SRRT (Social Responsibilities Round Table)

 View Only
last person joined: 2 days ago 

The Social Responsibilities Round Table works to make ALA more democratic and to establish progressive priorities not only for the Association, but also for the entire profession. Concern for human and economic rights was an important element in the founding of SRRT and remains an urgent concern today. SRRT believes that libraries and librarians must recognize and help solve social problems and inequities in order to carry out their mandate to work for the common good and bolster democracy.

Learn more about SRRT on the ALA website.

  • 1.  ALA

    Posted 22 days ago

    Dear Colleagues

     

    It is long past time to recognize that every operation of the American Library Association(ALA) is suffering. Fiscal solvency is in tatters, membership in substantive decline, conferences and publishing no longer meeting their fund generating goals.  We must stop tinkering with ALA's governance, isolate the reasons for this debacle, and design a sustainable future for our organization, long considered an institutional pillar of our democracy.

    Trevor Dawes and Beth McNeil have produced a brilliant resolution. They are asking for signatures and plan to present it at the next Membership Meeting for discussion. Pat Schuman and I have done this.  

     

    While we do not need to  agree with every word, it is a point from which our voices can be heard to put ALA back on course again. Please add your name with ours to this resolution.

     

     Here is a link to the resolution and a place to add your signature. 
     

     

    ALA needs your support as never before.  We must bring our Association back from the precipice on which it now rests before it leads to ALA's demise.

     

    Betty Turock and Pat Schuman

    Past Presidents and Honorary Life Members

               



    ------------------------------
    Patricia Glass Schuman
    ALA Past Treasurer
    ALA Past President
    ALA Honorary Member
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: ALA

    Posted 21 days ago
    Thank you, Patricia and Betty, for bringing your voice to this conversation. After reading the resolution I am inclined to affix my name to it.

    However I did have a few questions/thoughts I would like hear more on from you first if you would be so kind. I ask them here in case it might benefit others.

    1. I’m a long time member and fairly active in the organization (Beyond co-leading a SRRT task force, I always read through the ALA Connect threads I’m on!). However, I have not heard about many of the allegations in the resolution. It’s not surprising given the claims that we have not heard more on them from our leadership lately. I wondered though if there was any sources members might keep up with that are say some type of investigative journalism which reports findings like these regularly?

    I’ve long been frustrated with the opaque nature of how our organization operates…resources which more succinctly connect us to meeting minutes, processes of council, etc., are greatly needed!

    2. This resolution—perhaps fairly enough—does a good job of pointing out the problems we face but says little about solutions to those problems. It puts the onerous of positive change on current leadership—again fairly enough—but there’s been seemingly little evidence that suggests they are capable of such change.

    3. Similarly, there is discussion throughout about the need to tie leadership employment to whether or not we run a deficit. I can imagine certain strategies that would result in higher revenue in publishing, for instance, but that additional revenue might come at the cost of deviating from our professed values. Is that something we are willing and able to do?

    Ultimately, it makes sense that we hire people to run the association on the members’ behalf but perhaps there does need to be more member involvement in identifying possible solutions to our problems (financial and otherwise) as well as what strategizes our values will permit us to pursue toward such solutions.

    Thank you, the resolution authors, and everyone else ringing the bell for us on these essential issues in a time critical to the future of library success.

    Sincerely,

    Joseph Winberry

    Sent from my iPhone




  • 3.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago

    Thanks for your thoughtful questions. We used to have a library press that asked the tough questions and reported on actions. Sadly, the only way to follow what is happening now is to attend meetings or read minutes and reports -  when they are eventually published. 

    Equally unfortunate is the seeming lack of interest in elections and our leadership.  A small percentage of memberseven bother to vote anymore . And it is difficult to get people to run. Out of some 40,000 members, the current president was elected with less than 4000 votes.  when I fell for president, there was some 40,000 members and I received 14,000 votes . my hope is that resolutions like Trevor's will re-energize the membership because these are parallel times for libraries and librarians.


    Your publishing question is an interesting one . I don't have an easy answer but I do think there are there are some that would not compromise our professional values  

    My hope is that more people who care will get involved ALA .  We need a strong organization more than ever!

    Sincerely



    ------------------------------
    Patricia Glass Schuman
    ALA Past Treasurer
    ALA Past President
    ALA Honorary Member
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago
    Thank you.

