Rebound for APA's Failure to Thrive?

(Warning to non-library, non-ALA Raccoon Readers:  Nothing but Association politics in this post.)

I came to this Midwinter meeting, eyeing my newest committee appointment with a dim and skeptical view. I was recruited to become a member of the ALA Allied Professional Association (APA) Promotion and Fundraising committee.  Although I’m already loaded with assignments on top of my Council appointment, I was an early supporter of APA, convinced that ALA needed a mechanism with which to advocate for library employees, since the ALA is a library association, not an association for librarians. 

The APA is the 501C(6) arm of ALA that was created in 2002 to provide certification for individuals and to advocate for librarians in pay and equity issues.  I was a witness to the difficult birth of the APA in 2002, and, despite my interest in seeing it grow and succeed, I eventually diagnosed it with failure to thrive. Failure to thrive is a clinical diagnosis given to children in the first few years of life who, for various reasons, do not demonstrate normal growth patterns. At birth, they seem to be healthy and even robust, but by mid-way through their first year, it becomes clear that something is wrong. There’s a laundry list of potential reasons, including emotional and physical neglect and poor nutrition. Often times, even when parents are doing all the right things, there is no identifiable reason. APA has had a bit of a bastard child status, born to ALA without unanimous support and enthusiasm. This August 15, 2002 article from Library Journal summarizes early sentiment, both positive and negative, about APA.

Reactions to the APA ranged from total acceptance to absolute rejection, although most attendees were confused about the process. Some from the PLA contingent were concerned that the new emphasis on salaries would dilute their efforts to get ALA on
board with certification. Meanwhile, some from the Social Responsibilities Round Table (SRRT) were split on the ALA/APA, supporting the idea of the salary initiative but opposing the idea of certification. There was also widespread doubt about why the APA had no membership component and how and to whom it would be accountable without one.

Since its creation, ALA Council has heard numerous treasurer’s reports revealing that APA was in the red. APA has been living on money borrowed from ALA. The initial fundraising campaign was a flop—contributions are not tax deductible and APA was invisible and enigmatic to most potential donors, despite various promotion efforts, including toolkits, workshops and the e-publication Library Worklife. They even tried rebranding with a “rename APA” contest. The moniker that won was The Organization for the Advancement of Library Employees—not what you'd call catchy or adhesive.    Despite the best efforts of its ridiculously overworked and undersupported director, Jenifer Grady, and of its core of committed supporters and committee members, the baby’s growth stalled out in short order.

As sometimes happens with real life failure-to-thrive babies, there’s been a spontaneous, if not full, remission, and the baby has had a bit of a growth spurt and is showing some spark.

I attended the first meeting of the Promotion and Fundraising committee with major reservations. My intention was to ask hard questions and to be honest about my observations; I half expected to bail after the first meeting. In my introduction, I expressed my skepticism about the viability of the organization, despite my long-time interest its success. One by one, the other committee members offered that they really didn’t know much about APA either and some wondered how they were invited to a committee that they had not expressed an interest in. It was a hard discussion for Grady to hear, but I think most everyone left the meeting with a better understanding of the APA and of the committee’s charge. Instead of cutting out, I found myself volunteering to serve as a liaison to another APA committee with an adjacent charge. I left the second meeting feeling more hopeful and wanting to help nurture this baby, as did others. Grady was notably energized by the end of the second meeting which, in turn, gave the rest of us a fresh charge.    

At the Midwinter meeting of the ALA-APA Council on January 22, I was fully expecting some drama and to hear from the APA Euthanists. But, the treasurer’s report was relatively positive, and this session lacked much of the contentious discussion seen at previous meetings. Even a resolution put forth by Councilor Michael McGrorty sailed through, much to the surprise of several of us who have talked to McGrorty the past couple weeks. His proposal called for APA to endorse a nonbinding resolution in support of setting a minimum salary of $40,000 for professional librarian positions. All who rose, spoke in support of the resolution, and it passed by an overwhelming majority. At the close of the meeting, ALA Treasurer Teri Switzer offered her praise for Grady, saying that Grady had taken on a job that seemed impossible, that none of us would have taken, for any price.  Those in attendance witnessed just how much that validation meant to Grady. Parents of failure to thrive babies, regardless of their efforts, are often indicted as bad custodians. In some cases, parents are to blame, but Grady has done her best to keep this baby alive, despite the limited resources available to her.

Forgive me for throwing out this tired, albeit amended, saw, but it helps to have a village to raise a child. You can do it without support, but going it alone increases the possibility of failure. This conference marked a gathering, a rallying, and I hope ALA  pays heed and find ways to support APA and Grady to the best of their ability.

Despite this, I’m still feeling cautious and have some criticisms to offer. I do believe that APA would be better off as a membership organization—I think that’s the only way to guarantee maximum growth. I’m not entirely sure why this is not seen as a viable option. There’s revenue from its newsletter, Library Worklife, and from the annual salary surveys, but that will level out at some point. There’s also revenue from the certification program, but I’m not convinced that certification, if ALA feels compelled to offer it, needs to be under the APA umbrella. To me, APA exists to advocate for library employees and to provide practical workplace advice and support—a role for which there will be a growing need.

Others have worked to feed and nurture this tyke, and McGrorty’s resolution just bought baby a new pair of shoes.  As long as ALA ponies up for some no-skid padding under the rug, baby might be ready to walk.

Comments

[rochelle]

That's an intersting comment, Walt. In an attempt to be more inclusive, ALA and APA were batting around the phrase "library workers," but they found out that a lot of people really objected to that tag for various reasons. I think that APA wants to reach out to "library employees" these days, and is working on RFPs for support staff certification. It probably is not germane to you, or to folks who work outside of libraries, since the focus is supposed to be on library workplace issues.

As for joining--that's one of the bizarre things about APA. There's no membership, so you couldn't join if you wanted. Send money for sure, but it's a club with an empty clubhouse. Expect to see more coming from the library press and another blogger or two in the coming weeks.

[walt crawford]

Maybe it's just me (probably it's just me), but when I read about ALA-APA before and during its founding, it struck me that I didn't need to consider whether I should join.

Because, as I read about it, it was strictly for professional librarians. The rest of us need not apply.

Maybe that's not true, but that's certainly the impression I got. So, like the National Librarians Association (is it still around), I simply ignored it.