I've seen a number of comment-thread commenters suggest that, as a budgetary measure, the library should start charging to deliver holds. But that wouldn't be appropriate, because if the library were to charge for delivering holds, it would create a two-tiered system.
Popular novels tend to accumulate far more holds than the library has copies even before they're released. This means that all copies in the system are sent to people with holds on it, and (with the exception of the "Best Bets" section) none of the copies are in the library.
Currently, anyone can put a hold on a book, so everyone has an equal chance of getting at the book. You just have to get in line.
But if they started charging money for holds, only people who can afford to pay would place holds. This means that richer patrons would get at the books before poorer patrons, because the poorer patrons can't afford to get in line. Speaking as someone who could easily afford to pay a fee for this service if necessary, I consider that unfair, unacceptable, and contrary to the mission of libraries.
At this point, some people are thinking "But what if you can place the holds for free, just not have the delivered to your home branch?" The problem is that would still create a two-tiered system. Think for a moment about how such a system would work. Either patrons would only be able to put holds on books that live at their home branch, or they'd have to pick up the hold wherever the book happens to be. If we are limited to putting holds on books that live at our home branch, that's a two-tiered system because the pool from which we can place holds is significantly smaller. If we have to pick up holds wherever they happen to be, then we might have to go to any corner of the city - very likely over an hour by bus given how wide-spread our city is.
I also question whether that would actually save any significant amount of money given how often books need to be shipped around anyway. If you return a book at a different branch (say you return it at the branch near work even though you checked it out from the branch near home) they have to ship it home anyway. If it's already been subject to a delivery hold, it will need to be shipped home. And if they're shipping them to one branch anyway, how much more expensive could it be to ship it to another branch?
In any case, charging for holds would have the basic effect of allowing richer patrons to access our entire library system, while poorer patrons are limited to the collection at their local branch, which completely defeats the purpose the fantastic library system our city has worked so hard to build.
19 comments:
Hiya! I just wanted to say thanks so much for speaking so eloquently about the proposed library cuts; you've done my work for me, and I've been able to save a lot of time and energy I didn't have in the first place these days by sending people to read what you've said, since it so perfectly lines up with my feelings on the issue.
So I wanted to return the favour with the best I have a offer, a little comment-love!
Home branch? But I can WALK to eight different branches within 30 minutes.
Cuts are only needed because bloated salaries are "untouchable". Would you work at a quiet, clean, casual, public library - at a 20% discount, say $24 an hour instead of $30? Keeping medical benefits and a scaled to wage pension?
I beg for such a glorious employment!!
I don't think it's a bad idea. Maybe allot some 'free' holds for the year and then charge a small fee for the rest. I often see a lot of holds that people don't even bother to pick up. Maybe it would make people a bit more responsible for their selections.
I consider that unfair, unacceptable, and contrary to the mission of libraries.
What she said, all the way.
I wonder what CQ considers a "bloated" salary. Surely $30/hour is not considered bloated?? It's decent pay, but it's hardly astronomical. And many library workers earn less.
Home branch? But I can WALK to eight different branches within 30 minutes
Awesome! How close is the closest one? Do you have a good range of hours in your neighbourhood and the surrounding neighbourhoods? (I'm curious wher eyo ulive now, but you don't have to tell if you don't want to.
Would you work at a quiet, clean, casual, public library - at a 20% discount, say $24 an hour instead of $30? Keeping medical benefits and a scaled to wage pension?
I'd do it if I had to, but it's more people-oriented work than what I'm doing now, and the long-term top earning potential sounds about the same. Which is unfortunate, because librarians need to be able to out-research even expert translators, so they deserve to get paid more.
I beg for such a glorious employment!!
Yet another reason why I sincerely hope they don't cut it.
The closest(s) is probably still about 15 minutes' distance. And few hills to be ambled over. Most of the nearby branches have selective hours throughout a seven day week; some bigger some smaller.
It is bloated the same way I can see any subway ticket agent receive his $30 + overtime etc., while most area retail cashiers make far less, plus handle returns, credit cards, reward cards, product bagging, direct customer contact, put up with all-day Muzac...
If any management and union co-lifers actually cared about the public service and their 'brotherhood', they wouldn't sit back waiting for the inevitable minimum 10-20% required cuts to be safely and fully applied against its weakest seniority members.
Unions always oppose two-tiered contracts that split - and weaken - membership into new hires and old hires. Far from "sitting back" and waiting, the library workers' union is actively opposing these cuts, so much so that Doug Ford accused public protests of being "orchestrated" by the unions.
People are often unaware of what other people's jobs entail. Librarians and library workers (most people who work in libraries are not librarians, and earn much less) likely do more complex and challenging work than librar users, and especially non-users, may imagine.
I find it sad and shocking that anyone would consider a salary in the mid-50s range bloated. Can that truly be considered such a big deal these days? Have our standards fallen that low? Very sad.
