 |
 |
Kate, why take this approach ? Nobody posts to the list except when there is a deadline (or CILIP sends conflicting letters to our home) - I use the list to sound off professional issues (what more professional issue than employers trying to palm me off with library rates - btw the last employer that tried to do this was one of the NHS agencies, which relies heavily on TFPL, ROC and other "bad payers"). And what do we get for "career discussion" after the flurry on the list ? Someone saying they can't print from the disc - wow, that's going to make me want to stay and spend my evening writing up !!! I think my gist is "why charter" and "look what happens to you when you stay and try to approach jobs from the library department" - a cautionary tale. The Chartership is the hallmark that we are "professionals" but perhaps it's more and more a qualification which blocks progress (and an excuse for the employer to pay us "library rates"). I want CILIP to undertake a huge PR strategy to change this, if it is really going to be a professional qualification, or offer a fragmented chartership (so that we can specialise). Most of the articles in library magazines (look at today's job supplement) are not written by librarians: the heading article today is written by a former lecturer, and scanning through he is arguing "go part-time and do sth else on the side (either out of interest or by economic necessity). The only jobs for my library are 2 CRA3 jobs - these have never gone past the 15k-17k mark, in the last 3 years. What is the point to charter for this ? As a colleague at this research centre said to me when I commented about this list "Seems people need a lot of qualifications to do what, shelf a book ?" (adding that "she had never cracked it, "this librarian thing"). I WANT CHANGE: NOW After a year of CILIP, I thought we were going to get a cross between MIT New Media Lab and a Harvard MBA approach - and things are always the same no matter whether you change the list or not. Emilce >From: "<Kate Walker>" <[log in to unmask]> >Reply-To: "<Kate Walker>" <[log in to unmask]> >To: >Subject: Re: THe recent Discussion >Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 09:12:19 +0100 > >I don't think the problem is that we don't want to talk about salary >issues, but this list is for chartership candidates, so it's not really the >appropriate forum. Obviously it is relevant, but really it's something >that should be discussed on the main Cilip discussion list instead. > > _________________________________________________________________ Stay in touch with absent friends - get MSN Messenger http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger