ACQNET v3n076 (September 26, 1993) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v3n076 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 3, No. 76, September 26, 1993 ========================================== (1) FROM: Judith Niles SUBJECT: ALCTS bylaws changes (45 lines) (2) FROM: Ann O'Neill SUBJECT: ALCTS bylaws changes (15 lines) (3) FROM: Janet Gertz SUBJECT: ALCTS bylaws changes (91 lines) (4) FROM: Mary McLaren SUBJECT: Charleston Conference: volunteers needed (17 lines) (1)------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Judith Niles (Univ. of Louisville) Subject: ALCTS bylaws changes Date: Thu, 23 Sep 93 14:44:29 EDT I'm hereby stating my opposition to the proposed changes in the ALCTS structure, in hopes of initiating some discussion before members begin returning their ballots. I am in agreement with the PLMS/RLMS Perspective which is in the current issue of the _ALCTS Newsletter_ (vol. 4, no. 6/7.) The views presented by the executive committee of those two sections reflect opinions expressed by several members of the executive committee of the Acquisitions Section, in our discussion of the various proposals of the Organizational Structure Task Force. One rationale for the changes is that ALCTS needs to have a structure similar to the way libraries are now organized. I find that rationale totally unconvincing. ALCTS is not a library, and has a completely different mission to accomplish, and its structure should be designed accordingly. I agree that some changes would be beneficial to the organization, but most of those could be achieved by reducing the administrative scope of the current ALCTS Board of Directors and eliminating unnecessary bureaucratic red-tape. Several newer sections had already taken significant steps to achieve many of the stated goals for empowerment, responsiveness and leadership opportunities. It seems a shame to abandon those efforts for a period of two to three years while the organization sorts itself out under a radical new structure. The rationale for "forums" instead of sections is to make it possible for more members to be actively involved in their areas of interest. However, when it is stated that the leadership (if any) of a forum, would be elected at meetings of the forum, the implication is that only members able to attend conferences would actually have much opportunity to be involved. It has become more and more difficult for members to afford travel to ALA conferences. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate to maintain the momentum of section efforts such as the institutes, which take ALCTS out to members and potential members. I acknowledge that a number of good ideas have emerged from the process and I would certainly support and promote their implementation within the current structure. I would also continue to be a member and do whatever I could to support ALCTS if the proposed changes were to be approved. But I foresee a long period of organizational chaos, loss of current momentum and resulting disaffection of members before any positive results could be achieved via the proposed changes. Judith Niles, former member-at-large, Resources Section/Acquisitions Section, 90/91-92/93. (2)------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Ann O'Neill (Univ. of North Carolina ) Subject: ALCTS Bylaws Date: Fri, 24 Sep 93 09:30 I just received my first issue of the _ALCTS Newsletter_, and after looking at the discussion of the proposed bylaw changes, I will be voting "no." As a new member, but someone who has been watching from the sidelines for a while, I do not see how the new organization will encourage more participation or make the division more responsive to member needs. Who would I ask to serve on a committee, to make suggestions for presentations, etc? I also fear that it will allow a few people to dictate the agenda of the division, leaving many members needs unmet. I do not know how to fix the problems that need to be addressed, but I do know that the proposed organization changes will NOT solve them. (3)------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Janet Gertz (Columbia University) Subject: ALCTS bylaws vote Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1993 15:21:09 -0400 From: The Executive Committees of the Preservation and Reproduction Sections of ALCTS To: All ALCTS Members Re: THE VOTE ON THE REVISED BYLAWS The Executive Committees of PLMS and RLMS urge you to vote "no" on the special ALCTS ballot on the new set of bylaws. They drastically change the organization by eliminating the sections that are the center of our ALCTS identities as specialists in acquisitions, cataloging, collection development, preservation, and serials. They concentrate leadership in the hands of half a dozen people. They bear almost no resemblance to the OSTF report, which has been thoroughly discussed and disseminated. Instead, they are the last minute thoughts of the Organization and Bylaws Committee, presented to you for vote with no public hearings. DO WE NEED COMPLETE REORGANIZATION? The