Zoom Meetup Recording & Notes
Feb 24, 2021
Recording of the conversation (please note that my zoom was slow this day so many people’s screens look frozen. It’s not you, it’s the recording!)
Notes from the call:
Guest Visit from the Libraries Branch: Mari Martin (Director)
Talked about the new ADM Tara visiting one of these zoom calls in the near future. An opportunity to ask Tara questions about Municipal Affairs, she has worked in this ministry for many years.
Mari already seeing positive things about being in this Ministry, such as joining Municipal calls to learn more about what’s happening around the province.
(9:15). Elizabeth Tracy shared how the Library Partners are talking about whether to have a conversation with CUPE. ABCPLD was hesitant about this. We want to make sure there’s a clear objective going in and right now there’s not. We wanted to bring to membership for your thoughts:
Most Directors have huge concerns about this:
Concerned that CUPE will be looking for something they can use, and we can’t afford to say something out of turn, we’ll be nailed by it.
Goal of Partners is to speak with 1 voice. Concerned that if CUPE is part of that, then we’re saying they share our voice. They want to make it loud and clear that they don’t want CUPE to have a seat at the Partners table.
Concerned that CUPE has been attempting to move towards co-management, they’ve been aiming for this for awhile. This could be a foot in the door towards that end.
There was some openness to:
CUPE could amplify Partners messages.
Controlled information sharing where it’s of mutual benefit.
Working together on a really specific goal, like a shared advocacy campaign. But if we did that, it would be important to 1) refer back to the Terms of Reference to see if that matches what the Partners group is all about, and 2) consider who else needs to be there for this campaign. Any other unions? Other community groups?
(27:00). Hamilton Public Library and policies and charter of rights.
Related link: Hamilton Library Updating Booking and Event Policies on Assumption Charter of Rights Will Apply" (The Public Record, February 18, 2021).
Based on this article, BCLTA is encouraging Board Chairs to approach you and talk about reviewing your event and room rental policies, if applicable to your facility, and having a board discussion about intellectual freedom, Charter Rights, and the role of the public library.
Christina de Castell (Vancouver Public Library) shared her experiences and thoughts about this. Please note that this is NOT LEGAL ADVICE and we recommend you seek a legal opinion if you’re faced with a similar decision:
Christina shared that there’s nothing in the Hamilton decision that is new.
Most libraries in Canada were already operating as if the Charter of Rights applied to them. We make decisions based on the value of the freedom of expression and intellectual freedom, regardless of whether the Charter applies in law. So what the legal opinion is from Hamilton is really saying is that this lawyer believes the Charter applies in law.
(The Charter applies to entities that are government or linked to government.)
An area like this where there is no case law is an area where there’s mixed opinion. There could be lawyers out there that could claim the other direction and say the Charter doesn’t apply to libraries. Given the values that libraries have in IFLA and CFLA, that wouldn’t, in theory, change anything in the way we operate.
Christina’s sense is that this isn’t a 50/50 question of whether the Charter applies to libraries, there’s a bit more weight on the side of it does apply. But this particular opinion is analyzing the Ontario Act, and the Ontario Act is a little bit different from the BC Act, but you’d still be likely to come out with the opinion that the Charter applies.
And what it means when the Charter applies is that if you deny a room booking on the basis of content, that you can be taken to court and if you are found to have violated the Charter, you’d loose the case.
Ottawa Public Library example - this “Weld” decision confused the issue for a lot of people and this example is referred to in Hamilton’s decision. This example involved a room booking request to show a film, meaning the content could be reviewed ahead of time to determine whether it would violate the criminal code or not. The way this group took legal action against Ottawa Public Library is that they asked for a “judicial review” of the decision, not taking it through civil courts as a Charter action. The decision in this case was that judicial review didn’t apply because it’s a private business transaction. But this decision had nothing to do with whether the library is subject to the Charter and made no determination about that. But it made a lot of people misinterpret the Ottawa decision as meaning that room rentals are private business transactions of a library, therefore the Charter doesn’t apply and libraries can deny whoever they want. But that is NOT what that decision meant. It just meant the judicial review was the wrong process and if they wanted to take it forward, they’d need to take it forward through the courts.
The part that’s hard to interpret in it and that is problematic in our human rights legislation across Canada in general, is the discussion of discrimination and discriminatory events. Rather than the article itself, it’s more important to read the legal opinion linked in the article (available here). There’s a discussion of what kind of events or programs the library can hold or rent for, and discrimination on those terms.
If you had an event where you said women couldn’t attend, that would be a discriminatory event because women are a protected group under the human rights codes.
