Re: [Publib] Perplexed Librarian 2007 – Part One

[Backwage at aol.com]

In a message dated 6/2/2007 11:11:09 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
splibrarian at hotmail.com writes:

One of  the main issues faced by the staff at the Library in which I work is 
the  lack of value felt by staff from those Executives who make management  
decisions.  Feeling valuable is individually subjective and  emotional. 


One real problem is that making employees happy as individuals is not a  
management requirement for any firm, public or private.  For one thing, it  defies 
precise definition--how, exactly, would any library go about doing that  for 
each of its workers?
 
The employment relationship is one in which the employer has very  broad 
latitude of action, with a rather small list of proscribed  activities.  Within 
that, they can operate the firm pretty much as they see  fit.  Work remains an 
exchange of effort for money, and satisfaction is not  necessarily high on the 
management list.  Most firms don't want to lose  people, but most of them have 
accepted that they do.
 
One thing I hear all the time is that workers don't feel included in  
management decision-making.  Most of these workers are out the door thirty  seconds 
after their shift finishes, and their interest in the workplace extends  no 
further than their own particular interest or career.  That is a hard  thing for 
a worker advocate like me to admit, but there is too much evidence to  deny 
it.  
 
The collective bargaining arrangement is one constructed against the  
background of an agreement.  You get to grieve if the rules are  broken.  The rules 
don't cover very much at all.  Collective  bargaining is not going to get you 
your "happy."  
 
If I look at the dozen or so places I've worked over the years, every one  of 
them had line workers who thought management ignored them.  That began  with 
military service and went on and on.  There are two reasons management  
doesn't consult with lower-level employees.  One is that they generally  don't have 
to.  Two is that it generally doesn't pay.  I spend a lot  of time trying to 
convince working people to take advantage of their rights and  to provide their 
bosses with reasoned arguments to do various things.  I  stress the word 
'reasoned.'  Most of the time what you get is a series of  vague gripes.  As to 
the petition of no-confidence, I see that something  like 700 people signed it.  
How many were librarians and how many  patrons?  And how many are union 
members?  I could get 500 patrons to  send money to the president of Nigeria.  And 
what, exactly, is the precise  policy reference?  In the agreement, that is.  
If there isn't one,  then you've got practically nothing to go on through the 
union, and outside of  that, you'd better have a lot more than a list of 
signatures protesting Paris  Hilton's appearance on your shelves.  Which you 
haven't.  I take it  that you want to have control of branch acquisitions left in 
the hands of branch  librarians.  That's just fine.  Why not put it that way, do 
a  descriptive analysis of the situation and present your case?  All you've  
done to this point is make noise--which is not to be confused with speech.  
 
What you do have in the collective bargaining arena is the possibility of  
attacking any change in the material conditions of work for any represented  
workers.  That means that if the library outsources jobs, shifts locations  or 
anything like that, or presents plans to do so, you can object and fight the  
changes.  Go ahead and do that.  As to the value of human beings and  their 
happiness at work, you've got a three-legged horse to ride.
 
M. McGrorty



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/attachments/20070602/5f09c0af/attachment.htm