Last week someone left a comment on the More Hip Librarians post that puts in concrete terms my own view of the alleged "librarian shortage." The person wrote:
"My cranky two cents on the putative librarian shortage:
My wife is a registered nurse. There really is a nursing shortage. If she puts a resume up on the internet, she immediately gets e-mails and phone calls from recruiters wanting her to interview for real jobs, available right now. Any time she wants a raise, she can just get another job. Her pay has been going up several thousand dollars per year, for several years. Experienced Master's level nurses can easily make six figures these days. A nurse can blow into town on Friday morning, and be working by Monday. That's what a 'shortage' looks like. Does any of this sound like the library field?
There is no librarian shortage."
I couldn't agree more. It's a simple matter of economics. If there's a shortage of something in demand, then the price for that thing goes up. If the price of the thing isn't going up, then there isn't a demand. And if there isn't a demand, then there can't be a shortage. Librarian salaries aren't rising, thus there isn't a shortage of librarians. Any idiot should be able to understand this, and yet most of the ALA idiots can't seem to grasp this simple concept.
Now what there definitely seems to be is a shortage of morons willing to spend a couple of years in graduate school so they can go work in the middle of nowhere for $20K/year. But that's not a librarian shortage; it's a moron shortage. I never thought I would be saying this, but we do apparently have a moron shortage in this country, despite all evidence to the contrary.
The idiots I hear talking about how they can't find librarians never seem to make the connection. If you can't find librarians, then you need to pay more money. If you can't afford to pay more money, then the problem isn't a shortage of librarians, the problem is a shortage of good jobs. Libraries seem to want intelligent and capable people to pay for a library degree and then take low paying jobs in undesirable places. Many libraries only think they have a demand for librarians, when they really just have a desire for librarians. For some strange reason, these libraries find that their demand for morons doesn't satisfy their desire for librarians.
But the ALA keeps rolling out the lies and propaganda. One would think that any decent human being would be disgusted to continue telling such lies, but maybe the folks at ALA have been telling the same lies so long they actually believe them.
About Me
- AL
- The Annoyed Librarian is possibly the most successful, respected, and desirable librarian of her generation. She has no other interest than to bring her wit and wisdom to the huddled librarian masses yearning to breathe free. The Annoyed Librarian is a free spirit and you are lucky to have her.
39 comments:
That pretty much sums up how I feel. What never ceases to amaze me is the arrogance and lack of reality some libraries have when recruiting, in particular at the academic level.
I've interviewed at one library where all the librarians had quit, there were just staff people. I had a call from a place that wanted me to take a plane and then drive 250 miles, at my own expense, for the interview. Other libraries had rooms closed off due to structural problems, or had run out of money on their renovations. Who really wants to work in these places?
And that's aside from the requirements that are unrealistic, one ad I remember demanded "the absolute highest level of performance possible in all areas"---who is going to apply for that aside from an egomaniac?
They get away with this because there's a surplus of librarians, some who are still willing to do anything for a position.
But ultimately I think the problem isn't at the libraries, but at the funding. Libraries aren't providing enough value added input to justify high salaries and resources. A second master's degree in Chemistry is squandered showing you can use Chem Abstracts and know the keywords.
I sometimes wonder if at the academic level it won't break down that the "librarian" is just the director, hourly staff people do all the BS "teaching" and grunt work, while IT people take care fo the databases.
There's several things universities could do, such as breaking the back of academic journal publishers by publishing the journals themselves--and making the journals freely available. But there's not enough cooperation and too many existing copyright entanglements with existing publishers for that to happen.
Imagine what it would be like if librarians actually were doing primary research and served not as subject specialists but authorities in their field?
But as long as there's people out there wanting to spend their days on Web 2.0 and obsessing about being politically correct things will keep going downhill. I know a few professors who don't like going to librarians because they're so opinionated and willing to tell everyone what they think; and don't get me started on the presentations these librarians make.......
oh my gosh...thank you thank you for saying this! i've been trying to make these arguments on listservs for years. the response is always the same: if i'm "only in it for the money" then i should go elsewhere. only in it for the money?!?! who in their right mind becomes a librarian for the money? no, i got my MLS because i thought i would enjoy the work. i see nothing wrong with expecting to be compensated for my training. but, apparently, since i find it necessary to work in a job that pays a living wage, i'm just a money-grubbing whiner with no place in such a noble profession.
