LSSI Loses Challenge to Florida Rule Mandating Full-Time Directors

A judge has dismissed a legal challenge brought by Library Systems and Services (LSSI) against a proposed rule that would require Florida’s public library systems to be administered by a full-time librarian employed by the library’s governing body. Proposed by the Florida Division of Library and Information Services as an amendment to the State Aid to Libraries guidelines, the rule would require local governments to meet the requirement in order to receive a library operating grant from the state.

In its request (PDF file) to have the rule deemed invalid, LSSI said it would “substantially interfere with or preclude the management-outsourcing firm from entering into public-private partnerships with local governments for the provision of library management services … . due to the financial burden of employing a ‘full-time’ single administrative head and the logistical effects of this requirement.”

In the order of dismissal (PDF file) Administrative Law Judge Diane Cleavinger noted that while LSSI has undertaken sales efforts in Florida, it does not currently provide service to any entity in the state. Only a person “substantially affected” by a proposed rule may seek an administrative determination of its validity, Cleavinger wrote, calling LSSI’s interest “wholly speculative.” In addition, while LSSI cited its right to “earn a living” under the Florida constitution, Cleavinger said the right to work regulated by the rule does not belong to LSSI, since “it is not a single administrative head; it only employs single administrative heads.”

Wendy Breeden, president of the Florida Library Association, which filed a motion to intervene in the case, said, “FLA believes that the successful provision of public library service to Floridians and Florida communities requires the attention and service of a full time administrator.”

—Gordon Flagg, American Libraries Online
Posted Wed, 02/03/2010 - 17:36

Comments

Florida Library Services

If you need to wonder why libraries are different from trash collection and prisons, try using their services and wonder some more. You might just get it.

The word is sacrosanct.

R. Balliot

Submitted by R. Balliot (not verified) on Thu, 02/04/2010 - 02:21.

LSSI

Sounds like someone’s afraid of the concept of Contracting Out. I wonder what makes libraries more sacroscant than prisons, utilities, computer services, trash collection—-none of which are required to be kept in-house by governmental entities.

LSSI has a good record of cutting costs while increasing services for customers. It’s too bad local governments no longer have this option in Florida. Difficult economic challenges call for innovative solutions. Shame on The Florida State Division of Libraries and Information Services!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 02/04/2010 - 00:59.

Sounds like LSSI is the one who is afraid

> Sounds like someone’s afraid of the concept of Contracting Out.

LSSI seems to have a poor record in regards to transparency and openness, judging from their contractual requirements regarding nondisclosure agreements and nondisparagement clauses. It seems to me that if anyone is "afraid" in this instance, it is LSSI.

It is one thing to have a business relationship with a city council or county commission - many of whom may or may not be regular library users and in tune with the concerns of the community in regard to the libraries. It is another to actually have a Librarian involved who would be working closely with them and yet independently evaluating their decisions. Being able to justify their management decisions as being any other than a way to maximize their own profits is something they might wish to work on before they attempt to expand their list of clients.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 02/04/2010 - 15:52.

Outsourcing saves

Outsourcing saves money at first glance but if you dig deeper you may find hidden costs. Janitorial services are one example of this. At several institutions that I have worked the daily cleaning has been contracted to a local company. In one situation the owner sat on our board. By viewing our security camera we have proof that floors were not vacuumed even once a week. Now the carpets need replaced. From what we can tell, they do not even do half of what their contract states so are we really saving money?

These positions are so low pay that the employee can’t make a living and often work two or three jobs. They are too tired to do a good job. I suspect that many of them are also receiving some type of assistance from a government source, costing tax payers another hidden cost.

I have found that prior to the work being contracted out there is a working relationship between employees. People take pride in what they do and it is easy to discuss issues with someone you know. When the contracted people work a different schedule as our janitors who come in after we leave, there is no rapport, no feeling of team work, no chance to mention what was not done or what someone did especially well. There is often a high turn-over rate in the contracted positions. Information/messages that we leave for the contracted workers may help the situation at the moment but when the people change and you do not know it, the information is lost.

Talk to the people who have to work with the contracted employees. I have only discussed this issue with a few people from other offices but hear the same bottom line that the higher level managers are happy with the bottom line on the budget sheet but the people who are most affected by the contract workers know about the poor quality of work being done by them and they are very disappointed. Some feel great resentment because they have to take up the slack. This would cut the productivity and lower the morale of the regular employees; another hidden cost.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 02/04/2010 - 14:24.