Part-time LAI Transfers, Names on Badges, Criminal Record Review Act

  • Part-Time LAI transfers
  • Names on Badges
  • Criminal Record Review Act

Part-Time LAI Transfers

HR held a meeting in the Alice MacKay room September 16th to discuss “transitioning” of Part-time LAI hours to the branches.  Another meeting will be held September 23rd.  Some loose protocols (I know that’s an oxymoron but it does seem to reflect the level of detail involved in this latest change management process) were shared at the September 16th meeting:

  • process is designed to take employee preferences to which branch (of th
  • ose offered) they would like their hours transferred.

  • When a regular part-time shift becomes available in the branches, there will be three possible scenarios:
  • Scenario A: Direct lateral transfer if only one person is interested Scenario B: If more than one person is interested, all parties will be e-mailed and the person with the most seniority will be offered the position. Scenario C: if no one is interested than will be assigned to member with lowest seniority.

There are a few problems here and the stem from the lack of a needs assessment:
1. What are the tasks that are currently being done by LAI’s.
2. Which ones are transferable to shelvers? Which are transferable to LAIIs?
3. Consequent workload issues.
4. How is the workflow affected?
No study has been done that reflects the need to discard the LAI position. If anything, this latest attempt at change management has proven there is a need for more.

There is room for Shelvers, LAI’s and LAII’s in our system.  These members are not only the worker bees but offer significant value to public service and insight on how to resolve workflow problems.  Let’s assign some of the new managers the tasks of a proper needs assessment and evaluative process which measures results both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Please let a grievance committee member or me know if you have any concerns.  We have collective agreement language that has bearing on how these processes are conducted.

Web definitions for transitioning: # or affirming gender describes the process of adopting a lifestyle and / or bodily characteristics better corresponding to a person’s gender …

# Transitioning is the process of changing genders – the idea of what it means to be female or male. For transsexuals, the new gender is “opposite … (transgender)

“transitioning to a new process”
The transition period occurs after managers and employees have been trained in the new process, when they actually start using it. …

VPL’s online version of the venerable OED does not dignify the adaption of the noun “transition” to the gerund “transitioning” with a definition. Management has failed to dignify the process of “equalising” staff at Central library with a discernible process of evaluation. Change management is being implemented to serve an outcome of “achieving savings” rather than an objective of improving public service. The Union will have to provide an assessment for the Board over the next few months. Please note if:

* proper cross-training takes place
* enough staff are available to serve public; in person, on phone, via e-mail, Askaway
* staff are able to answer questions in new subject area or if they hand the question to more experience staff member, or if note question to return answer at later date
* members of public leave due to lack of staff to serve them through phone, virtual reference, in person

Names on Badges

The original policies that the administration and Board reviewed (one Board and one administrative) are:


With the exception of the employees in charge of the worksite, staff are not required to give their name to members of the public upon request, the patron will be given the employee’s badge number. The patron should be referred to the employee in charge. Library Administration do not reveal employee’s names to the public.

Approved by: Administration

Date: September 18, 1997



Staff must always wear a photo identification tag with a generic “staff” designation while working in the Library. Staff are the given the option to, and encouraged to, use their own names on tags if they wish.

Approved by the Library Board
Date: October 24, 2001

The Administration submitted their report to the Board suggesting that the two policies be revised and consolidated as an administrative policy rather than administrative and Board. The Board deemed that policies reflecting these matters should be Board policies because the issues discussed interfaced directly with public concerns. Both the Union and the administration presented again at the June 25 Library Board meeting. The Board voted in favour of the administrations policy so the grievance continues. Four members who could might have had concerns for staff safety were away. Edward Soraany and Elizabeth Ball raised issues and offered alternative suggestions with the policy but their concerns were dismissed by their colleagues.

The Union’s focus at the last Board Meeting was to represent members concerns:

* Uttered threats from public
* Stalking
* Violence
* Identity theft (unusual names)

We will be focusing on these issues again with emphasis on staff safety.

To place a personal grievance, members need to have observed some basic protocols connected to the policy. I have received a letter from Sandra Singh which allows for staff who previously brought forward safety-related concerns to the Union to be automatically exempt.

In the matter of Exemptions (see below) S. Sing’s letter.
‘In terms of potential exemptions, VPL management agreed to “automatic” exemptions for those staff who brought forward safety-related concerns to the Union during its previous consultation period, provided those concerns comprised part of the Union’s case/presentation to the Board. (about 40 or 50 letters). (Sandra says 20 in her letter but that figure is incorrect.) Effective January 1, 2009, those
staff will be exempted from this policy for the next year. All other staff must follow the exemption process outlined in the policy, including contacting their Director or HR consultant to request consideration from exemption.

Requests for exemption will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Some reasons for a possible exemption might be:

* Documented threat of violence in the last 24 months
* Restraining order in effect
* Health-related concerns
* Other

The Union had asked that the “Other”, item be left as an open option for those who simply don’t want to participate, but we could not get Management to agree.

If you don’t want your full name on the badge, here is what you do.

1. Call the Union office and see if your letter is on file from the board report. This makes the exemption fairly easy.
2. If the Union does not have a record of a previous letter, apply for an exemption through Human Resources.
3. If HR concludes that you should not be exempt from the process, contact the Union and we will write a personal grievance for you.

We are ready and willing to write any number of grievances to ensure our members safety. This policy serves to glamourize a branding process of public service and fails to take into account that we already have respectful, trusting and caring relationship with the public. Members do not have to endanger their lives to support a what is touted as a future trend.

Criminal Record Review Act
The Criminal Record Review Act (CRRA) will now be the record check used for Vancouver Public Library employees. The police will review your record for:

  * histories of sexual misconduct with children
* acts of physical violence
* drug-dealing

Minor charges do not warrant being brought to the employer’s attention. This is the process which the Union suggested was appropriate for libraries when we first addressed the Board in September of 2006.

The cost of this much less invasive check will be picked up by Management. If you have a minor charge but it is not in the three areas outlined in above paragraph; it will not be of interest to Management and will NOT be released by police to VPL. The police either give a yes or no answer to Management. If you do not have any previous charges or a record that pertains to the three bolded points, then the police tell the employer that you are good to go. The CRRA requires that employees be checked every 5 years. If it is yes, then you will be discussing your record with management with a grievance member to support you.

The Union will be grieving the application of the Criminal Record Review Act (CRRA). We believe that all members do not require a check. An appropriate application of the CRRA would be with those members who are working in a position of trust with children on a regular basis.

see Schedule I of the CRRA for related offences. Schedule I, CRRA