new bylaws address a crisis that is invisible to many members. ALCTS as currently structured serves its members well in many ways. The advocates of change have not made clear what works and what doesn't, nor have they identified where the problems originate: in the sections? in central ALCTS? at the ALA level? They haven't tried to correct those problems within the current structure. Voting "yes" is throwing a healthy baby out with the bath water. LOSS OF IDENTITY The sections in ALCTS have served an important role by giving librarians with functional specialties a place to work together on issues related to their jobs. Forums are supposed to replace sections and provide an identity for our communities. But in the bylaws forums have no assignments, no powers, no purpose, no function. Their leadership will not be chosen by mail ballot of all of ALCTS; only people actually attending a conference will vote. Communities are formed by groups with shared activities and goals; forums have neither. Such a formless, unempowered entity cannot nourish an effective community or a sense of identity. Sections now serve as the training ground not just for the future leadership of the ALCTS but also for the future leadership of our cherished libraries and information organizations. In eliminating sections you eliminate a primary means for many library staff to acquire the skills necessary to advance in their home institutions. DIS-EMPOWERING THE MEMBERSHIP The issue of empowerment is primary. In the proposed organization all power and authority rest in the hands of eight people (six directors- at-large, president, vice-president) rather than being shared by over fifty people as in the current structure. This can in no way be characterized as member "empowerment"; rather, it is a deliberate attempt to limit the input members can have in management, planning, and fiscal issues. Interest groups and forums must petition the ALCTS Board for permission to exist. All committees will report to the board. The past-president will serve as the chair of Organization and Bylaws, further concentrating the power of the organization in a few hands. A vote in favor of the bylaws endorses the move away from self-determination. INBRED LEADERSHIP Some members complain that it is difficult for new people to become active because the ALCTS establishment generally appoints/nominates only people they already know. The new structure will increase the inbred nature of the ALCTS leadership. The vice-president will make ALL appoint- ments to committees and task forces. How can one person know about all interested and able members who want to contribute their valuable efforts to the work of the division? TIMELINESS OF ACTION There is strong concern over a lack of timeliness and responsiveness now in ALCTS. The bylaws make ALL committees, forums, and other groups report directly to the Board. Actions which require Board approval will need Board discussion during conferences. In ALCTS now there are about sixty committees (excluding executive and 'bureaucratic' committees). If even half of these continue, an incredible bottleneck to action could quickly develop as the Board attempts to deal with all of those reports directly rather than through section chairs. Timeliness is essential in planning programs and other events. ALCTS now sets the time tables, while section committees do much of the work. The proposed bylaws don't address how these matters will be handled in future. Attendance at programs, preconferences, and institutes is one of the most valued activities for ALCTS members. Should we not at least have a description of the new procedures before we vote to destroy the old ones? We are all aware that ALCTS needs to change. But it needs to change for the better. Creating an improved ALCTS is possible, but these bylaws are not the way. We urge members to vote against the proposed changes to the bylaws, and we further urge them to take up the challenge to find how we can best create the dynamic, flexible, and useful organization we all want. (4)------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Mary McLaren (University of Kentucky) Subject: Call for volunteers Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:08:31 -0400 The plan for the Charleston Conference's Automation Lively Lunch for Friday (Nov. 5) calls for informal breakout groups arranged by automated system of choice (eg: NOTIS, CARL, etc.). Anyone interested in volunteering to lead the group which will discuss their system of choice is asked to contact me directly (mclaren@ukcc.uky.edu or (606) 257-2543). Responsibilities include facilitating the discussion and recording the major topics of interest. These are very informal "meet and eat" groups set up to promote discussion of systems issues among current users as well as potential users. The CARL leader has already volunteered (Thanks, Thelma Diercks from Hawaii!), but all the other system spots are still open. ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 3, No. 76 ****** END OF FILE ******