The second paper I ever wrote for a class in library school was on the ambiguous language used in library literature to justify its academic standing as a “science.” Words like “epistemology,” for instance, were freely used to make the author’s arguments for academic status sound empirical, but were in the end, invalid. The forefathers of modern librarianship, otherwise known as Library Science, tried so hard to turn this clerical profession into a more “respectable” one, where it could compete with other professions now being taught in colleges and universities. Reading all of that slop in the library lit journals during my research for this paper was disheartening to say the least. It was embarrassing and sometimes highly entertaining.
Anyway, the point is that some librarians think too much of themselves and their profession. It’s not a bad profession. It is very useful, in fact. There is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of by being a librarian, but it is not in the same class of profession as lawyer or doctor or professor. This inflated view of the profession only encourages dissatisfaction and finally low morale. I mean, when do you ever see a fry cook get pissed of because he doesn’t have the same status as a chef?
soren faust
A lot of libraries still seem to be paying librarians as if they all have husbands making the real money while they're just killing time pretending to have a career. Especially if you're a female librarian, demanding more money is too unseemly.
I love the "if you want more money, go elsewhere" response. My reply is, "no, if you want me, then you're going to have to pay a lot more. Maybe you can't afford me, but don't complain that you just 'can't find librarians.' That's not the problem."
"Libraries aren't providing enough value added input to justify high salaries and resources. A second master's degree in Chemistry is squandered showing you can use Chem Abstracts and know the keywords."
This comment is on target. If I had a master's in chemistry, I would be using it on the chemistry bench and not in a library. You need not be a chemist to find chemistry information, only if you plan on using that information and turning it into knowledge.
I have some undergraduate background in science, but I do not necessarily lean on this experience to find scholarly science articles for patrons. Some of the requirements that libraries place on their job recruitment ad's are often unnecessary (i.e.) second masters degree or Ph.D. Much of the information I retrieve could be found by a well trained person who does not need to understand molecular structures, only how to find information about this topic.
Following this requirement, presidential libraries would only let former Presidents of the United States be librarians at their facilities; how crazy would that be?
Ok. Here's the crap we were fed at LIT school (I knew better, but most didn't. Upon entering : "welcome to a wondeful career. There is a great demand for library techs. Jobs galore!"
A few months in : "but not in the Big City public library system, they don't recognize the LIT diploma".
The second year :"and not really in the big city itself. You will most likely have to look outside the big city".
By Graduation Day (and by email yet! so as to avoid being pummelled): "don't despair if you don't find anything right away. Why, in my day, it took me six months to land a library job".
Oh, I laughed, and laughed. Honestly, who would have thought that LIT programs would "bend the truth", i.e . engage in truthiness. Not Librarians! They are too honest, no?
AL, you are so spot on when you said" My reply is, 'no, if you want me, then you're going to have to pay a lot more. Maybe you can't afford me, but don't complain that you just 'can't find librarians.' That's not the problem.'
I have to admit, once I leftthe public library world and went to the corporate one, I quickly learned that salary negotiation is key. You know, like in any real business.
I've since walked out of interviews when they want a you to supervise a global team of 35 librarians, know 3 languages and dozens of software programs and they offer you $35,000 because that''s what some Salary survey said librarians make.
I've since walked out of interviews when they want a you to supervise a global team of 35 librarians, know 3 languages and dozens of software programs and they offer you $35,000 because that''s what some Salary survey said librarians make.
Touche! The one interview I should have walked out on was where I drove six hours at my own expense to interview at a library in a high crime area with a huge turnover rate. It was the usual panel interview with the attitude "are you good enough to work for us?", and I should have just shook their hand and said, "No, I'm better than this place."
One of my professors in library school had tole me when he graduated in the sixties there were two jobs for every librarian and you could write your own ticket; I doubt we'll ever see that again.
There are worse places to be; some people will figure out who I am from this post but it doesn't matter at this point.
I started my post-bachelor's experience trying to get a master's in Audiology, which for those who don't know are the people who test your hearing and sell hearing aids.
The field was rapidly losing it's place and distinction, much like libraries. Anyone from a doctor to a minimally trained "hearing aid dispenser" can test hearing, several programs across the country were closing, and the field was wrapping itself up in ever higher requirements--they were introducing a roll back PhD requirement, which meant I would have had a very short career before heading back to school.
It's also a bad sign when you're still in school and your professors are telling you to write letters to legislators supporting your field.
