this can work for now. however, these non-librarians practicing the art and science of library and information science SHOULD be given a condition that at some period of time, they MUST have earned their license.
to amplify, an employer of a non-licensed librarian may sit down with him/her to discuss plans and actions on how he/she can take MA classes in library and info science for, say, two years. after that, a year to earn a license. this can be an agreement between the employer and the non-licensed librarian. it would be good if this is put in writing -- a black and white document that serves as a contract as well. if the non-licensed librarian fail to do so, then the employer can do its part to hire a licensed librarian or follow what policy it has for such cases. just my two-cents worth. this situation may happen in private institutions but i do not know how things are in government practice. On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Vhic Gilos <[email protected]> wrote: > Fellow Librarians, > > Just a thought... While contemplating on RA 9246 and at the same time > preparing for CICT iSchool roll-out wherein I will be teaching > non-librarians acting as librarians in public secondary schools the ways of > a librarian, a thought occurred to me that instead of discouraging, I will > be encouraging them to continue acting as librarians even if it is against > the law. The same way that other SUC librarians did in their localities. > > If you disagree with me, I'd like to hear your point of views > regarding the help I will be extending to teachers acting as librarians. > Thank you. > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:18 PM, vonjobi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A discussion on the violation of certain provisions of Republic Act No. >> 9246 <http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9246_2004.html>(or >> R.A. 9246), specifically the continued employment of unlicensed >> librarians in the Philippines, is now on its third week at the Filipino >> Librarians Googlegroup >> (1<http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians/browse_thread/thread/1eee0da33ce3f04b?hl=en#> >> 2<http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians/browse_thread/thread/219a6818b4d690b7?hl=en#> >> 3<http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians/browse_thread/thread/c28e2a44415af4db?hl=en#> >> 4<http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians/browse_thread/thread/d7e5845c12850376?hl=en#>). >> Some have suggested that there are certain situations where violating the >> law is justified, but the appointment of non-librarians to head a library, >> despite the presence of qualified, licensed librarians, is indefensible. And >> then there are the unlicensed librarians who have been "OICs," supposedly a >> temporary designation, for almost two decades. >> >> It is not clear, however, whether those who have been suggested as the >> individuals or groups who can do something about the concerns raised are >> reading these emails. But it is also important to remember that it is not >> just somebody else's responsibility to make sure the law is followed; it is >> also our responsibility. Why do I say this? Zarah >> Gagatiga<http://lovealibrarian.blogspot.com/2010/01/filipino-librarians-license-and.html>has >> already pointed out that, "The librarian MUST have a license. The >> employer MUST hire a licensed librarian." But what if they DON'T? Do we just >> wait for the powers-that-be to put things right? Below are the relevant >> sections of R.A. 9246 and my comments, followed by suggestions on what >> licensed librarians can do to uphold the law: >> >> SECTION 26. Illegal Practice of Librarianship. – A person who does not >> have a valid Certificate of Registration and Professional Identification >> Card or a temporary/ special permit from the Commission shall not practice >> or offer to practice librarianship in the Philippines or assume any >> position, which involve performing the function of a librarian as provided >> under Section 5 of this Act. >> >> The "person" referred to in Section 26 is, in essence, someone who is >> working as a librarian illegally. Note, too, that there are no exceptions >> granted for certain kinds of librarians (e.g., special librarians). Everyone >> working as a librarian in the Philippines is covered by this law. The only >> exceptions, I suppose, are those whose employers are not covered by >> Philippine laws, like some international agencies. >> >> SECTION 31. Employment of Librarians. – Only qualified and licensed >> librarians shall be employed as librarians in all government libraries. >> Local government units shall be given a period of three (3) years from the >> approval of this Act to comply with this provision. >> >> The emphasis in Section 31 on government libraries does not imply that >> the law applies only to librarians working for the government. All this is >> means is that the government, as the single, largest employer of librarians, >> was singled out for special attention. >> >> SECTION 32. Penal Provisions. – Any person who practices or offers to >> practice any function of a librarian as provided for under Section 5 of this >> Act who is not registered and has not been issued by the Commission a >> Certificate of Registration and Professional Identification Card, or a >> temporary license/permit or who violates any of the provisions of this Act, >> its Implementing Rules and Regulations, shall, upon conviction , be >> penalized by a fine of not less that Thirty thousand pesos (P100,000.00), or >> imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor more than three (3) years at >> the discretion of the court. >> >> The most important phrase here is, to me, "upon conviction." Thus, a case >> has to be filed against the librarian. But I do wonder why the employergoes >> unpunished. Shouldn't the employer be liable as well? Note, however, >> that Section 32 is one of the sections that clearly shows that those who >> drafted R.A. 9246 were not as careful as they should have been. What exactly >> did they mean by "not less that Thirty thousand pesos (P100,000.00)"? >> >> There are, of course, certain realities that must be acknowledged, such as >> the fact that no one is really enforcing the law. Academic and school >> librarians are in a better position because accrediting agencies mark down >> universities and schools for non-compliance with the law, but all other >> kinds of libraries, including the public libraries funded by local >> governments, can ignore R.A. 9246 if they so desire. Have cases been filed >> against unlicensed librarians? Have any been convicted? If so, please let me >> know. >> >> The following are my suggestions for those who wish to see R.A. 9246 >> implemented properly: >> >> 1. Verify whether someone working as a librarian is licensed or >> unlicensed. The Board for Librarians, the National Library, the Civil >> Service Commission, and the Philippine Librarians Association are supposed >> to have "up-to-date, complete and properly organized" lists of all >> licensed >> librarians in the Philippines. >> 2. Write a letter to the person, with copies to the person's employer, >> the Board for Librarians and the Philippine Librarians Association (and, >> if >> applicable, the National Library and/or the Civil Service Commission), >> indicating all the pertinent details and exactly how the provisions of >> R.A. >> 9246 have been violated, pointing out that the person's continued >> employment >> is punishable by law. Make sure you keep copies of all correspondence, and >> ask recipients to sign for any letters you give them. >> 3. If your letters are ignored or you are discriminated against or >> fired (because the person was your boss, for instance), file a case >> against >> the person at all appropriate agencies. >> 4. If filing a case, or even writing letters to the person or agencies >> concerned, is not an option, send letters to local and national newspapers >> laying out how the law is being violated. While this may be done >> anonymously, it is perhaps best that you identify yourself. >> >> All these are, of course, easier said than done. But all we really need is >> one, high-profile case, preferably involving a well-known employer, that can >> then be used to show others who are violating the law that librarians are >> serious about policing their ranks. >> >> >> >> -- >> Posted By vonjobi to Filipino >> Librarian<http://filipinolibrarian.blogspot.com/2010/02/unlicensed-librarians-and-ra-9246.html>at >> 2/02/2010 10:07:00 AM >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Filipino Librarians" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<filipinolibrarians%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Filipino Librarians" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<filipinolibrarians%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians?hl=en. > -- -z- http://lovealibrarian.blogspot.com http://sumatrawoman.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Filipino Librarians" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/filipinolibrarians?hl=en.
