| |
|
|
Providence Public Library staffers cite downsizing concerns
BY BRIAN C. JONES
|
|
|
|
|
As many as 60 of the 200 employees at the Providence Public Library could face layoffs as a result of substantial changes being considered by officials at the state’s most high-profile library, workers say. These employees tell the Phoenix they are concerned not only for their own and coworkers’ jobs, but they also worry that the intellectual quality and breadth of services at the library could be compromised. Library officials announced last month that changes were in the works, but the scope of possible staff cuts have not been previously disclosed. Workers said they were briefed on possible changes at staff meetings last month. Maureen Sheridan, a library spokeswoman, said in a subsequent interview that the number of layoffs won’t be known until later in the month, but that the potential maximum is about 50 positions — 40 in the downtown building and 10 from the 10 branch libraries — but the numbers could be lower. Mike Taylor, a clerk in the computer lab at the downtown library, and a colleague who asked not to be named, tell the Phoenix that some workers feel they’re being used as "levers" in the library’s attempt to get more public funding, but that the danger that valuable staff could be lost is real. "There are librarians with master’s degrees with 17-to-20 years of service," says Taylor, referring to some of those who might face layoffs. The two PPL staffers say their views reflect concerns of at least 25 of the library’s workers, who are beginning to discuss the issues in private group meetings and on a newly established Internet listserv. As alarming as the possible loss of the jobs are the possible effects of other changes, they say, including division of the downtown operation into two distinct entities — a so-called "popular library" on one floor, and a reference section on a second. The "popular library" would provide such materials as best-selling books and high-demand videos, children’s books, and computer and Internet access, they say. The worker who declined to be named says one worry is that the popular library concept might constrict the offering of books and other materials less popular than bestsellers, but which give the library depth. At the same time, separating the reference area from the rest of the library would make the downtown building a less integrated operation, they say, and perhaps reduce the chance some patrons might realize reference resources are available. They say a large staff cut could mean poorer delivery of computer services to a large clientele of students who work on term papers, job-hunters preparing resumes, and the poor and the homeless, who have no other access to the Internet. A background statement prepared by the concerned workers said that while library administrators say that more reference services will be provided through computers, the officials "don’t understand that patrons especially need staff assistance accessing and understanding the multi-layered and often unmediated electronic environment, from the World Wide Web to the online library catalog." Sheridan says the area likely to be hardest hit is the central library’s reference services, where more access to materials may be provided through computers. She says the "popular" library concept does not mean a dumbing down of the library, and that the library’s mission to provide a broad range of materials is not changing. The issue, she says, is how level funding — 12 years from the state and five years from the city — is forcing the library to "make fundamental changes" in how to match services to available funds. In 2003, the state contributed $3.1 million, and the city $3 million, of an $8.9 million budget, according to the library’s annual report.
|
