LAUC Davis General Meeting
April 30, 1998
Corrected Minutes

The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by Chair Rebecca Davis.

Present:  Rebecca Davis (Chair), Jim Martin, Nancy Kushigian, Jane Kimball, 
Sharon Baker, Ken Firestein, Mary Wood, Elaine Franco, Reve Rocke, Hans 
Rocke, Buzz Haughton, Michael Colby, Mary Helen Moreno, Karl Kocher, 
Carolyn Kopper, Linda Kennedy, Marcia Meister (Secretary), Gail Nichols, 
Patsy Inouye, Judy Welsh, Phyllis Wang, Jerry Thompson, Michael Winter, Ted 
Sibia, John Sherlock, Susan Casement, Mary Eldredge, Joanne Boorkman, 
George Bynon, Clinton Howard, Opry Popa.

1.  Minutes of the January General Meeting were approved.
2.  Annoucements:
Susan Casement reported that the LAUC-D programs were finished for the 
year, although another Reference Forum might be scheduled at a later date.

Rebecca Davis said that the deadline for nominations for the distinguished 
Librarian award is April 30.

Nancy Kushigian reported that the Library Diversity Committee has scheduled 
a  brown bag program on disability for April 30.  The Committee has a web 
page up.

3.  Report of the University Librarian:
Marilyn Sharrow was unable to attend the meeting.  George Bynon represented 
her.  He had no report but stated his willingness to answer questions.  

Sharon Baker asked Bynon a question regarding the status of collective 
bargaining since some of the contract provisions expire.  Bynon replied 
that discussions were ongoing.

Patsy Inouye asked a question regarding a possible new salary survey for UC 
librarians, based on a comment from Myron Okada.  Bynon had no new 
information.  
  
4.  LAUC-D Elections Update
Jim Martin, Nominations and Elections Committee Chair, announced that a 
call for nominations for LAUC-D offices would be coming within the next 
week.  A LAUC-D General meeting will include presentation of a slate of 
nominees.  The election is June 12 and results will be announced the week 
following the elections. 

5.  Professional Governance Committee Report and Discussion:
Rebecca Davis noted the materials provided for our discussion include a 
tabulation of the final vote count by campus and by question from the 
recent Professional Governance Committee survey on the issue of steps in 
the Librarian series; a position paper distributed via email; and the text 
of resolutions proposed in the Committee report.  

Davis suggested that we discuss the proposed resolutions as stated in the 
committee report.

Discussion on the proposed resolutions included the following points:

 Jane Kimball pointed out that resolution number one, which proposed 
revising the position paper regarding steps, was not a good idea;  revising 
the position paper should wait until the steps issue has been resolved.
 
 Linda Kennedy continued the discussion on resolution 1 by suggesting that 
resolution number one should be tabled.  LAUC should work to get the extra 
steps, which wont be an easy argument to make, and the argument in favor of 
additional steps should include comparisons to other institutions and other 
salary issues to be effective.  It is premature to revise the position 
paper at this time.
 
 Susan Casement made the point that in comparing faculty steps, faculty 
step 6 is distinguished and steps 7 and 8 are beyond distinguished.
 
 Additional discussion points included a question  "what if steps are not 
added"?  The Survey reports a majority vote in favor of making making a 
Librarian 5 a regular merit step if no additional steps are added.  
 
 Kimball suggested that we need to look at other non-Senate series titles 
as comparisons. We need to note that librarianship is an aging profession 
with few newer and younger people being recruited.  We should ask what our 
libraries should look like in five years.  There is a crunch of people at 
the top of the salary scale but there are also concerns for recruiting the 
best and the brightest entry level librarians.  We need to look at the 
whole salary scale and need to raise the bottom as well as the top when 
librarians are replaced.  There is also a need to look at the overlap 
between Associate and Librarian ranks to determine if there is still a 
valid need for the overlapping steps.
 
 Bynon agreed that the demographic issue is a problem.  An increase in the 
entry level is important in recruiting.  It will need work to justify the 
extra steps at the top of the series.
 
 Kennedy reported that the charge to the Professional Governance Committee 
in previous years was to restructure the salary range and it needs to be 
looked at again and follow-up on the previous Committee charge should be done.
 
 Recruiting issues and salaries in a changing profession suggest that 
comparisons with private industry should be made as they may be more 
competitive.
 
 John Sherlock reminded the group that there is considerable discussion on 
other campuses regarding a "Distinguished" step and some sentiment that 
there shouldnt be a "Distinguished" step at all.
 
 Salary restructure apart from the distinguished issue was still a valid 
project.

Discussion continued on the issue of a "distinguished" librarian step.  
Important points suggested included:

 Jane Kimball reviewed the APM prior to the meeting and reports that other 
non-Senate academic series have a "distinguished" level

 Linda Kennedy reported on a message from Judy Horn, (UCI) former Chair of 
the LAUC Committee on Professional Governance, saying that it is 
politically not a good move at this time to eliminate language regarding 
the "distinguished" step in the librarian series.  

 Rebecca Davis reported that some LAUC members feel that it is 
increasingly difficult in the changed work environment with fewer 
librarians to do the professional work outside the job which would be 
recognized as "distinguished" and therefore fewer librarians are actually 
eligible for the "distinguished" librarian step.

 Joanne Boorkman said that she believers that the librarians who are 
motivated to achieve would do so regardless of other committments in time 
and on the job responsibilities.

 Judy Welsh spoke about the LAUC Professional Goverance Committees 
charge.  They talked about a salary survey but were advised that a salary 
survey was not a realistic part of their charge.  They were not optimistic 
about getting the additional steps in the librarian series so proposed 
changes in the position paper based on an anticipated negative response.

 Patsy Inouye reported that LAUC members on other campuses report 
inconsistencies in applying the criteria for advancement to step 5 and this 
is a large part of the problem in perception and application of the 
"distinguished" step.

 It was suggested that the backlog of librarians at step 4 needed some 
financial incentives to continue to perform at a superior level.

 Rebecca Davis reported that the LAUC statewide executive board had 
discussed applying for LAUC research funds to hire a professional to 
conduct a salary survey.

 Regarding the Librarian 5 step, George Bynon said that in his opinion the 
real  perception of the librarian steps is that the range goes to Librarian 
IV, with very few people going to Librarian V after exceptional and 
distinguished careers.  UCOP does not really want to do another salary survey.

 Changes in job structure and skills required are good arguments for 
looking at attracting the best job candidates and are good justifications 
for a major salary restructuring.

 Kennedy and Kimball suggested that a small group could do further 
research and justification for salary increases and restructuring including 
additional steps.  A small group could work as an ad hoc committee to work 
quickly on developing the material for an effective proposal.

 John Sherlock proposed that some internal resolution on the question of a 
"distinguished" librarian step should take place.  

 A "straw poll" to vote on whether we in LAUC-D are in favor of retaining 
a Distinguished Librarian step was suggested.

The following motions were introduced:


1.  John Sherlock moved, that: 

LAUC-D takes the position that the top step of the Librarian series shall 
remain a distinguished step 
 
26 approved
1   against
3   abstained
1    non-voting

MOTION CARRIED

2.  Linda Kennedy moved and Jane Kimball seconded, that:

LAUC-D make the recommendation that the first resolution in the 
Professional Governance Committee Report should be tabled until a decision 
is made on adding steps.  [resolution no. 2 reads:  LAUC shall revise 
Postion Paper Number 1 to delete references to special criteria for 
reaching Librarian Step V]

26 approved
2   against
1 abstention

MOTION CARRIED

3.  Jane Kimball made a motion that LAUC-D should accept the second 
resolution in the Professional Governance Committee Report:  [resolution 
no. 2 reads:  LAUC shall officially request that the University 
administration add three more steps to the Librarian Rand (steps VI, VII 
and VIII)]

26 approved
3 abstentions

MOTION CARRIED

4.  Jane Kimball made a motion to accept the following motion and present 
it at the LAUC Assembly:

That the LAUC President appoint a small ad hoc committee to prepare a 
report that provides recommendations regarding the following:

1. Raising the entry level salary for the librarian series in order to 
increase our success in recruiting and retaining the best new librarians 
for the UC system in the coming decade.
2. Reviewing the overlap between the ranks of Associate Librarian and 
Librarian.
3. Adding additional steps to the Librarian rank of the Librarian series to 
enhance career potential for librarians at the University of California.
4. Retaining the present criterion of distinguished career for advancement 
to the top step of the librarian series.
5. Restructuring the Librarian salary scale taking into account the 
librarian salary scales in the California State University system; an 
analysis of hiring patterns and salaries of new graduates of the nations 
leading programs in library and informaiton science; and other pertinent 
factors.
6. The committee should present its report and recommendations by the 1998 
LAUC Fall Assembly.

It was moved that we adopt the motion to present at the Assembly, the 
motion was seconded and the vote was taked as follows.

23 approved
0 opposed
3 absentions

MOTION CARRIED

6.  Research and Professional Development Resolution

Phyllis Wang explained that problems with reporting the results of research 
have occurred at some campuses.  The Committee wanted to issue a reminder, 
supported by LAUC, to people that they should follow the guidelines and 
make the reports on their research grants.

Nancy Kushigian moved and Jane Kimball seconded that LAUC-D should support 
the resolution.

23 approved
0   opposed
0   abstained

MOTION CARRIED

7.  The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m.


Respectfully submitted by Marcia Meister, Secretary