There’s a mention in the legal opinion about promoting discrimination and that’s really complicated. It says that Hamilton may want to consider denying events that promote discrimination. Hate speech and promoting discrimination are totally different bars, and you’d need a legal opinion to make a judgment about that. This has the high likelihood of getting into a charter violation.
If you had an event that wasn’t hate speech but it does promote discrimination, then you’d have to get legal advice in order to figure out if the discrimination is sufficient to warrant denying it and potentially deny the booker’s human rights. It does get complicated.
And that’s where we wind up with challenges when we’re talking about things like gender identity related events. Depending on the content, these events could be seen to promote discrimination. For example, if you had a group that was talking about why transgender women shouldn’t be allowed in shelters, you’re then allowing an event to take place that says there should be discrimination. But you have the Charter coming into play because it’s actually a discussion about policy and law and how we define gender. And gender is protected under the law.
Our BC Code is different from Ontario’s so should you find yourself in a situation where dealing with something like this, seek legal advice on your specific situation because this is not something where you can make a global decision, you have to look at the particulars of the situation.
That’s why at Vancouver they put in a process of due diligence to look at the individual groups who are booking a space and try and make the determination about the content. And in their policies, they’re quoting sections of the legislation. They’re not re-wording anything, they say “we comply with the law” and then insert the exact language.
(36:00). Question: Can we turn men away from a women’s book group? Answer: No, my understanding is that you can’t turn men away. You can promote an event for women but at the point you turn people away based on their gender, you’re treading into categories of problems under human rights law. Not turning people away is your safest bet.
Know what the human rights code says are protected areas (gender, race, ethnicity, age, etc) and don’t turn people away for any of these things.
Related link: About the BC Human Rights Code
If you want to share this with your Board, your best bet is copy from the legal Hamilton opinion (available here).
(52:35). How many libraries have seen changes in their provincial funding?
View spreadsheet to see what Directors on the call shared
(59:00). Question to Scott - any updates from conversations you’ve had with your lawyer about whether vaccinations can be mandated for staff?
Scott is NOT A LAWYER but is providing his understanding.
Legal consensus from multiple sources appears to be that employers will probably a) be able to and b) should require their employees to get vaccinated. From a WorkSafe perspective and liability perspective, the onus is on the employer to mitigate and eliminate risks in the workplace where possible. COVID-19 represents a very significant risk and therefore, in order to prevent that risk, it’s reasonable that we would ask people to get vaccinated.
If staff refuse to be vaccinated, then they would be eligible to be laid off or terminated, depending on the situation. And in fact should be. That includes a combination of medical exemptions and religious exemptions. The assessment Scott has read is that just because you have medical or religious exemption doesn’t mean the rest of society agrees to that. And employer is liable so employer has to take steps to ensure the workplace is safe.
By September (when they say vaccines will be available for everyone), or by the end of this year, we will be getting the question about whether vaccines will be mandatory for staff or not. And Scott is hoping that by then, other employers and legal firms will lay the ground work for libraries.
The Boards might also play a role here. If they have a strange reaction to this, that might result in something different.
Question: Would government provide advice on this? Answer: Likely no. We’re likely going to see guidance from WorkSafe, not from government. But employers will probably have to chart their own path here.
15:35:57 From Wendy : Yes, I am hoping that libraries would not need to seek legal advice individually. Hopefully there will be a clear WorkSafe message we can use, or perhaps ABCPLD can go in on legal advice together.
Question: Could duty to accommodate come into play here? Answer: No, because the employer would have to accept undue hardship to accommodate.
(1:09:15). Don: What to do about weeded materials?
From Heather Evans-Cullen : @Don we put weeded materials out to patrons and then send off to Better World Books
From Cari : to the dump
From Heather Evans-Cullen : We also donate to prisons
From Wendy : We have stopped accepting donations until the pandemic is at the point where the Friends can have a book sale.
From Deb Hutchison Koep (she/they) : We are doing contactless booksales, also donations to local orgs, and some to our local Big Brothers and the rest to the transfer station
From Sasha - Midway Public Library : Book sale with boxed up books only so it is contactless but it is slow to get rid of
From Jim Bertoia : We used to send to Better World Books, but then they found we had to much and turned us down. I am not sure what happened.
From susan walters : city has forbidden us from recycling, but we are not accepting and neither are our FOL. People can drop off at works yard and from there they get picked up by someone other than BWB I think
From Ursula Brigl : Our Better World Books experience is the same as Sparwood's
From Deb Hutchison Koep (she/they) : There are also avid crafters out there who will take some. Depends on scale tho!
