ACQNET v7n033 (Sept 7, 1997) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v7n033 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 33, Sept. 7, 1997 ======================================== (1) FROM: P. Wallace SUBJECT: RE: Hawaii outsourcing controversy: Reply to Chamberlain, Intner, Bloss (193 lines) PART 1 OF 2 (1)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 01:05:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Pat Wallace Subject: Response to Intner, Chamberlain, & Bloss What I find most irritating about Sheila Intner's recent "Open Answers" post is the perpetuation of inaccurate depictions of the wording of resolutions put forth to ALA Council by the Hawaii Working Group. And these inaccuracies are being perpetuated despite direct attempts on my part to dispute them in recent posts forwarded to the ALA Council listserve, which I presume ALCTS leaders read. For example, referring to Charles Willett's recent "Open Questions to ALCTS" post, Intner says: "Angry at ALCTS' failure to denounce the Hawaii State Librarian, Baker & Taylor, and outsourcing, he framed the statement bitterly." In a post forwarded to ALA Council listserve on August 16th I made this statement: "We have not proposed that Council criticize Bart Kane or address events in Hawaii on the level of bad management. In our view, this is a philosophical-ethical issue. The fundamental conception which underlay the RFP in Hawaii in the first place represents an abandonment of the responsibility of public libraries to make what is in the best interest of their readers/patrons the benchmark in managerial decision-making ... So far, ALA Council has not "gotten" this basic idea! ... The Government Employees Union in Hawaii has sued the Hawaii State Public Library System, the Hawaii Board of Education, and State Librarian Bart Kane for the contract with B&T as unconstitutional privatization of a public, tax-supported body ... The Hawaii contract, every bit as much as the Riverside County (CA) contract, raises the issue of privatization of public libraries to Council." [Inter] goes on to claim, erroneously, that: "The resolution AIP wanted Council and ALCTS to approve included language that said outsourcing per se is bad ... " On July 22, Counselor Sue Kamm expressed this confusion: "As someone has pointed out, any library which has a standing order system or a Greenaway plan is indeed leaving their resource selection in the hands of an outside company." Deborah Gutermuth, Hawaii librarian and member of the Hawaii Working Group responded on Council listserve this way: "As one of the panelists at ALA from Hawaii, I respectfully say: you don't get it. Bart Kane, right or wrong, is a local issue. We will deal/live with it. What is larger than Hawaii - the point we were all trying to make -- is that outright selection decisions should never be "wholly" made by the vendor without local library supervision. This is where the Hawaii problem and any other type of approval plan diverges. We had NO RETURN RIGHTS (Yes, I'm Shouting!) WE HAD NO SELECTION INPUT! Each time a box came from B&T, it was a "surprise" box. We had NO prior notice of what was being selected and shipped ... I'm not anti-vendor. I'm against removing the front-line librarian from the loop of collection development!" Intner states: "ALCTS isn't for or against outsourcing ... There are no absolutes -- just individual cases of outsourcing that must be evaluated one at a time, depending on what is outsourced and how, why, and what the alternatives are." With this statement the Hawaii Working Group would agree. And in wording resolutions we have tried to distinguish "The Hawaii Model" of outsourcing as a historically unique form of outsourcing never before applied in an American public library. The resolution put to ALA Council in February 1997 at the Midwinter Conference included this wording: WHEREAS the Hawaii State Public Library System last year totally outsourced the procurement and processing of library materials to a private vendor; and WHEREAS such HSPLS outsourcing has clearly weakened service to Hawaii library users, seriously demoralized HSPLS staff, severely damaged library collections, and impeded access to library resources; and WHEREAS similar outsourcing of basic library functions is either underway or being seriously considered elsewhere; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Social Responsibilities Round Table of the American Library Association urges the Hawaii State Public Library System to immediately cancel its outsourcing contract and permit Hawaiian librarians to do the selection and cataloging that only they can do best; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ALA/SRRT recommends that other libraries do not follow the "Hawaii Model," which demonstrably leads to wrecked, irrelevant, and inaccessible collections, as well as wasting both money and staff expertise." Notice please that we did not recommend that ALL forms of outsourcing be discontinued by all libraries. Our reference was specifically directed to the unique, precedent setting characteristics of what we called "the Hawaii Model." The resolution we put forward to Council this summer in San Francisco contained even more specific wording: "Whereas the "Hawai'i model" of