LAUC-D Executive Board Meeting, April 2, 1998
Meeting minutes

Present: R. Davis, Chair, P. Wang, P. Inouye, S. Casement, M, Meister, J. Thompson, J. Sherlock, K. Kocher

1. Minutes of the March meeting were approved.

2. Distinguished Librarian

The call for nominations for a Distinguished Librarian award have gone out with an April 30 deadline for nominations. The Committee is in place and members are: John Sherlock, (past chair of LAUC-D) Chair, Karleen Darr, Member at Large, Buzz Haughton, Past Chair of Review Board, George Bynon, Library Administration, and a member from the Academic Senate Library Committee to be appointed. The committee will make a decision by May 22.

3. LAUC-D representative to the statewide Cultural Diversity Committee

Linda Yamamoto, the current representative to this committee, is resigning to accept a position at Stanford and someone will need to be appointed to fill out the remainder of her term which lasts through September, 1999. R. Davis will issue a call for nominations for a volunteer to accept this appointment.

4. Adding steps to the Librarian series and criteria for advancement to the top step--Spring Assembly agenda item.

The LAUC Committee on Professional Governance is compiling the results of the recent survey on adding steps to the librarian rank and the criteria for Librarian Step V. The survey results will be discussed at the Spring Assembly.

The issue of adding steps to the librarian series needs to be discussed at the upcoming general membership meeting in preparation for the Spring Assembly in San Diego. Various aspects of the steps issue were discussed. J. Sherlock said that librarians have traditionally tried to parallel faculty regarding rank and step and the faculty has been successful in adding steps. This may help add justification to adding steps to the librarian series. P. Inouye reported that at a past LAUC meeting with Myron Okada (UCOP), one of the controversial points about adding steps was the issue of whether to leave the "distinguished" accomplishment step at Librarian V or to move it to the highest step (Librarian VI or Librarian VII). Clarification is need to understand whether the sense of the proposal was that we would propose leaving the "significant achievement" step at Librarian V but adding steps above that or moving the honorary step up to the highest step. The results of the Professional Governance survey should provided some insight into librarians preferences and help determine if a concensus on the issue is possible. The results from the survey on librarian salaries from a few years ago were inconclusive regarding the competitiveness of librarians salaries and the need for increases.

Other items will also be on the Spring Assembly agenda. The board feels that LAUC librarians need to talk more with each other about issues of importance and this spring meeting should allow room for more informal discussion.

5. Meetings

Rebecca asked the board members for their opinions on the frequency of LAUC-D General meetings. While differing opinions were expressed, it was generally felt that there is a value in getting librarians together to interact and LAUC needs to meet on a regular basis. She will query the membership on the desirability of more frequent meetings. A general membership meeting will be scheduled for later in the month of April with discussion of the Professional Governance survey as the major agenda item.

6. Committee Reports:

Professional Activities: the committee wont meet until May

Professional Issues: Karl asked if PIC should meet to discuss the steps issue and Rebecca suggested that providing background on the history of steps and information on comparable faculty steps would be useful for the general meeting.

Program: Susan reported that the next program will be a program on machine readable cataloging presented by Patsy Inouye and Pat French. Rebecca reported that a reference forum will be held on April 9 with LAUC as one of the sponsors.

Research: Phyllis reported that the state committee is reviewing 3 revised proposals previously reviewed by the Committee. Two proposals were originally recommended. They are working on the accountability issue and on revised guideline language for electronic submission of grant proposals and on multi-year project funding. Locally there has been no new activity.

Review Board: The Board has almost completed reviewing the packets.

7. There was no new business. The meeting adjourned. We will receive an email notice when the date for the general membership meeting is scheduled.

Minutes submitted by Marcia Meister, Secretary.