American LibrariesSearch American Libraries  |
||
Site NavigationLeft Sidebar ItemsOnline Features
|
||
Executive Director Explains Need for Dues IncreaseALA Executive Director Keith Michael Fiels visited with 19 member groups during Midwinter to talk about the need for an Association-wide dues increase. The proposal received overwhelming support from most of them and from ALA Council, which agreed to place it on the spring ballot for approval by the general membership. Rooted in the widely vetted ALA Ahead to 2010 strategic plan (mailed as a brochure with the February issue of American Libraries), the dues increase would “enable the Association to achieve organizational excellence while advancing the key action areas of diversity, equitable access, education and lifelong learning, intellectual freedom, literacy, and advocacy,” Fiels said.AL invited the executive director to respond to some of the tough questions that emerged, both during Midwinter and in a straw poll conducted on American Libraries Direct, ALA’s new weekly electronic member newsletter. One of the objections to the dues increase we heard at Midwinter was that many librarians simply cannot afford it. Is the proposed increase in line with salaries? Over the last decade, salaries for librarians have risen by about 43%. The dues increase is about 30%, so that means that while salaries have been going up about 4% a year, the total annual increase in dues is certainly less than that, so we do think that it is in line with salaries. The bottom line is whether the $100 for ALA membership has been worth the $100. We’re hoping that with the dues increase, we will be able to add some programs that are going to dramatically increase the value to members, so a member’s return on investment will increase as a result. How has ALA been able to sustain its current level of products and services with a flat budget over the past five years and no dues increase in a decade? Because ALA has a fantastic staff that has worked hard to keep things together. I think one of the great myths is that ALA is some cumbersome creature; what I have seen over my last three years as executive director is that staff members work hard to be more effective and to make changes that need to be made in order to maintain services. We have also had to make do with fewer people during that period of time, and the way we have done it is by basically working harder and longer. I think every library professional can relate to the fact that everywhere we’re being asked to do more with less. We’ve had a number of new programs that we’ve been able to roll out. We haven’t just been able to maintain; in fact, we have been able to make some small advances, and, again, I attribute it all to the fact that people are just working hard. What specifically is the average ALA member going to get for an extra $10 a year over the next three years? A couple of things. The first is that when we went out and asked the 20,000 members that we involved in the strategic planning process, the primary priority that we got back from them is the need for increased advocacy. And that really took three forms: more research to document the value of libraries and librarians, more public awareness of the value of libraries, and more support for local advocacy in order to improve library budgets and to stave off some of the budget cuts and closures we’re seeing in various places. The main new initiative that we’re proposing under the strategic plan is a dramatic expansion in our work in the area of advocacy. It’s something that members have been asking for and that we need to provide. But we’re not going to put all our eggs in one basket. We also have many fine programs having to do with everything from school libraries to rural libraries to outreach to the underserved to intellectual freedom to diversity, and all of these areas have been starved because of the lack of additional funding. In all of these areas throughout the Association, we have a lot of great ideas that we’re ready to move ahead on. Going back to advocacy, when you say members are going to get more support, what does that mean? Our measure of success will be if in five years, somebody says, “You know, we fought off those budget cuts, we got that budget increase, we passed that referendum, we got that bond, we built that building, we managed to keep the school libraries from closing, and ALA was helpful to us.” The way we’ll do that is by providing additional resources and training. What resources? A resource would be a toolkit, it would be the ability—if you’re looking on how to do an effective budget presentation—to be able to go in and find information on some sample budget presentations, how other libraries are using data and research to support their budget requests. So we’re talking about very specific tangible tools. Continuing education, such as the advocacy institutes, clearly supports that goal, which is to give library advocates the tools that they need, working with the chapters and working with those who are very active in this area, so that local advocates have more support from the Association in achieving local advocacy goals. What does an ALA member stand to lose if the dues increase fails? The average member loses because without a more active ALA and advocacy, we’re going to continue to be caught by surprise every time there’s a budget cut, every time somebody proposes the elimination of libraries. We need to be much more proactive, both as individuals and as a profession. If the dues increase fails, are members still going to get everything they’re already getting? The fact of the matter is that we don’t see that the ALA budget is going to be able to grow without the dues increase. We’re not even keeping up with inflation, which is something anybody who’s ever been in charge of a budget can understand. We are aggressively working for grants, we’re aggressively trying to develop ALA’s businesses and service to libraries and the profession, but we do not see that the revenue is there to support an ALA that can do any more than essentially