It was a challenging program but overall a very unpleasant experience, and my decision to quit finally came down to there were hardly any jobs and most didn't pay well. The program claimed it had good job stats, but that was because everyone had to do a post-graduation six month practicum to get certified and those were counted as "jobs."
Of all the things I've done in my life, leaving that program was one of the best decisions I made. The audiologists were simply educating and pricing themselves out of the market. You can now expect a rebuttal from someone at ASHA.
And now I'm ready to move on from libraries, I'm not even working at one now. There were times I truly enjoyed helping people and feeling I was making a difference, but everyone reading this knows the problems libraries have. I just wish I could have achieved something rather than leaving because there's nothing out there.
Amen, AL.
AL,
As always, you've hit the nail square on the head. One caveat--there simply is not a shortage of morons. They are all working at Headquarters in Chicago and preparing the Kool-Aid even as we read your limpid prose. Personally, I'd prefer a Hendrick's martini.
On the same front, I would dearly love for you to pick up pen or keyboard on what would be a more accurate disciplinary name than library science (as noted by one of your intrepid fans). I am voting for librology (as in astrology) or libromancy. Your considered opinion?
Perhaps the ALA is cursed by the Good Lord himself.
aside for anon @ 3:17 - I would vote for Librarianship, time-tested, rested, and ready for a comeback after those positivists are shown the gate! genteel poverty, that's the ticket...
AL, I don't have time to sift through all the wonderful blog posts you've done, but I recall you once saying something like, "if you don't make enough $$$ then you're probably not worth it." Now you're saying we - the non-morons - should demand more $$$$. Am I misunderstanding something or are you being inconsistent? If there really isn't much of a demand for librarians, how can we demand more $$$$?
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. You've probably heard that somewhere before, though. I'm always amazed that anyone expects consistency on this blog.
Still, I did say something like that somewhere, though I can't remember which post. In my previous statement, I was probably saying those librarians who aren't willing or able to play the market aren't underpaid. If you're a poorly paid librarian whom nobody else wants to hire, or who can't relocate for some reason, then you're not underpaid. You're paid what the market will bear. If no one else is offering you more money, then you have no argument for a pay raise that anyone controlling the money is likely to accept.
On the other hand, there are librarians who are able to negotiate. Public librarians are perhaps out of luck, but others have more freedom. One commenter mentioned corporate librarians. I'm an academic librarian, and even I have some choice, especially when the move is into administration. I was on the market last fall, and turned down one job because the offer was ridiculous, well below what I'd said was my minimum. It wasn't quite as bad as the supervising 35 employees for $35k that someone brought up, but it wasn't that far off. The library that has me now was willing to pony up.
Libraries want skills they aren't willing to pay for. What I'm saying is that if more people had the strength or the freedom to bargain, we would all be better off. And I don't know if that's consistent, because I've had a couple of martinis, and foolishly checked my comments at the end of the Hour.
Got it, thank you.
L'chaim!
Just received an email from a listserv asking for resumes from unemployed librarians. Although the email's author claims there are jobs available, she had the courtesy to admit they were part-time, term, or sessional positions. At least she'll be the one shopping them around so I have nothing to lose by submitting mine.
Officially, I've stopped actively seeking archival or library work. Two years is enough and I'm eager to move on. I was accepted for an ESL teacher certificate program in the fall and by next year I hope to be accepted for a doctoral program in History. If I'm offered a job, temporary or otherwise, I'll take it, but not at the expense of grad school. I've waited far too long to get a PhD in History so I won't let anything get in the way.
Couldn't agree with the post & comments more. I'll add that as a profession, I think libraries shoot themselves in the foot often and not just on the money issue. I remember being nearly done with my LIS program and being told at my public library where I worked (with a snicker by one) that I should work as a parapro for x number of years because I need to get "experience" somewhere. Thing is, I did have experience--just not in a library. I worked in the real world for 20+ years in retailing, as a paralegal (doing research, managing the library with looseleaf updates & pocket parts, interacting with clients and other assorted egos, etc.) and as a secretary. Why can't librarians get rid of their tunnel vision and see experience for what it is? Entry level library work is not brain surgery--put a on a friendly face and dig into the work with a half a brain. Why do managing librarians (some, not all) make such a huge deal out of experience? Is it because they've never worked anywhere else? I don't get it.
Fortunately, I was hired right out of school and not by the library I was working at. Couldn't be happier.
And yes, there is no shortage of qualified librarians. Maybe a shortage of quality libraries though.
