(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
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.
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.
