Skip to main content

November 2000 Minutes

Membership Meeting

November 14, 2000
2-4 p.m.
Seuss Room, Geisel Library


Meeting called to order at 2:04 by Harold Colson

  1. Announcements

  • Harold thanked the membership for the various private accolades he received upon conducting his first membership meeting last September.

  • At the next membership meeting (February 20) D. Hoffman will speak about librarian roles in the development process

  • Harold welcomed visiting librarian Koichi Wada (he’ll be visiting several libraries to observe and learn).

  • The Fall Assembly is this weekend (Harold Colson, Jenny Reiswig and Christina Keil will be attending and reporting back).

  • Jenny announced that statewide professional governance has been asked to review and respond to Position Paper #1, related to the distinguished step; she wants feedback from the membership and possibly setting up a task force. More to come from Jenny later.

  1. Academic Reviews - Brian & Anne

Brian Schottlaender remarks on peer review:

  • Thanked CAPA and ad hoc committees for their hard work.

  • This year was different for many reasons, including the fact that we have a new University Librarian, uncertainties about labor negotiations muddied waters in an unusual way (some guidelines might result from the current negotiations).

  • Extraordinary factors aside, there are some things which can be improved:

  • LATE FILES: most of files were late; this tardiness has budget implications as well as emotional implications for CAPA; adherence to the calendar ensures the quality of the review process; establishing due dates for reviewees and review initiators; there was some discussions on having the review initiators explicitly request extensions so that CAPA knows when files will be forthcoming

  • Our peer review process is very bureaucratic – LHR and CAPA are looking at ways to streamline the process

  • People are writing on corporate memory – people should not assume anything from the past; attend the workshops

  • AULs notably absent from the process; need to look at how/where to plug them in – there were instances where their feedback/presence could have been useful to move the file

    Brian's impressions of "us":

  • 23 candidates for review, 2 ended up being withdrawn

  • Quality of work in files was exceptional, both in terms of accomplishments on job and also on commitment to profession and university

  • UCSD has a reputation for having, employing first-quality librarians

  • Activities in criteria 2-4 are essential because they help us shape and guide the profession and the community

  • LAUC R&PD is to be congratulated on their work so far and he looks to working with them even more; encourages everyone to attend programs and also to shape up new programs

    Anne Prussing’s Remarks: (handed out CAPA annual report)

  • It is an honor to look at the files and accomplishments of colleagues

  • 21 files reviewed, 9 of them required ad hoc committees (which adds time to the process)

  • Only 2 files were in by the Feb 1st due dates; some were as late as 4 months; lateness is not just an inconvenience but it makes it hard to look at files equitably; you never know when there’ll be a need to request more information/documentation

  • Some of the files were so late that they required retroactive actions from campus HR

  • Initially, files were being reviewed under the old scales but the new scales become effective July 1st for non-represented librarians

  • CAPA participated in appointment of 10 new librarians

  • Reminder that the org chart is required not an option; supervisory duties also required

  • The position paper regarding the distinguished step had originally been sent to CAPA but it is now in the hands of Professional Governance

    A lot of discussion followed. Some of the comments made:

  • Recommendation from Susan Starr that we have a no meetings week (who can make this decision?) so people can concentrate on their files.

  • Reminder that people can always turn in files early

  • Encourage review initiators to let other people know that they will need to write letters

  • There was a lot of discussion on professional activities percentage of time and whether or not items in criteria A should be allocated percentages of time, ranked in order of importance, etc. Professional development in SDM and not as percentage; except in very special circumstances such as being elected ALA president; concern that would make it appear as if you have to do those activities in your time because taking this out of the 100% total; current setup is not equitable; as professionals we don’t work 40 hours; percentages of time don’t make sense for professional jobs but they have a salary/level correlation for staff positions so why even have percentages? How about percentages only in criteria A. [Addendum from secretary: some more discussion followed at the workshops for the review process and CAPA is taking a recommendation from CAPA and LAUC-SD Executive Board to the membership on this issue]


  1. Visit by LAUC President Cathy Palmer

Presidential activities:

  • write charges, make appts,

  • campus visits (she thinks the vice-president should be the one doing the visits in the future, to get acquainted with the campuses before her/his term starts). As she goes to each campus, she is visiting the corresponding University Librarian

  • Planning LAUC assembly

  • Cathy distributed a chart related to the ages of librarians in the UC system. Median age: 50; most at Librarian level; some discussion on the issues stemming from these facts and more discussion will take place at fall assembly.

  • Potential LAUC involvement in the search committee to replace R. Lucier

  1. LAUC-SD committee annual reports summaries

  2. C. Haynes thanked A. Prussing and L. Barnhart for their work. A. Prussing is taking over as chair of Cultural Diversity; CDC website will be VAD generated; attendance at film at noon series has increased steadily (more films will be presented this year). Their report will be up on the web.

  3. Bargaining update

No update since Bargaining Update #21; a meeting was taking place last Wednesday but we haven’t heard about it; new field representative Funeka Winsor (some people have met her)