    I have signed. Will it be an open letter or where we will at least learn how many people have signed? JW






  • 5.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago
    This is Trevor's resolution, not mine, but I am sure it will. 






  • 6.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago
    Trevor just assured me that this will be public, including all signers

    Pat 
    Sent from my iPad





  • 7.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago
    Edited by Tara Brady 20 days ago

    Hey, Joseph. I have one point of information that I think might be helpful in evaluating this resolution, especially re: your question 2: ALA staff, even senior staff, are not ALA Leadership. Even the executive director is appointed by, serves as the pleasure of, and reports directly to the executive board. The executive director does also sit on the executive board, but they don't have a vote. ALA's elected member-leaders are its leadership. 

    It's because of this that I think this resolution misses the mark. It lays the responsibility for ALA's financial struggles at the feet of those whose job is only to execute the priorities that our governance structures have set. ALA staff don't set those priorities: they just do their best to run the programs our governance structure creates. There's no evidence that our deficits are due to staff mismanagement: in fact, it seems the main problem is that we are continuing to ask ALA staff to do more than we are bringing in the money to pay for.  

    ALA's governance is trying to course correct. That's what the much-talked-about program assessments have been about, for example. We're in the process of trying to work together to find ways to reduce costs and use or members' dues and donations much more wisely: for example, by sunsetting programs that aren't serving the association well anymore and by eliminating duplicative work among the programs we do retain. Some might call that 'tinkering,' but from where I sit it's an important and long-overdue reevaluation of decades of accumulated committees and programs, many of which are simply no longer serving their originally intended purposes. That's how we right the ship. 



    ------------------------------
    Tara Brady
    Queens Public Library
    She/Her/Hers
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago
    This is important context and points, Tara; thank you for sharing them. I do feel like we as a field have more responsibility for this situation than the resolution suggests. Having said that, we do collectively create a structure for hiring people to do these things on our behalf as we are all busy "librarying" every day and do not necessarily have the expertise to create and manage revenue streams. While there are differences of opinions on why are we in this situation and what to do about it there seems to be agreement that our current path is unsustainable for the future of organization and profession. But the move to centralize control does not seem to have brought us any solutions. We may need a larger effort to come to terms with where we fit into  modern society and possibly make big changes unthinkable even just a few years ago. An overhaul of publishing might be one example of that. Hopefully council can get more information out about where we are and how we can better organize to address these challenges.

    --
    Joseph





  • 9.  RE: ALA

    Posted 20 days ago

    I think that's kind of the point, though: it's true that most individual ALA members don't have the expertise to manage any one part of the association, let alone the whole thing, but that's one reason why we have an executive director who reports to our elected executive board. If staff performance were even a small part of the problem at ALA, it would not take a membership resolution to solve it, because ALA's member leaders don't merely delegate all of that work and forget about it: they have a responsibility to conduct oversight as well. That means that if staff performance ever somehow got to the point that it needed to be addressed via a membership resolution, that too would be a governance issue, because it would mean that ALA's entire leadership had failed to do their jobs, and done so over a period of many years and multiple election cycles. 

    So I'm kind of at a loss: if our association's leadership had failed so thoroughly that a resolution like this one were ever to become necessary, demanding accountability from our elected leaders would still be the more pressing concern. But instead it seems at least some of the resolutions supporters are treating it not as a complement to the ongoing changes to the association, but as a counterproposal.  

    I'm not totally sure what you mean by 'the move to centralize control' - I know a lot has been made of the proposal to do away with council as a policymaking body, but it was only a proposal and it was voted down more than three years ago now - but as for the larger effort you mention; yes, that's absolutely needed, and also currently underway. We are already making big changes unthinkable a few years ago (and still unthinkable to some today, I think!) Take for example the aforementioned program assessment, the strategic plan we adopted at last year's annual, the policy recommendations from the executive board we voted on in August, and the committee on organization motions from the winter meetings. There's a lot going on already! 

    ALA's problems are real, but they are not ALA staff's fault. They've been doing their best to run an association that has let its housekeeping pile up for too long. I really hope everyone who's concerned about ALA's future will consider looking into the work that is going on and find a way to get involved.  The ALA Forward Member Updates page is the place to start. 



    ------------------------------
    Tara Brady
    Queens Public Library
    She/Her/Hers
    ------------------------------