tread water. That’s why we’re going to the members, because we need an ALA that can do more than simply maintain existing commitments. We’re doing a lot of great things, but we need to do more. Will a dues increase mean salary raises for ALA staff? Isn’t the staff already more highly compensated than most librarians? The staff here at ALA has salaries that are comparable, I believe, to the salaries of people working in major libraries in urban areas. Over the last five years, the staff has received raises in three of those years that don’t even equal inflation. I do believe that ALA, since we champion better salaries for librarians, has a responsibility to try to be a model employer, and that means that we should at least have raises that equal the cost of living. Would the failure of a dues increase on the ballot mean cutting jobs at ALA Headquarters or in the Washington Office? We will do everything within our power to try to prevent that from occurring. We are already in a position where there are about 10% fewer staff members at ALA then there were five years ago, serving a membership that has grown by 15%, and having launched a significant number of new programs. I think the answer is that we’ll try and sustain it as long as we can, but we do think that the dues increase will allow us to do so much more that we’re hoping the members will support it. What have you told the ALA division boards, specifically the Public Library Association, that are reluctant to endorse the dues proposal because they fear a drop in their membership as a result? The last time a dues increase was passed, in 1995, we saw a 1% drop in the ALA and divisional membership the first year—and, again, this was a three-year phase-in as well—and a 2% drop the second year. By the third year, we had already seen membership growth again. I would only argue that a more active ALA that is providing better benefits to members is going to guarantee our growth over the long period of time, and that once we get through what will certainly be some small loss of membership over the short term, that members will come back as they did after the last dues increase. Membership has grown 17% since the last dues increase. Why can’t ALA raise the needed revenue in other ways? ALA does raise revenue in other ways. We have a number of new and exciting services that we’re providing to libraries and the profession, such as the AL Direct weekly electronic member newsletter, the new LibraryCareers.org site from the Office for Human Resource Development and Recruitment, a new job site now in development from American Libraries and C&RL News, Booklist, and Choice. All these do generate additional income for the Association. But we don’t have a source of revenue that can grow large enough to support all of the needs in the Association. Compared to other associations, what proportion of our revenue is dues-based? Comparable, lower, or higher? My understanding is that ALA actually raises a larger percentage of its total budget through nondues sources than the vast majority of other organizations. Currently we raise $4 in grant and business-related activities for every dollar in dues. So every $100 that a member puts in by being a personal member is matched by $400 in revenue that’s raised through publishing, grants, or conferences. At the Midwinter Meeting, what was the main objection to the dues increase that you heard, and how did you address that concern? Most people wanted to know how the dues increase would produce specific benefits for them and their division or area of interest. People were not necessarily as opposed to the dues increase as they were interested in finding out how it was going to benefit them. One of the strengths of the 2010 strategic plan is that it does not accept the fact that ALA is an organization that can only do a few things well. We have tens of thousands of members involved in every area of library service under the sun. We have a plan that is going to be able to produce not only some benefits in the form of new initiatives such as the advocacy initiative that we’ve talked about, but also will actually produce tangible benefits throughout the Association. As I say, this is not an “all your eggs in one basket” dues increase. We intend to basically use this funding to make many flowers bloom. When we talk about an extra $10 a year, not only will there be a significant and dramatic increase in ALA’s ability to support advocacy at the local, state, and national levels, but the money will also be used to support many initiatives in other areas as well. For instance, people have asked about technology and continuously improving the ALA website. The plan does call for almost a quarter-million dollars of that dues revenue going into technological enhancements. Without that increase, we’re clearly moving on a much slower timetable than we would be with that revenue. One last thing on affordability. The dues proposal also calls for extending the number of members that would be eligible for reduced dues rate. Now anyone making below $25,000 is eligible for reduced rates. We’re also committed to continuing to explore over the long term the possibility of a graduated dues structure. So don’t bother voting for one now, because we’re going to come back to you in a year with a graduated structure? The problem is that we need a dues increase now, and that even if we were to come to an agreement after some extensive study on a new dues structure, that would take two to three years to really do the work that needs to be done in order to come up with something that would actually be agreed upon by all the members. This is a large membership organization. That is a huge fundamental change that involves issues ranging from privacy and confidentiality of people’s salary information, and a number of other issues. Even if those issues were to be worked out, we cannot delay a dues increase. What we expressed the willingness to do is to continue to look at the possibility of moving to a graduated dues increase, but we simply cannot wait. |
Right Sidebar
|
|