From Hilary Bloom : We've been putting ours out for free (outside our front door during open hours), and they've been a hot ticket item (surprisingly)
From Karen Hudson, Salt Spring Island Library : We bagged up 450+ "Mystery Bags" (4200+ books) for patrons in 2020 to take for free, and also have a booksale cart that we brought back post quarantine.
(1:12:30). Deb: Poll on public seating
A few comments on this:
From Heather Buzzell : Just met with our OHS guy about that today to bring it back.
From Nakusp - Claire : We have all of the seating, but less in each section, and with time limits.
From Scott Hargrove : We have reduced seating, roughly 60% depending on internal geography by library.
(1:14:42). Question: Do you have time limits on your seating?
Most do have time limits but do not enforce
FVRL doesn’t have time limits and it isn’t an issue. Most people voluntarily leave pretty quickly. There are a few exceptions but it’s not that many.
15:46:43 From Toby Mueller : yes
15:46:48 From Tina Nielsen : Yes, but not strictly enforced.
15:46:53 From Elizabeth Tracy : yes
15:46:55 From Ursula Brigl : We recommend 60 minute visits.
15:47:02 From Tracey Therrien : yes still a limit of approx. 45 min
15:47:08 From Karen Hudson, Salt Spring Island Library : Yes, but not enforced lately due to cold weather.
15:47:17 From Fort St. James Public Library (Karli) : We do but we’re pretty lax about it, 30m
15:47:27 From Scott Hargrove : We do not, and have never had time limits. Has not been a problem.
15:47:55 From jmoore : Up to 60 mins -- not strictly enforced. This was put in so that we could manage the capacity.
15:48:02 From Alice - Mackenzie Public Library : yes same. There are time limits when others are waiting to get in
15:48:06 From susan walters : no time limits in Richmond
15:48:09 From Amber Norton - HHPL : we only limit time on computers. If we have people waiting we would ask people to leave, but it actually hasn't happened.
15:48:30 From Alex Faucher : We didn't have time limits until recently and now have 60 min …
15:48:36 From Jim Bertoia : Ours is an hour but like others not strictly enforced.
15:49:18 From Wendy Cinnamon : we have time limits (15 min. browsing, 30 min computer use), but are still doing access by appointment - however we have quite a few walk-ins that don't make appointment but take a chance that they can come in
15:51:05 From Alice - Mackenzie Public Library : we often have kids hanging out for hours taking up all of our occupancy limit spots so we ask them to leave as other people try to get in
15:51:23 From Tina Nielsen : Scott does that include study space seating?
15:51:55 From Karen Hudson, Salt Spring Island Library : Well done Scott!
15:52:06 From Julie Spurrell : We still have computer limits, but we always had those. We have never had a problem with reaching our building capacity, so as long as people wear their masks and don't move the furniture, they can stay. We're at about 45% seating.
(1:20:23). Question: Has anyone opened any group space? Or pairs?
Grand Forks just opened new study room. Sign that says to stay to your bubble. In enclosed room
Cranbrook has tables in children’s section, with signage. 2 chairs at either end.
Jim Bertoia - We do allow family groups and we do have social services meet with clients privately.
FVRL - treat 1 family as 1 person. Even if 5 people in family.
From Julie Spurrell : Yes, but between plexi
From Jim Bertoia : We do allow family groups and we do have social services meet with clients privately.
From Cari : we have the same exception for the spaces we do monitor
From Heather Evans-Cullen : Just wondering how many of you are still accommodating some staff to work from home
From Ursula Brigl : When groups of teens come in we assume they are all in the same bubble.
(1:23:14). Question: Are you allowing staff to work from home still?
Most said yes.
From susan walters : we are
From Elizabeth Tracy : Yes
From Maureen Sawa -GVPL : We are as well
From Deb Hutchison Koep (she/they) : None as COVID-related accommodations; we still have several working from home to reduce the number of staff onsite.
From Tina Nielsen : Not at this time. Mainly because not needed.
From Marc Saunders : Programmers work from home 3 days a week
From Karen Hudson, Salt Spring Island Library : Next zoom meeting (Finance) starting, thanks everyone.
From Heather Buzzell : Yes, because it's reducing the number on site
From Scott Hargrove : We have approximately 10% of our staff working from home - support staff (HR, IT, etc.) and some programmers...
From Heather Evans-Cullen : thank you- helpful
From Elizabeth Tracy : We have 2 cohorts as our staff occupancy limit is 7
From WVML Staff Meetings : most staff have a mix
From Ursula Brigl : I have one person working from home because of a medical exemption for mask-wearing. I saw this as the only way of providing a safe work environment for her.