"and don't get me started on the presentations these librarians make......."
There is no greater torture than sitting through librarian presentations. When talking in private, everyone agrees these are a waste of time at the big conventions, but no one is willing to do anything about it. Why? The chase for tenure.
sorry to waste your time
- a library presenter
There seem to be shortages of "competent" librarian candidates. If you've served on a search committee recently, you know what I mean. Do people think that all you need is an MLS to make yourself employable? And don't get me started on the quality of cover letters that I received from job applicants. I am a young librarian and it makes me so sad.
Liz:
You are correct. Some new librarians are not very competent. I have served on numerous hiring committees as well, and I have noticed this also. However, I have also noticed that there are WAY MORE competent new librarians applying for jobs that are having a serious problem finding suitable work, also.
I've noticed a big problem:
Library employers who are hiring people without library degrees or promoting paraprofessionals over degreed, compotent librarians. To me, it's the "prom court syndrome." So-and-so wasn't the prom queen in high school, and now they have the opportunity to make it up by becoming a "librarian."
There are also plenty of experienced librarians who do not present themselves competently, either on paper or via interview. I have served on a search committee and know this all too well.
I'm takin what they're givin cause I'm workin for a living.
--Huey Lewis
Funny you bring up Huey Lewis. People seemed to actually care about one another in the '80's.
“shortage of morons” Hehe,, yea,, there is some truth to that. But, given the caliber of people that make it thru library school, it does not seem to fit.
Ok, before you fire up the flames, let me explain a bit….
I have a Bachelor of Science in Information Systems. This is a business based computer science program that is fairly hard to complete. I say ‘fairly hard’ because it is way easier then the hard core, non-business, computer science degree. None-the-less it was way harder to complete then many B.A. programs and even harder then my MLS. The MLS was far too easy in my opinion. It had a way too low washout rate. In other words, everyone seemed to pass! In the grand scheme of salaries and competency, this is a bad thing. I learned more about operating a library (or any monetary entity for that matter) from a handful of my business classes then I did in all of library school!
You mean there really won't be a librarian shortage? I'm just finishing up 2 years of grad school. Oh, well. Based on all the "hip librarian" articles, I'm probably not cool enough to be a librarian, anyway.
Since graduating in 2001 with a Library Studies degree, I am still no closer to a job in the field. It's been a series of contractual nonsense after another, doing things having little to do with my library degree. I've been typecast as Jack-of-all-trades, not the "librarian" title I was told I would get upon completing my Master's degree. It's a sad state right now in library land. If it's not working for you, like it's not working for me, think seriously about pursuing another career.
...The MLS was far too easy in my opinion. It had a way too low washout rate. In other words, everyone seemed to pass! In the grand scheme of salaries and competency, this is a bad thing. I learned more about operating a library (or any monetary entity for that matter) from a handful of my business classes then I did in all of library school!...
AMEN BROTHER!! There were people in my library classes that I would consider functional illiterate. Others were unable to do basic math like balance a checkbook. The most difficult class I had was at the 11th grade level. Frankly, if you showed up, said something in class, even if it was stupid and had no bearing on the subject and played the PC game, you got an A.
I have a bachelors in a physical science. I expected graduate school to be something where I would be challenged and where I would expand my learning. Didn’t happen. And don’t get me started on the statistics course. Classmates thought an average was hard to do.
In my classes, there were four other students that I hung out with. One had a business degree, one was a nurse, and two others had computer science degrees. We would get together and lament the cluelessness and plain stupidity of our classmates. Most of our other classmates were educations majors that failed at teaching. (And please, don’t tell me how difficult it is to teach. I taught computer science in private colleges and instructed men in missile technology while in the military. It isn’t difficult to teach.)
I am back in the science field with a resume that says I have a masters in “Information and Data Storage and Retrieval.” When interviewed, I say that I work in both digital and physical media. I have an excellent job that pays the equivalent of what the dean of my library school makes – and it is my first “library” job out of school.
Can you do well with a library degree? Sure, if you have any brains.
As a side note for those looking for well paying library jobs, take chemistry, physics, and calculus and then look outside the box. The jobs are there. I have openings for three people, starting at $50K-75K, right out of library school if you have the right bachelors degree. If you are unwilling/unable to do the science and math classes, then you are doomed to looking for non-existent or low paying jobs in the public or academic sector. AL has all the details on this blog. And no, just because you have a masters degree, the world does not owe you a living.
