been great!  Instead of

which there were as many ways of doing things as there are authorities,

in much the same way as MLA don't give solid, professional guidance

neither does CILIP.  We all appear to be adrift beavering away

reinventing the wheel (and other component parts).  

Wouldn't it be nice to have a central repository of policy, as a "for

instance"... instead we all do it!

I read of Library Authorities no longer choosing to employ library

professionals, or letting library professionals go.  I heard at a recent

conference, "Librarians?  Too expensive, we don't need to do 'all that

stuff'. "  My own authority has given up its corporate membership as

they don't "feel the support" and also have savings to make, the CILIP

annual fee was seen as easy to let go. However, the professionals felt

the sleight.  It just adds to loss of currency, lack of respect &

understanding for a qualification and of course the experience that goes

with it.

I don't mean to be "glass half empty" but sometimes it is difficult to

be otherwise.

 

 

5.Like me. I read the jobs section when I need a new job, maybe flick

through the magazine when I'm sitting on the loo but UNISON has done

more for me professionally than CILIP, at least they aren't going about

how I should use my own personal time to take part in continual

professional re-accreditation, or has CILIP dropped that idea now?



6. I wonder what the benchmark is for professional bodies such as Cilip

in terms of member turnout, and how others attract members to engage?

Good that you're raising this though, I wouldn't have picked up on the

turnout figure...

 



7.I just wanted to say, as an individual, that I commend your call.



I admit to being one of the disaffected non-voters.  I do support Cilip,

in my profession, in encouraging students to join, and as a mentor,

BUT..



There has been a lot of good work going on and efforts to make changes,

that is obvious. But, I am not happy at how Cilip represents the

profession.  I would prefer to be part of a wider information

professionals group, of which librarians are a sub-group.  I personally

feel Cilip missed an opportunity when the IIS and LA joined forces.

Whether we agree with it or not, people do not like to be associated

with the more traditional and negative images of librarians.  Image and

branding is an issue, and soft pretty pink Cilip logos.... well what can

I say.  I'm not sure if it sends out the right message.

 Many of my friends within the profession have chosen to stop their

Cilip membership as they feel it actually has a detrimental affect on

their career prospects.  Very worrying, and yes very sad.





Sorry, I've just said everything I've wanted to say for a long time, and

not dared.  When I have broached these feeling to Cilip officials in the

past at Cilip events, I have been shouted down and not listened to.  It

will take a lot to win people back.



So trustees, the future of the professional body is to an extent in your

hands. The future, the present indeed, does not sound healthy and we

have voted for you in TRUST to do something about it. Reading your

manifestoes there is some mention of all this, but I, and I am sure

others, will be looking at your record in office, your communication

with the membership and the profession at large,your receptivness to the

profession and hoping we can see not only signs of life, but a

responsive attitude to improvement and growth. We want and we need a

strong, vibrant and relevant professional body, not one that is

haemorrhaging members and is held in less than the highest regard.

Things are NOT going to get any easier in this 21st. Century., there is

a lot of competition out there for what we do. So let your actions speak

volumes, don't get bogged down in the minutiae of running Cilip , leave

that to the staff (and Bob you also need to take heed, hope you are

reading emails in the Hague at IFLA), and as Lynne Brindley said, 'Just

do it' and as I say' START doing it now, and make a difference'!! You

have the role now do the job!!



f  







 



-----Original Message-----

From: CILIP's University, College & Research Special Interest Group

[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Johnson Gareth

Sent: 06 December 2007 10:45

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: FW: CILIP announces new Board of Trustees



For information



G

 CILIP : the Chartered Institute of Library and Information

Professionals

> 7 Ridgmount St, London WC1E 7AE.

> 

> Tel: 020 7255 0500

> Textphone: 020 7255 0505

> Fax: 020 7255 0501

> Mailto:[log in to unmask]

> 

> News from CILIP

> 6 December 2007

> 

> CILIP announces new Board of Trustees

> 

> CILIP Members have elected the twelve Trustees to serve on its

reformed Council, which takes effect from 1 January 2008.

> 

> They are: Chris Armstrong, Judy Broady-Preston, Paul Clarke, Veronica

Fraser, Isabel Hood, Ayub Khan, Dion Lindsay, Nigel Macartney, Liz

Maclachlan, Caroline Moss-Gibbons, Diana Nutting, and Bruce Royan.

> 

> Bob McKee, Chief Executive of CILIP, said "CIILP has been working hard

on Governance issues over the last two years. The twelve Trustees were

elected from a strong list of candidates. They will drive CILIP forward

over the coming years".

> 

> 

> Contact: Daniel Sabel, Governance Manager Tel:020 7255 0656

> 

> 

> Notes for Editors

> 

> CILIP: the Chartered Institute of Library and Information

Professionals is the leading professional body for librarians,

information specialists and knowledge managers.  It forms a community of

around 36,000 people engaged in library and information work, of whom

around 21,000 are CILIP members and around 15,000 are regular customers

of CILIP Enterprises.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 



This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an

attachment may still contain software viruses, which could damage your

computer system:

you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with

the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK

legislation.



_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _



Think before you print - only print this email if absolutely necessary.



This email and any attachments are strictly confidential and intended for the addressee only.  

If you are not the named addressee you must not disclose, copy or take any action in 

reliance of this transmission and you should notify us as soon as possible.



This email and any attachments are believed to be free from viruses but it is your 

responsibility to carry out all necessary virus checks and Gloucestershire County Council 

accepts no liability in connection therewith. 


Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager