Readings Reactions Week 8

G. F.

Staffing Shifts Roil Orlando Public Library

This article gives opinions on both sides of a staffing dispute in a library.

I think this article was a bit misleading, in that the tone seemed to favor the staff side of the conflict, while technically providing factual information that backed the new director. I had to read the article twice to catch that the number of professional staff had decreased by 15 since April 1999, but the new director had only been on the job since January 2002. It made no sense to me that she was being accused of decreasing professional staff when she wasn’t even director; she even “pointed out that OCLS actually has three more librarians now than it did one year ago.” I did appreciate that the author pointed out that “42 of the 64 librarians only have bachelor's degrees, and 22--only 33% of the professional staff have an MLS.” To me this showed that the union has a very lenient definition of “professional staff.” As a library patron, I would expect professionals to have degrees and training. I would also expect reference desks to be staffed by these professionals, not clerks, which does seem to be an issue that should be addressed by that director.

Sarah Houghton-Jan

Assessing Staff on the Competencies

This article gives a detailed outline on how to assess staff on different competencies/skills.

I think this article provided plenty of different options testing staff skills, assessing the need for improvement, and following up with staff. It makes clear that there isn’t a single right and best way to assess staff competencies. However, I did think some of the suggestions Houghton-Jan made were probably not applicable in real life. She does acknowledge some short-comings of different methods, saying of testing current skills that it has some serious downsides, “which is why you see it in very few libraries” (44). A method of assessment I think would be problematic is the peer assessment. While having a supervisor assess staff skills makes sense, I think having peers assess each other would open up the possibility for rivalries and tension between co-workers, which is not what the library as a workplace should be about.

Jane Fama and Elaine Martin

One Model for Creating a Career Ladder for Library Support Staff

This article proposes the creation of a new way for library support staff to be promoted and compensated for their work.

With the changes technology has brought to libraries, I thought this article was spot on in advocating for higher pay and the creation of a career ladder for library support staff. This article seemed to reflect the concerns of last week’s “Community Leadership through Public Library E-Government Services,” in that libraries and those who work in them are being given more and more responsibilities without the proper compensation. The system in this article is a move in the right direction, at least for staff.

Mary Pergander

Working Knowledge: To Share or Not to Share

This article shared some pros and cons on sharing information about an applicant with a prospective employer if the sharer knows both parties.

The conclusion of the article was, in general, to not to share information about an applicant because of the unfair advantage it offers that applicant over others. I found this odd because I have always heard that networking was very important in landing a job. Also, saying this would give an applicant an advantage over others is just silly, as one applicant is clearly going to have some sort of advantage over the others in order to be hired.