There is no greater torture than sitting through librarian presentations. When talking in private, everyone agrees these are a waste of time at the big conventions, but no one is willing to do anything about it. Why? The chase for tenure.
I've presented at conferences before, but unlike Brian, I am not really offended by this comment. Yes, I've had a few people knit, nod off, etc. during my talks, but I often get a lot of positive feedback. I try to tailor my presentations to make them as less ennui inducing as humanly possible. In general, my presentations tend to be about practical applications (not pie in the sky ideas) and problem solving, not self-promotion. IMHO, there's nothing worse than a self-promoter! People tire quickly of bloated rhetoric.
Can you do well with a library degree? Sure, if you have any brains.
This is absurd. Sometimes people with LIS degrees are tethered to geographical locations and possibly lower paying offerings in that region.
About nursing: I've worked with many nursing students at my FPOW. Most of them had difficulty with the simplest tasks--creating a Power Point presentation, for example. Some of them had poor communication skills and substandard English. Granted this is at a 2 yr CC, but they all get snagged for jobs rather quickly. You should all be worried that these dimwits are increasingly becoming the future of nursing. To add insult to injury, their starting salaries are way more than that of an entry level librarian's. Those with BSN's tend to burnout faster because they are bright, but armed with that degree they can at least move into administration and/or go for their masters. Yes, there are a plethora of jobs in nursing, but the work conditions are rough and the hours make it fairly impossible for one to have any semblance of a life.
As someone in working in a hospital library, having daily contact with nurses, as well as physicians, physical therapists, pharmacists, dieticians, etc. I can tell you this about alot of the medical personell I work with; they don't know how to do powerpoints, work laminator's, conduct lit searches, ad nauseum. BUT THAT ISN'T THERE JOB! There job is to TAKE CARE OF THE PATIENTS! I would rather the medical staff know how to take care of patients and prevent further injury or death than use make a powerpoint presentation.
Since I am in the staff education department, I work with those wanting to be nursing, and I see what is coming out of the schools and what is necessary to keep licensure. In my opinion that 2 year associates degree is a heck of alot harder to get than the MLS. And then once they get the ASN, they then must pass state licensure exams (unlike librarians), and have mandatory continuing education to keep licensure. NO licensure NO job, (again unlike the library field)
As for the pay, that is pure economics. I'll simplify the process to one phrase: Supply and Demand. When demand for nurses is high and the supply is low, as is the current nursing situation, the cost of getting a nurse to work is high. When the demand for librarians is low and the supply of librarians coming out os library schools is high, the cost of getting a librairan will be low.
Privateer6
In my opinion that 2 year associates degree is a heck of a lot harder to get than the MLS.
The BSN is harder than both. I haven't been impressed with the nurses I've encountered with the 2 year degree--as a recent hospital patient and as a librarian. Maybe this has something to do with the fact my former state of residence ranks near the bottom in education! I had one nurse who could barely explain to me why I was administered a particular medication; that is inexcusable. I had to wait until the following morning to ask my attending medical resident. The requirements to get into a 2 yr program are minimal. Nurses from these programs are paid well because they do a lot of the grunt work.
So, the market is flooded librarians. Apart from putting pressure on the ALA, I am not sure what else we can do about it. My former state had a library school and I wasn't too impressed with the "product" they were pumping out.
There were people in my library classes that I would consider functional illiterate. Others were unable to do basic math like balance a checkbook.
And a lot of them can't write cover letters, either.
BUT THAT ISN'T THERE JOB! There job is to TAKE CARE OF THE PATIENTS!
I think that about says it right there...
"As a side note for those looking for well paying library jobs, take chemistry, physics, and calculus and then look outside the box. The jobs are there. I have openings for three people, starting at $50K-75K, right out of library school if you have the right bachelors degree."
I have an engineering degree, do share!
Me again, with 2 cents more (I wrote the original comment about my wife's experience as a nurse):
The comments about the Associate's level nurses have some truth to them, in my observation - some of those nurses are not the sharpest tools in the shed. They still get good jobs easily, though - because there's a shortage!
Anonymous wrote:
"Yes, there are a plethora of jobs in nursing, but the work conditions are rough and the hours make it fairly impossible for one to have any semblance of a life."
