 |
 |
Mine came with the Gazette- I'd get in touch with Cilip asap. Carol. On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:38:35 -0000, Finney, Emma P <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi > > Am I right in thinking the ballot papers for the subscription ballot were to be included in the Gazzette ? > > If so, I am minus mine. Anyone else suffered from this ? > > Emma > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals on behalf of Tassoni, Laura > Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 5:30 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Cilip flat rate wrong and unnecessary > > I absolutely agree, this is what struck me from the outset - why does it have to be all or nothing? > > I will definitely be voting "No" to the proposal because of the flat rate idea, but feel frustrated that I therefore have to > reject all the other parts of the proposal as well. > > Laura > > --------------------------------- > Laura Tassoni > Information Adviser > > Learning Centre > Sheffield Hallam University > City Campus > Pond Street > S1 1WB > Sheffield > > +44 (0)114 225 4700 > [log in to unmask] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of No Name > Sent: 05 November 2004 15:07 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Cilip flat rate wrong and unnecessary > > More apologies for cross posting! > > It is beyond question, I think, that the way Cilip administers subscriptions is inefficient and needs reform. This does not imply > a need to move to a poll-tax style flat rate. The foundation of Cilip's case for a flat rate is this: "We can't renew members > automatically until we no longer have to ask what they earn." This is not correct. In fact, Cilip will always have to notify > members that their subscription is about to be renewed and give them the option not to renew. A few weeks before the renewal date > they could simply send out a notification like this: > > "Dear member, your subscription is due for renewal on [date]. You may either > > 1. If your circumstances have not changed since last year, do nothing, in which case your subscription will be automatically > renewed at the same rate; > > 2. Notify us of a change in your income or employment status, in which case your subscription may be adjusted (see attached list > of tariffs*); > > 3. Cancel the renewal, thereby ending your membership. > > * - NB if your circumstances have altered but not enough to make you eligible for a different tariff, you do not need to notify us > of the change." > > Nobody at Cilip has been able to give any reason why this could not be done, so why not keep the socially responsible and fair > income-based subscription system, and switch to automatic renewal, direct debit with discounts, and rolling renewal (each year > after the member's joining date). This seems the fairest, most efficient and most equitable solution, and will avoid the decline > in revenue per member that the flat rate would bring. I therefore recommend that members (1) vote "no" to the flat rate and (2) > ask Cilip to reform the current system along the lines suggested above. > > Regards, Aran Lewis. > > ---------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net >