Adw: Notes from the Labor WG call 2019-10-04

2019-10-13T23:56:43Z

Notes from the Labor WG call 2019-10-04

New page

'''DLF WG on Labor in Digital Libraries, Archives and Museums: Valuing Labor Subgroup'''

Meeting minutes: October 4, 2019

'''''Building a working group initiative around an issue'''''

Facilitator/Note-taker: Amy Wickner

[https://wiki.diglib.org/Labor/Valuing-Labor/2019-Calls Complete 2019 schedule]

== Background ==
'''Prompt: What is one concrete, collective action that you would like the working group to take up in 2020?'''

To understand where we are as a group, you might draw upon:
* [[Labor/Valuing-Labor/2019-Calls | Monthly meetings from the past 5 months]]
* [http://laborforum.diglib.org/white-paper/ Collective Responsibility white paper]
* [https://wiki.diglib.org/Labor/Valuing-Labor/Research-Agenda Valuing Labor research agenda]

== Discussion ==
=== Gathering data to make a case for anecdotal stories we hear about labor issues → what next to make real & lasting change across LAM? ===
* SAA Issues & Advocacy section interested in contingent labor in archives
* Lit review → basically nothing
* Survey, SAA-funded with consulting firm out of price range so DIY
* Shared out at SAA, will present at DLF
* Who else do you want to see this data?
** SAA doesn’t want to serve as repository so sharing out with anyone who asks
** No IRB approval so can’t publish
** Have discussed as section coming up with best practices doc
** Not sure how much power we have as a section to enact change profession-wide

=== How can we help people gain the skills to understand what power they have and organize a campaign to actually push back? ===
* Having moved into admin position & sitting with more people in admin/managerial positions, talking about institutional constraints
* Could be an advocacy toolkit but not necessarily
* Lots of (mis)perceptions about where you can/can’t push back v. if you talk to your HR it might not be a policy, maybe can actually be changed
* Feels like it’s beyond the scope of our grant bc lots of work but maybe something this group could think about doing
* The more people doing this kind of work the better but still struggling to see how we can build more connections, power together
* Even if groups focus on different aspects, intentional plan for addressing issues
* Tired of people accepting constraints as norms!!!!!! They’re norms for reasons because people don’t think they can be changed

=== Start at the top with funders, change perceptions where the $ comes from ===
* Numbers might make sense but morality of practices is off, short-term
* Lots of grants depend on low costs for labor so that more $ goes to digitization & preservation
* Became director & flipped budget towards staff from preservation - important to acknowledge the people behind the work
** 10-year-old program of all contract workers
** Important to say what the situation is and ask whether it’s sustainable (it’s not)
* Norms that funders expect is tied to “well this is how much they cost” i.e. low-paid workers
* Where do guidelines originate? How can we change them?
* Prison labor to digitize has happened in California -- “Why don’t we just outsource this work?”
** Leads on what vendors, sponsors, funder orgs are pushing this kind of thing? Separate investigation!
* In Collective Responsibility grant, funders raised the need for an appendix or standard for addressing labor in grant applications
** Institutions can reference
** Matter of adjusting expectations, shift to value labor rather than “cost-effectiveness”
** Meaningful that we can connect funders to information!
** The more people recognize it as a problem the better

=== Data collection related to Organized Labor goals in the Valuing Labor research agenda ===
* Digital library workers’ involvement in organized labor
* Developing a list of unions, and compiling resources for digital library workers interested in organized labor to inform themselves and participate.
* Could the salary spreadsheets that have been floating around might fit in with this?
* Potential overlap / collaboration with Information Maintainers

=== What comes out of the Collective Responsibility Forum? ===
* Lots more than we can finish on the grant project
* Want to revisit some of those, what does that look like & what makes most sense to people who are here?
* How to tackle HR on stuff?
* Search committee → recommendation → what if HR won’t budge on the salary range?
** Offering comparable pay to other parts of the country without taking cost of living into account
* What if not enough transparency about what exactly happens in the hiring process?
* It would be great to compile data on all of these institutional failures in the hiring/recruitment and retention of LAM workers - we should share these stories

=== Success stories ===
Collecting examples of identifying a problem and making a change

=== Develop a topic from the Valuing Labor research agenda ===
Impacts of automation on the classification of digital library workers

== Logistics & announcements ==
Labor-related sessions at DLF
* #m1c: "I'm not an archivist, but..." https://sched.co/S2U4
* #m2c: partnerships on campus https://sched.co/S2UJ
** Let’s Get Organized: Outreach Strategies to Engage Union Colleagues
* #m3c: The State of Temporary Labor https://sched.co/S2Ub
* #m4c: Digital Humanities and Library Labor https://sched.co/S2Uq
* #t3e: 7x: Assessment / Staffing / Project Management https://sched.co/S2Vf
** Ethical Digital Scholarship and Prison Labor?
* #t6d: partnerships + publishing https://sched.co/S2WX

Next meeting Monday 11/4, 3pm ET / 12pm PT - Internal & external advocacy

Labor/Valuing-Labor/2019-10-04 - Revision history

Adw: Notes from the Labor WG call 2019-10-04