The working conditions are indeed rough - it's a demanding, responsible, "real" job, where mistakes have consequences. I can't agree about the hours, though - since it's a 24/7 occupation, hours can be pretty flexible. Like your sleep? Work the 3-11 shift. Like your time off? Work two sixteen hour weekend shifts, get forty hours' pay for those thirty-two hours, and take the next five days off, every week. You can negotiate your hours and pick-and-choose to a degree because - did I mention this? - there's a shortage!
About the MLS degree. I first went to graduate school in the early 1980's, where I got a master's and a doctorate in one of the social sciences. In 2006 I returned to school to earn my MLS. I graduated from that program recently. I found the work for the MLS degree, in comparison with that required for my earlier graduate degrees, to be ridiculously easy.
The first time I went to grad. school, the default grade (the grade you got if you showed up, did the work, and didn't make trouble) was a "B". To get an "A" it was necessary to produce work at least somewhat better than merely adequate, and it was also possible, if you messed up, to get a "C". Now I find that the default grade is "A", if you mess up you might get a "B", and there is basically no way to distinguish (by means of grades) excellent work from the merely adequate. The only way to get a "C" nowadays is, I think, by failing to complete the work at all.
My high school studies were much more rigourous and challenging than the MLS program.
It's OK. At this stage of my life, I am not looking for a challenge.
If the ALA wants to get serious about diversity, they'll work harder to protect the profession and professional salaries. You want to move economically underprivilaged folks into librarianship? Prove it. Work harder to get us better carrots.
I'm about halfway through my MLIS degree, and I'm starting to realize that the "real" classes aren't going to start any time soon. I think the only two classes I've taken where I couldn't have just a read a book and received the same education were in database design, which I can't really see using in a library anyway. But I've wasted a lot of money already not to finish the program and at least have another degree.
I'm wondering if anyone has experience with jobs outside the library field where an MLIS would be useful. Especially jobs that don't require a bachelor's degree in math or science. (I'm also an English major who now realizes that was a bad choice.) Or maybe jobs in the industries that serve libraries, like database companies?
I realize now that I have a lot of research to do. I can't just depend on getting a job as a reference librarian or whatever. And since I'm not learning many useful skills in my library classes, I'm not sure that leaves me any better off than I was when I graduated with my bachelor's in English.
I've been a librarian for 22 years, and I can tell you that the idea that librarians are either professionals or intellectuals is a bad joke. Library schools are so empty of content because there is not content to be taught: librarianship for the great majority of librarians consists of attending endless and useless meetings during which the administrator wanabes shameleesly kiss up to whatever bureaucrat is running the meeting, a large amount of typing and other clerical tasks done on word processors, now that the clerical workers who used to use typewriters have been done away with, answering astoundingly stupid questions at public desks, and accepting (preferably with a smile) the most atrocious abuse from drunks, neurotics, spoiled yuppies, and birdbrains who insist that they be given special priveleges because they are "friends of the director" or they "work for the Mayor."
Practically no one among the public takes that "librarians are trained professionals" nonsense seriously. Most of them put you in the same category with sales clerks at K-Mart, 1958 airline stewardesses, or delivery boys.
I would estimate that less than 3 percent of librarians are intellectuals in any meaningful sense of the word. Most have not read a serious book since some meanie professor forced them to during their undergraduate years.
Their conversations rarely rise above the level of gossip, talk about how their cars are running, or what they saw on television the night before.
I would advise anyone thinking of applying to library school to avoid this bogus profession unless a life of homelessness and unemployment is the only alternative.
This degree is a joke! I have never felt such a waste of graduate school. I have been actively looking for a library job since 2/07 and had one offer, which required a move out of state 3 wks after purchasing a house. They lie in library school and they lie out in the library world. I was told to continue to volunteer and intern because the experience is what would get me the job. I was up for a position with 2 others and you know who got it? The library graduate, with no experience whose mom worked there! Tell me that isn't favoritism at it's best and downright discrimination at worst. Another inicident where I interviewed for a job and was told I had the most credentials of any of the applicants. I received a call that my references were top notch, then nothing. I finally asked for a response and was told that I wasn't called back because my previous experience didn't match the qualifications for the job. I had the highest education, the best references, and almost a year of volunteer experience and that wasn't enough? It was a library technician job and I was willing to take a step down monetarily from my current position (which is not in a library), in order to prove I could do the job. I have had it, I am fed up, and I will encourage everyone I know to stay away from the library world because it isn't what you know, its who. And it's sad. I'm going back to school for a degree that amounts to something, I'm just sorry I wasted all that money and time on such a useless education.
Post a Comment