Placements & Salaries Survey 2009: The Issues that Matter
Profession-wide there continues to be a strong emphasis on recruiting a diverse workforce in all areas, whether by region, position, or library type.
Stephanie Maatta -- Library Journal, 10/15/2009
    |
The Minority Report | Venus and Mars on the Job
I’s, L’s and O’s | School Affairs
Professionwide there continues to be a strong emphasis on recruiting a diverse workforce in all areas, whether by region, position, or library type. Funding agencies, such as the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the American Library Association (ALA) Office of Diversity, and others, have continued to disseminate grants and scholarships to recruit, retain, and promote minority candidates despite a lean economy. In 2008, approximately 11.2% of the LIS graduates claimed minority status, mid-range between the 9% and almost 13% in previous years. And these graduates report successful job hunts and better than average salaries.
Minority grads in 2008 were paid a higher than average starting salary of $43,928, improving by $1,097 or 2.5%. In part the salary growth can be attributed to an increase in salaries for grads entering “other” agencies (private industry, for example), which topped $50,776 in 2008 (5.9% higher than 2007). As a subgroup of graduates, minority men garnered the healthiest salary increases between 2007 and 2008, improving 4.5% to $46,952 (11.4% above the national average for 2008), while the salaries for all men slid down 2.3% to $45,192. The most significant salary growth for minority graduates occurred in the Northeast, improving a noticeable 21%. Interestingly, the percentage of minority graduates finding jobs in the Northeast fell, while salaries popped.
By the numbers there is a consistent 80–20 split between women and men in the LIS workforce, and for many years a gender gap has existed between salaries achieved by these same women and men. This past year was no exception with men averaging salaries that were 7.4% higher than women, with only a marginal closing of the gap from the previous 7.7%. Among grads reporting minority status, the gap was even wider, with men’s salaries 8% higher than those obtained by women, but in the plus column minority men realized a 4.5% improvement in salaries, heading up from $44,828 in 2007 to $46,952 in 2008, in an economic environment when most salaries were down.
Clearly the type of library impacts overall salaries, and it is most noticeable among women. For example, public libraries continue to offer the lowest average salaries, with a national average of $37,556, and while women make up the largest proportion of the employment pool (82% in 2008), their salaries are lower than average at $37,361 annually. In the public library, women outnumber men in children’s and youth services, cataloging, and circulation, which are at the lower rungs of the salary scale.
By comparison, women comprised 93% of the placements in school library media centers in 2008, and grabbed salaries that were 8.8% higher than those of the men ($45,116 compared to $41,362).
The proportion of women entering other (nonlibrary) agencies, including nonprofits and private industry, dropped from 67.4% in 2007 to 61.5% in 2008. Unfortunately, salaries followed the same downward trend— losing 12.5% from the highs of 2007 ($44,166 compared to $46,698)—though continuing to fit into the highest wage category. One of the factors includes the proportion of women accepting positions in nonprofit agencies compared to men (58.2% of the nonprofit positions were reported by women), such as social service agencies, where they are securing salaries that are on average 18.5% lower than those reported by all other organizations outside of libraries ($39,977 compared to $47,394).
On the other hand, private industry has been a lucrative proposition for women. In 2008, salaries for women entering private industry were 22% higher than the national average for all new female members of the LIS workforce ($52,549 vs. $40,898). However, women’s salaries were significantly below (21.8%) men’s salaries in equivalent positions in private industry ($52,459 vs. $63,928).
There are nuggets of success for women in the workforce. Looking to academic libraries, women accepting positions located in the Southwest earned 7.1% higher salaries in 2008 compared to 2007 ($38,828 and $36,056), and, in a surprising turnaround, the salary gap narrowed in these same institutions, with men’s salaries shifting from $43,667 in 2007 to $38,410 in 2008. A similar phenomenon occurred in public libraries in the Northeast, with women bettering salaries by 3.8% (up from $38,023 to $39,544) and narrowing the gap from 8.5% between men and women to a difference of 1.9%. (Unfortunately, men’s salaries in these public libraries dropped by 2.4%, from $41,276 to $40,308.)
Evidence of the gender gap also emerges when looking at prior professional positions and background. Women entering their second (sometimes third) profession in 2008 garnered salaries that were 3.3% higher than the national average ($43,005 compared to $41,579); men with a similar profile earned salaries 8.3% higher ($45,354 compared to $41,579). Dollar for dollar, these same grads saw a 5.5% difference between the starting salaries for men and women. Backgrounds for second-career women included education, human and social services, retail management, and the ministry; backgrounds for men included law, education, business, computer sciences, and engineering. On the wage scale, backgrounds in science, technology, and engineering appear to provide more salary momentum than those in the service industries.
Discussions about the merits between library science (LS) and information science (IS) programs have not abated. The arguments still simmer and erupt as schools drop LS from their names and professional organizations attempt to guide curriculum. In 2008, graduates were once again asked to self-define whether their jobs fell into LS, IS, or some other designation. Of the 1650 grads who responded to the question, the clear majority believed their jobs were decidedly LS (71.9%—which is down slightly from 2008), 11.3% claimed the IS designation, and the rest described their positions as falling into other areas, most frequently as archives or education (classroom teachers and higher education). The “other” category also served as a designation for many of the positions that fell outside of the LIS professions.