outsourcing collection development includes: complete reliance on a single vendor; allowing that single vendor to allocate 100% of the materials budget; includes a single unit cost per item delivered; and includes no right of return And whereas it is a fundamental principle of the library profession to select materials appropriate to individual library communities so that the local library user receives the best and most appropriate service ... NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the American Library Association endorses the statement that the core values of the library profession include local control of the selection of materials. Outsourcing of the selection of materials function is an inappropriate use of library resources." I think it is clear that the reference to "outsourcing of the selection of materials function" meant TOTAL outsourcing of materials selection which followed the characteristics outlined in the first "Whereas." In the June issue of _Library Journal_, Carol Chamberlain, ALCTS President, stated that: "Like any service model, it [outsourcing] may not be right for every library organization, but it adds to the choices and opportunities we have." My response, posted to the ALA Council listserve, was that: "This approach hardly indicates appreciation for the fact that handing all decision-making power over to a for-profit corporation does more than purportedly solve budget shortfalls and allocation of human resources. It is a decision to violate the public trust to be directly responsible for meeting the tax-paying public's needs. We don't need to call a commission to determine core respon- sibilities of libraries to understand that. One need only understand the difference between decision-making bottom lines in for-profit and tax-supported public service institutions." ALCTS spokespersons have steadfastly declined to follow their own dictum, i.e. to treat each case of outsourcing as a unique case, and have instead continued to sow confusion and fear among others by referring to "outsourcing" as a unitary practice. Moreover, Intner in her response to Willett chooses to reduce the very serious issues which the Hawaii Working Group has been trying to put before ALA Council to ad hominem criticisms and groundless charges of "ALCTS-bashing." To quote Intner: "Mr. Willett and AIP ... seem to prefer testimonials for those whom they designate the 'good guys' & against those they designate the 'bad guys,' or they will bash ALCTS like they bashed the bad guys in Hawaii." The only "testimonials" the Hawaii Working Group has put forward commended the Hawaii librarians for being proactive in forging bonds with patrons and legislators to end the contract with Baker & Taylor. On August 13th, 1997, ALCTS Councilor Alex Bloss himself admits: "By summer, it was apparent that the outsourcing contract was a bad one, that there were failures on the part of both parties, and that the Hawaiian librarians had scored a victory in the Hawaiian legislature, which rescinded the contract." As for charges of "bashing" ALCTS, my comment would be to point out that [they] present [themselves] as "the ALA division most closely involved with outsourcing issues and vendor relations [which] provides leadership to ALA and the library community in these and other areas." If [they] are going to assume such a weighty mantle of authority, it would behoove [them] to be willing to be subjected to critical scrutiny in how [they] responded to the most significant development in the practice of outsourcing library functions to private vendors to occur in recent library history. In other words, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. What we are all waiting for is for ALCTS to stop defending itself and start participating in serious discussion of serious issues alongside your professional colleagues. On August 11th, Councilor Mitch Freedman forwarded information from Hawaii Librarian Carol Tomioka, another member of the Hawaii Working Group: "One member of the [Hawaii Board of Education's] Blue Ribbon Panel, Douglas Ehresman, briefly touched on the problem of illegal delegation of library authority. Ehresman, a lawyer, wrote for the draft of the final report to the Board of Education: "Outsourcing the authority to select all books for each of the 49 libraries is contrary to public policy. In a democracy, voters need full access to information in order to make informed decisions/choices. First Amendment free speech is supported by this rationale. Free public libraries provide citizenry the forum to obtain full access to information. The books in the public library constitute part of the information. The decision of what books go into each of the 49 libraries is a fundamental duty of State government that cannot be delegated to an out-of-state private, for-profit company ... The contract delegates authority to make final book selection for each library. Public employee librarians perform this function. More important, book selection is not a ministerial function like hauling trash. Public employees exercise discretion. It is doubtful outsourcing total book selection would withstand legal scrutiny." [Continued in ACQNET 7:34] ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 33 ****** END OF FILE ******