There had been discussion at the online Budget and Finance meeting that we could open this up to encompass other section recruitment activities, not strictly limiting to receptions, happy hours, etc. So it could include giveaways and creative things that sections might want to do for recruitment. (Not feeling creative enough to come up with an example.) The thought was to give Sections some flexibility in case they want to do some other type of member recruitment activity, but to not expect them to fund conference programming from this money.
M. Kathleen Kern
The vote is on the proposal as amended. See that thread for the document.
Hi! I am likely in the minority here, but I would like us to think about recruitment activities vs. substantive programmatic material. Sections asked last year for a piece of the funding to pay for extra program expenses. So....let me ask a few questions:
1. Is programming support really a need? Paying honoraria for big name speakers can be very expensive. We cannot pay library speakers, but we can pay some expenses, I believe.
2. I am particularly concerned here about retention of people who are already members. Would socials and giveaways be a better use of our money than some funding for programs? I agree that recruitment will be less expensive.
3. Which of these should be our priority?
Mary Pagliero Popppopp@indiana.edu
Can you tell me more about what the sections asked for last year? Was it for food for the programming (which is nearly retention in my book ;-) or was it to pay honoria?
Ann, the desires expressed to me by Sections last year varied. There was interest in food (which could indeed be construed as retention), but there was also interest in funding for speaker fees for non-ALA speakers and assistance with travel expenses, such as a plane ticket or a night in a hotel room, for both non-ALA and library speakers.
Our experience with the President's Program this year, where we found speaker fees in the $10,000 and up (plus expenses) realm makes me a little leery about guaranteeing speaker fees for onsite speakers. However, honoraria for those who create free webinars or who do an online program would be something to consider.
As revised, programming at conference is excluded for the reasons that Mary mentions. If an honorarium is wanted it would be outside of this range and this is not the purpose of the "recruitment and retention" allocation. It would need to be made by the sections as a separate budget request.
Honoraria for online speakers is mentioned. The background on this is that RUSA pays $150 for webinar speakers. (This is in keeping with what other ALA and non-ALA library webinars pay their speakers.) If Sections want to offer additional free webinars or reduced cost webinars as a member beneift (or perhaps free for some group like unemployed or students?) they could use this to pay for the webinar speaker so as to not lose money on the event.
I'm not doing a good job with clear communication today, so I hope that this makes sense.
I am unable to vote. It says the poll has closed. I thought I voted yesterday but I don't see my name on the list. I vote yes.
Janice Schultz, retired
HI! I had the same problem. Could we please reopen it till the EOB on Friday?
Mary Pagliero Popp, Research & Discovery Services Librarian
Discovery & Research Services Dept., Indiana University Libraries
W501 Herman B Wells Library, 1320 E. 10th Street
Bloomington, IN 47405
812-855-8170 FAX: 812-856-2062 email@example.com
om: ALA Connect [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
While the poll is closed already, I also would have voted yes.
I am particularly happy about this now being flexible enough to support more than just the actual events. BRASS has enjoyed vendor support for our event and I'm glad we can use these funds for other creative recruitment and retention ideas in addition to our event.
I just fixed the poll so it's open again. Sorry about that - we had originally chose the date of June 20 to close. However you should be able to vote now.
I had seen two dates--June 20 and June 21 and evidently got them confused. They are on two different documents. Thanks!
This poll is now closed. The proposal was approved with 14 yes votes.