From Wendy Cinnamon : we have 2 working from home for part of our hours as we are working independently when at the library
From WVML Staff Meetings : front line staff are different (shelvers etc)
From jmoore : Management and Coordinators are doing some WFH.
From Julie Spurrell : Yes, to reduce people on site.
From Fiona : Our staff room is small, and we are limiting the number of staff in each day, which means some are working from home.
From Alex Faucher : Working from home only for seminars/workshops, virtual programming, etc (this is for any staff) but we are not doing any sort of medical accommodation
From Don Nettleton Okanagan Regional Library : We have several but not accomodations escept one
From Maureen Sawa -GVPL : Good point, Deb - ours are at home for the reasons you cite
Next call is in 2 weeks: Wed, March 10
Feb 10, 2021
Recording of the conversation (note: only the first 30 minutes were captured - apologies!)
Notes from the call:
Tami Setala from the BC Libraries Coop gave an update on her work with the Digital Initiatives Project, particularly re: Lynda.com. In Tami’s words:
Post yesterday in the Co-op website's Licensing Group about the launch of LinkedIn/Lynda.com on March 1
Last time I spoke about authentication options and the bad timing of the transition to LinkedIn Learning.
Lynda.com had a number of authentication options available to libraries
LinkedIn is limited to PatronAPI (proprietary for Innovative – so Sitka and Sirsi-Dynix couldn’t use it) and SIP2.
Since BC Libraries are moving away from SIP2 for privacy reasons, we needed some extra time to find alternatives for any library not using Innovative Interfaces for their ILS. Pressure on LinkedIn to offer more options failed.
Some developments in the past few months:
Sitka Libraries, Jeff Davis built a back end solution that would allow Evergreen libraries to authenticate via PatronAPI.
Vancouver Public Library had been working on a similar solution for Sirsi-Dynix libraries to work with PatronAPI and this code is available in the Co-op website's licensing group.
Current subscribers will not need to transition to LinkedIn learning until May to give them time to work out authentication
SIP2 is currently used by a number of Sirsi-Dynix libraries, and these libraries have included a consent agreement that patrons have to click through in order to access Lynda. While not ideal, it will satisfy the criteria for a privacy impact assessment.
Sitka libraries’ authentication set up is being handled by support. Most other libraries are already subscribers, and only two libraries have to work out authentication and I have reached out to them directly to connect them with LinkedIn.
Feel free to email Tami with any questions: tami.setala@bc.libraries.coop
For a new account and to have access to the Licensing Group updates, LBFG meeting info: office@bc.libraries.coop
Digital Initiatives Project updates: https://digiprojects.libraries.coop/licensing/
(11:50) Mari Martin, Director of the Public Libraries Branch.
Grant report:
Share your report with your board for information, but doesn’t need a formal approval in a board meeting. This is primarily about making sure your Board is knowledgeable about a report that will be made publicly available.
If you won’t be able to make the March 1st deadline, it’s ok but reach out to the Branch and let them know.
Mari offered to do a session on “Funding 101” as a lot of interest came up around this in New Director’s Orientation.
Poll about 2021 Budget and Digital Collections: “What % of your 2021 collections budget have you shifted to digital?”
5-10%: 20 libraries
10-25%: 4 libraries
25-50%: 2 libraries
Discussion around drug use in washrooms. There are limited services available, ie public washrooms, and in some cities, the library is the only public washroom in the community that’s open. Even municipalities and city halls have closed their washrooms to public use. Case of a small library seeing increased drug use in washrooms, conversation around solutions. When do you call police, what kind of restrictions/tools have you put in place around washrooms, what do you when there’s an overdose?
Summer reading (virtual or in person?) - Quick conversation, everyone is in a wait and see approach.
Staff fatigue and antidotes - conversation about how low people are right now. The challenges around front line service. Staff are struggling to serve people. People they’re serving aren’t at their best. Antidotes like staff recognition, how and when people recognize staff.
Discussion about visitors trying to use digital resources - people from other communities trying to access databases from other libraries. Because of our contracts, we can’t have people using these resources.
Discussion about families congregating in the library to socialize and not observing time limits - growing problem with this. WorkSafe does not expect us to police that. Post occupancy limit, post the time limit. Let people know there’s a limit and then wash your hands of it. It’s up to people to manage their behaviour.
Discussion around CALP funding and Decoda. Some libraries have a great working relationship with Decoda, others don’t. It’d be great to have Margaret come on a future call to talk to us about adult literacy and CALP funding.