I know I'm repeating myself, I'm just amazed. I will stop now.
On the subject of home branches, in Mississauga, I have several branches near my house (one in walking distance, 3 or 4 others in short driving distance), but each principally serves a very different community. It's possible that someone could target some of these branches as redundant, if they didn't do the research and understand all the people that depend on having a branch close to home.
while most area retail cashiers make far less, plus handle returns, credit cards, reward cards, product bagging, direct customer contact, put up with all-day Muzac...
Retail cashiers are very underpaid. It would be good for them to unionize and fight for a fairer share of their employers revenue.
That would be far better for working people than dragging transit workers and library workers down to the awful working conditions and pay of retail cashiers.
Now I will really stop.
A salary in the mid 50's? Would that be $50/hr+?? If so, yes, not just bloated, insane! There are people doing MUCH more demanding jobs earning 1/4 of that amount and you really feel a librarian DESERVES that amount?? For what, looking things up in books and passing on information? The greatest danger being a paper cut?
Holy Hell. You sound like you are trying to get one of these glorious jobs. I hope you never do.
A salary in the mid 50's? Would that be $50/hr+??
No. In the mid-$50K annual salary range.
$30/hr comes out to about $54,000 annual salary.
Sorry for the confusion.
I also want to point out that librarians do more than look up information, although that can be part of the job.
Librarians determine what materials are offered in the library, based on what the community needs and wants. They design systems to help millions of people access the catalogue online. They design and run programs like ESL classes, resume workshops, literacy classes, storytime for children (a very important part of learning how to read), computer skills classes, teen support groups, book clubs, immigrant settlement programs... and more.
Re paper cuts, our society does not base salaries on the relative safety or danger of jobs.
Imp Strump, sorry to be going on.
@Anon #1:
I often see a lot of holds that people don't even bother to pick up.
How can you tell that people aren't even bothering to pick them up, as opposed to them just not having been picked up before you got there?
@CQ: The closest(s) is probably still about 15 minutes' distance. And few hills to be ambled over
That's too bad, it sounds like they could be better located, or perhaps you could use another branch in the middle. I know my grandmothers, for example, or families with multiple young children might find that too inconvenient. What are the demographics of their neighbourhoods like? Are the branches sensibly located for general traffic patterns, e.g. at subway stops etc?
If any management and union co-lifers actually cared about the public service and their 'brotherhood', they wouldn't sit back waiting for the inevitable minimum 10-20% required cuts to be safely and fully applied against its weakest seniority members.
That's why they're actively fighting cuts, no?
@Laura:
People are often unaware of what other people's jobs entail. Librarians and library workers (most people who work in libraries are not librarians, and earn much less) likely do more complex and challenging work than librar users, and especially non-users, may imagine.
This gives me my next blog post, thank you :)
Aug 6th, 3:55 p.m. "That's why they're actively fighting cuts, no?"
No. Organized Labour has mutated itself into a Pyramid Scheme across Western Society. They bullied themselves so far ahead of the rest of the citizenry, with Gov't Agency paid Managements, regulated competition controls, and Gov't paid 'independent' arbitrators, they have become fiscal traitors.
They KNOW the overall cuts must happen. Everyone could keep their jobs and locations with AND if an across the board wage and pension (market value) re-evaluation were adapted - and before zero hour. Instead... hard times for the neccessarily increased out-of-work.
FYI. My mom was a teacher. With lite qualifications earned in the 1950s. Both parents have their pension plans. She was ashamed of how her pension deal insists on paying out firmly at its maximum market value reached, throughout the 08-09 recession meltdown.
Mandatory full benefit payouts now, and forget whoever is lower on the pryamid. And nevermind all of those commonly outside of the gov't pryamid yet ordered into paying for its primary tax support.
Wow, that's the complete opposite of my own experience when I was in a unionized environment and the experience of everyone I know IRL who is or has been in a unionized environment (friends, relatives, classmates, teachers). They very much want everyone to have jobs and pensions that are as good or better than theirs. I'm so terribly sorry that you seem to have stumbled into a corner of the world where people are less spiritually generous. I've been there too (somehow the non-spiritually-generous people didn't end up overlapping with the organized-labour people) and I know it can be so soul-destroying the be surrounded by that.
There are people doing MUCH more demanding jobs earning 1/4 of that amount and you really feel a librarian DESERVES that amount??
If we could simply force people to be slaves to companies/employers, then everyone would be paid the same -- which would do away with complaints about various people not DESERVING what they get. Because everyone would get nothing!
Still, I suppose people like CQ would still gripe. "I have to do 6 hours of back-breaking work for absolutely nothing, while that other guy works for 5 hours and he ALSO gets nothing?!?!? Why is his rate of nothing higher than mine? It ain't fair, I tells ya!"
Post a Comment