Salary is always a sore point with many in the profession (myself
included), but blaming the LA is not only pointless, it ignores the very
practical help and support that is given both by the organisation
generally (primarily through guidelines and other publications), and
specifically by the professional advisers. In the latter case they are
often only informed of the salary situation after the event and so are
left fire fighting rather than operating in a preventative manner.
Anyway salaries are union matters - are those complaining taking a
similarly negative view of their unions, which can after all be much
more directly interventionist. Further to judge membership of a
professional body simply on what is being done vis-a-vis salaries is
incredibly narrow. One wonders what involvement those complaining have
in their appropriate branch/groups with all the benifits of such
involvement.
Donald J.D. Mitchell, FLA
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rowland, Jennifer [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 25 May 2000 14:34
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Benefits of LA membership
>
>There is a big debate going on in lis-la-charter (a discussion list for
>chartership candidates) at the moment about whether it is worth chartering
>or even belonging to the LA at all- it seems to several participants that
>the LA does not do enough to justify the fee. In particular, it is felt that
>it does not do enough to ensure that salaries are at professional levels or
>that chartership is respected. Do any ALAs/FLAs or those who have chosen not
>to charter have any views they wold like to share here or on lis-la-charter?
>
>Jennifer Rowland
>Senior Library Assistant
>Materials Department Library
>Imperial College
>
>Views expressed in e-mails are the member of staff's own and do not reflect
>the position of the College.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|