The LS vs. IS designation continues to represent more than curriculum standards and pedagogical philosophies. For many grads and LIS programs it signifies substantial salary differences. In a dollar for dollar comparison, graduates who described their jobs as information science earned 15% more on average than those claiming library science. IS-defined positions earned an average starting salary of $46,310 compared to LS positions, which earned $40,221. Jobs described as “other” obtained salaries slightly above LS, averaging $41,638, and significantly less than IS-defined jobs (a difference of 11.2%). In a surprising twist to the LS vs. IS debate, the grad who earned the top salary in 2008 of $137,000 was self-defined as library science.
IS designation did not provide immunity to a poor economy. In fact, jobs described as IS declined approximately $2000 annually (4.4% lower) compared to the 2007 salary levels of $48,354, while LS job salaries remained flat. The drop in salary was much steeper than the national average of 1.8%, suggesting this segment of the information industry was impacted by the credit crisis and falling stock prices as well as severely reduced funding for educational institutions and public agencies. However, the information science jobs continued to have some of the best levels of compensation, 11.4% higher salaries than the national average ($41,579) for all of the LIS grads in 2008. And, once again, a degree from an iSchool Caucus member did influence salary, with seven of the 12 reporting institutions climbing well above the average starting salaries overall (ranging from 3.3% higher than average to an eye-popping 16.8% more, see Table 4).
The LS vs. IS debate had less impact on the trends among individual schools' placements than did regional economic factors. On the whole, graduates from schools in the Northeast fared better than those in the Midwest and Southeast. Syracuse University, for example, had average salaries slightly below the national average in 2007, but in 2008 Syracuse grads edged past University of Michigan grads by $400, placing them at the top of the salary ladder. Between 2007 and 2008 average salaries for Syracuse grads grew by a hefty 16% from $42,000 to $49,978. Interestingly, Syracuse grads did not report placement in private industry, which tends to drive average salaries upwards, but they did have high placement rates in academic libraries, which experienced positive salary growth in 2008. Tennessee, which appeared among the top ten of salary earners last year, dropped from $43,355 in 2007 to $37,782, losing 14.8% in average earnings. Tennessee grads also reported increased placements in public libraries in 2008; when combined with lower salaries in the Southeast in general, this negatively impacted the average.
Once again the University of Michigan dominated placements in private industry, representing approximately 30% of the overall placements in that arena. This was significantly down from 2007, when Michigan grads scored over 40% of the private industry jobs. The downturn may be indicative of the economy in the State of Michigan as well as on the West coast, where many of their grads sought employment in 2007. However, when private industry salaries are factored out of the U of M grads' average salary, the grads fall much closer to the national average for all graduates at $42,772 annually to start, or 2.7% higher than the national level of $41,579. Perhaps not surprisingly, 23.8% of the U of M grads found positions in academic libraries rather than public libraries or school library media centers.
Looking at placements in “other” agencies (private industry, nonprofits, and other entities outside of LIS organizations), U of M also dominates. Pittsburgh (34.6%), Drexel (28.6%), Maryland (28%), and the University of Texas at Austin (27.8%) round out the list of the top five schools with the highest percentage of placements in “other” agencies. Reflecting the schools’ specializations, placements are strong in archives, conservation and preservation, and for the University of Texas at Austin, in data standards. Information technology, project management, and research for external agencies round out the variety of positions grads find in “other” agencies.
Besides Syracuse, graduates of University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Iowa, Louisiana, and Simmons indicated the highest percentage of placements in academic libraries, ranging from 43% to 60% of the schools’ grads. On the whole, placement in academic libraries and public libraries were aligned at just over 29.5% each. Alabama, Kent State, Long Island University’s Palmer School, and Wayne State University had the strongest showings among the LIS schools in placing public librarians. With the exception of Long Island University, salaries for each of these institutions were below the national average, ranging from 2.1% to 8.7% below. On the other hand, school library media specialist positions declined from 33.5% of the placements in 2007 to 13.2% of the reported placements in 2008. However, Buffalo, Oklahoma, and TexasWomen’s continued to show strong placements in media centers, reflecting each program’s area of specialization.
The University of Washington graduates' responses, while received too late to include in the overall reporting, mirrored many of the same indicators as in the other programs. In 2007, the Washington grads earned among the highest starting salaries among the new professionals, averaging $48,176. This reversed in 2008, with salaries slipping to $42,553 (down more than $5600 or 13.2%), moving much closer to the national average of $41,579 at a slight 2.3% higher. Reported placements among the Washington grads were evenly distributed among academic libraries, other agencies, and public libraries, with approximately 22% of the placements reported in each. A full third of the grads reported their positions as part-time placements, with the majority of the part-time positions in either public libraries or other agencies, such as government agencies outside of libraries. Like many of the other new professionals, the Washington grads commented on the mismatch between skills and experiences of entry-level employees and the needs of the marketplace for experienced professionals, advising future colleagues to obtain as much experience as possible while seeking the degree and to be flexible with those experiences and opportunities.
| Author Information |
| Stephanie Maatta, Ph.D. (smaatta@cas.usf.edu), is Assistant Professor, University of South Florida School of Library and Information Science, Tampa |
EDITORIAL |
JOB SEARCH |
