ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


37

Resolution Passed 
at LAUC Spring 1978 Assembly 

Regarding CPEC Report
E d it o r s  Note: V irg in ia  S h e rw o o d , p r e s id e n t o f  
LAU C , w rites: “H ere is th e  resolution p assed [on 
J u n e  2, 1978] b y th e A sse m b ly o f  th e L ibrarians 
A s s o c ia tio n  o f  t h e  U n i v e r s i t y  o f  C a lifo r n ia  
(L A U C ) th a t was re fe rr e d  to in th e  n ew s item  
S tu d y  o f  A cadem ic L ib ra ry  Salaries in C a lifo r­

nia (C& RL N ew s, N o v e m b e r 1978, p .303). P ub­
lished in its e n tire ty , th e  resolution explicitly a n d  
su b s ta n tiv e ly  expresses o u r objections to th e re­
p o r t. I t  is im p o r ta n t th a t a c a d e m ic  lib ra r ia n s  
k n o w  w h y L A U C  c o n sid e re d  th e  re p o rt in co m ­
plete a n d  in a c c u ra te .’ ”
W H E R E A S  th e  C alifornia P ostsecondary E d u c a ­

tion Com m ission has a d o p te d  a re p o rt L ib ra r­
i a n s ’ C o m p e n s a tio n  a t th e  U n i v e r s i t y  o f  
C alifornia a n d  th e  C alifornia State U niversity 
a n d  Colleges: The Search f o r  E q u ity , a n d  

W H E R E A S  th e  re p o rt, follow ing legislative m an ­
d ate, uses a p rev ailin g  w age approach to study 
lib ra rian s’ salaries, á m e th o d  w hich th e  C alifor­
nia C om m ission on th e  Status of W om en has 
c o n clu d ed  to b e  disc rim in ato ry  w h en  u se d  to 
analyze salaries in p re d o m in a n tly  fem ale p ro ­
fessions, and 

W H E R E A S  this re p o rt, in th e  form ulation of its 
conclusions, does n o t cite p e rtin e n t stu d ies of 
lib ra rian s’ salaries p re p a re d  by th e  Association 
of C ollege a n d  R esearch L ib raries, th e  C ouncil 
on L ib ra ry  R e so u rc e s, U C  B e rk e le y  L ib ra ry  
Affirmative Action P rogram  for W om en C o m ­
m itte e , th e  L ib rarian s A ssociation of th e  U n i­
v ersity  of California, o r U niversity o f C alifornia

a d m in is tra tio n ’s S p ecial C o m m itte e  to S tu d y  
L ib rarian s’ Salaries, and

W H E R E A S  th e  re p o rt, in its second ch a p te r, by 
d raw in g  conclusions from  a se le c te d  p o rtio n  of 
l i b r a r y  l i t e r a t u r e  c r e a t e s  a n  i m p r e s s io n  o f 
p r e s e n t day acad e m ic lib ra ria n sh ip  w hich w e 
b eliev e to b e  d isto rte d  a n d  in accurate, and

W H E R E A S  th e  salaries of C alifornia co m m u n ity  
college lib ra ria n s a re  highly re le v a n t for p r e ­
vailing wage o r co m p arativ e w o rth  analyses of 
lib ra ria n s’ salaries a n d  this re p o rt reje c ts th e  
u se o f C alifornia co m m u n ity  college lib ra rian s’ 
salaries in th e  fo rm u latio n  of its conclusions, 
and

W H E R E A S  th e  C om m ission re p o rt fails to note 
th e  actions taken by th e  C alifornia L egislature 
in a c c e p tin g  sex d isc rim in a tio n  a rg u m e n ts in 
passing in e q u ity  legislation since 1973,

T H E R E F O R E , b e it resolved
th a t th e  L ibrarians Association o f th e  U n iv er­
sity of C alifornia reg ard s th e  p re s e n t stu d y  of 
lib ra rian s’ co m pensation as an in co m p lete, in­
a c c u ra te  a n d  th e re fo re  u n a c c e p ta b le  basis for 
“e v a lu a tin g  r e q u e s ts  for salaries a n d  b en efits 
for librarians at th e  U n iv e rsity ,” 
th at LA U C u rg es th e  w ithdraw al of th e  study 
as a basis for such evaluation o r for any d e te r ­
m ination o f salary stru c tu re , and 
th a t th e  P re s id e n t o f LA U C b e  in stru c te d  to 
c o m m u n ic a te  th e s e  view s to UC System w ide 
ad m in istratio n . ■■