Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Salaries

Salaries

From: Mary Yordy <mary.yordy>
Date: Monday, April 14, 2003
Walter Henry <whenry [at] lindy__stanford__edu> on behalf of A
Young Professional writes:

>    ... Even more so when
>    jobs requiring no graduate education or specialized training
>    (such as technicians' positions) offer more job security,
>    better benefits and higher pay than conservation positions.

Though technicians' positions do not usually require graduate
education, is it accurate to say that that they do not require
specialized training?  In libraries technicians repair and recase
dozens of books a week with skill and alacrity.  This capability was
developed through specialized training and practise.  I would think
that regardless of the type of conservation, this would generally be
true of technicians.

It is unfortunate that conservators would be under-valued and
under-paid as described.  However, it is not typical in libraries.
Conservators are usually classed as 'professionals' and receive the
advantages of that status, including higher pay and better
retirement packages, while technicians' pay is commonly on a level
with clerical workers' or standard library assistant's pay.

Academic credentials are a fairly new value in a field that
persisted as a craft well into the last century.  Perhaps the
technicians who are comparatively well-rewarded are benefiting from
the vestiges of that system, where longevity and experience were the
prime value.


                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 16:61
                 Distributed: Wednesday, April 16, 2003
                       Message Id: cdl-16-61-007
                                  ***
Received on Monday, 14 April, 2003

[Search all CoOL documents]


URL: http://cool.conservation-us.org/byform/mailing-lists/cdl/2003/0444.html
Timestamp: Thursday, 26-Jan-2012 15:56:53 PST
Retrieved: Tuesday, 23-Jul-2019 09:51:05 GMT