ACQNET v7n017 (April 22, 1997) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v7n017.txt ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 17, April 22, 1997 ======================================== (1) FROM: Rick Anderson SUBJECT: RE: SRRT Hawaii Resolution (39 lines) (2) FROM: S. Mueller & F. Zula (2 postings) SUBJECT: RE: One or Multiple Vendors (51 lines) (3) FROM: Rhonda Glazier SUBJECT: Paperback vs. Hardback (14 lines) (4) FROM: Marylou Hale SUBJECT: Status of Librarians (27 lines) (5) FROM: Jey Wann SUBJECT: InMagic Library Guide (30 lines) (1)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 07 Mar 1997 09:32:08 -0500 From: Rick Anderson (Yankee Book Peddler, Inc.) Subject: Re: SRRT Resolution [The Editor apologizes for inadvertently omitting this posting earlier during the Hawaii discussion. Perhaps it will spur us on to further reflections on the topic] (These comments and opinions are my own, and not necessarily those of Yankee Book Peddler, Inc.) [From the SRRT resolution....] >WHEREAS commercial vendors, primarily motivated by profit-making, >cannot effectively select and catalog materials for library >systems whose local staffs are much more knowledgeable about their >own collections, user interests, material-sources (including >regional and alternative presses and groups), and access needs; Interesting set of fallacious assumptions here, ranging from the illogical (commercial vendors seek profit; therefore, profit-making is their primary motive) to the simply misinformed (workers at commercial vendors cannot effectively select and catalog materials for libraries). As a professional librarian who works for a book vendor, I can testify from daily experience -- and based on extensive feedback from a large number of libraries -- that vendors can and do participate effectively in both collection management and cataloging in ways that benefit libraries. Does that mean it's wise for a vendor to try to act as a library's entire CD or cataloging staff? Personally, I think not. But there is CD work that vendors can do very well, thus freeing up valuable time for librarians at client institutions to perform those tasks which a vendor *cannot* do well. ***************************** Rick Anderson Bibliographer Collection Management Services Yankee Book Peddler, Inc. (800) 258-3774 ext. 240 (2)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 09:44:07 -0600 (MDT) From: Susan Mueller Subject: Re: Single or Multiple Vendors (ACQNET 7:15) Single or multiple vendors We use multiple vendors. We have 3 or 4 primary vendors, but use many more for special requests. We have identified special features of these vendors for different needs. Some do a good job of binding paperbacks, others are more resourceful at fulfilling OP requests. Of course discounts are considered as well. We have had problems with one vendor and we were glad we had others we could use instead. That one vendor is working hard to get us back, but I don't foresee ever having just one vendor. There is probably more clout with one vendor, but there is also the fear that something would happen that would require redirecting all your orders elsewhere at the last minute. We prefer the multiple vendor option. Susan Mueller ***************************************************************** Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 21:17:26 -0800 From: Floyd Zula (Cal State-Fullerton) Subject: Single or Multiple Vendors I would like to weigh in on the side of those using more than one vendor for their basic (core) monographic business. One of the more important reasons for doing this is a matter of work flow. While my perceptions in this matter may need to be corrected, I would surmise that most vendors only transmit the orders that they have received from their customer libraries to their publisher suppliers once a week, or even less frequently. Consequently, if a library uses more than one vendor for the acquisition of its core books (U.S. trade and university presses), it benefits from possibly having its orders sent out more frequently than once a week to this wide array of publishers. Secondly and more importantly, the shipments of books from your two or more major vendors are more likely to be received by the ordering library at staggered times and thus serve to alleviate to some extent the problem of "dry spells" in your receipts operations. This, in turn, may be appreciated by the people cataloging and processing your books, etc. Floyd Zula Coordinator, Acquisitions Section California State University, Fullerton (714) 773-2366 fzula@fullerton.edu (3)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 20:29:25 -0500 From: Rhonda Glazier (Univ. of Missouri) Subject: Paperback versus Hardback I am trying to get information on how different libraries are handling the purchasing of paperback vs. hardback editions. Do they determine it by cost, when the paperback edition is published, etc. Any suggestion you can give me on how to find out this information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Rhonda Glazier (573) 882-2835 (4)-------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 14:31:19 +0000 From: Marylou Hale (Las Vegas Public Library) Subject: Status of Librarians Rumor has it that our Library District (Las Vegas Clark County Library District) is considering making all Librarian I's non-exempt in regards to the Fair Labor Standards Act. We are currently exempt. What this [the change] means is that we would basically be considered non-professionals, regardless of the fact that they REQUIRE the candidate to have an MLS to be hired. We would have to clock in and out, and we would be expected to leave exactly at the end of our eight hour shift. We would no longer be allowed to stay "those extra few minutes" to finish a project or answer a particularly hard reference question. I perceive that this could be the first step in the devaluation of the MLS, once considered to be the professional proof that one is a librarian. However, some in our district have told us that they know of no Librarian I's who are exempt. My question to this list is: Do you know of any Librarians (MLS) who are considered non-exempt according to the Fair Labor Standards Act? Please respond personally to me at hmhale@worldnet.att.net and I'll summarize for the list. Thanking you in advance Marylou Hale (5)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 17:00:15 +0800 (U) From: Jey A Wann (Oregon State Library) Subject: Inmagic Library Guide (Cross-posted to Acqnet and libsup-l. Please excuse the duplication.) I would like to hear from anyone who has experience using the serials and acquisitions modules of Inmagic's Library Guide. We currently use EC for serials and MATSS for acquisitions (and, yes, I'm the person who posted the same question about DRA's modules a couple of weeks ago.) Obviously, we are considering changing systems for these 2 functions. I am finding this kind of decision much more difficult to make than it was deciding which system to get when we first automated. When we switched from manual to automated systems, it was pretty clear that there would be a benefit. But contemplating switching systems, there are so many things to compare and trade-offs to consider that I find it somewhat daunting. Jey Wann Acquisitions Coordinator Oregon State Library State Library Bldg. Salem, OR 97310 503-378-4198, ext. 248 fax 503-588-7119 jey.a.wann@state.or.us ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 17 ****** END OF FILE ******