Re: Position Announcement - Cornell - 40 lbs of dust

["Kevin. Mac Donnell" <info@MACDONNELLRAREBOOKS.COM>]

I can understand the anger and frustration with job descriptions that
include physical requirements that might exclude some applicants from
qualifying, but to change this situation you must change the laws. Postings
to this listserv don't do that.

I personally would question the 40 lb figure. That's more than double the
weight of a reasonably sized/packed archival container, but many archives do
include heavy objects. But a weight-lifting requirement, in itself, is
perfectly legal and quite reasonable for many kinds of jobs, including some
in libraries. I just donated seven boxes of archival material to an Austin
library and the librarian and I lugged those boxes from my car to the loadng
dock and then to some shelves. I don't think either of us felt this was
beneath our dignity or beyond the professional parameters of either of our
jobs. Just a few months ago the director of our local public library and I
lugged heavy boxes of books around at the Austin Convention Center. Big
deal.

To answer your rather personal questions, I had adult-onset asthma for seven
years, which made many tasks associated with my work very difficult. Some
adult-onset asthma cases can be cured, and I am one of the lucky ones, so
that's no longer an issue, but I know what it is like to be disabled. At the
moment I can't lift a 20 lb box without being very careful, while my knee
recovers from surgery, and as I get older I pack smaller and smaller boxes
to move books around.

In my fire department we have routinely accommodated disabled employees, but
there are some physical requirements that cannot be accommodated. I too am
curious why Cornell could not state that weight-lifting requirement as a
preference, but I don't know the specifics of that particular position. It
may be valid to make it a requirement. However, as I said before, they are
courting a lawsuit if they make the ability to breath dust a requirement.
I'm not surprised to see a job-posting from a university that looks like it
was not vetted by somebody familiar with ADA II, OSHA, and various Federal
Labor Laws (which apply quite differently to different jobs); I frequently
see non-conforming job-postings for fire and EMS positions from agencies who
should know better.

Rant, rave, and rumble (but not at me; I didn't write the laws), but at the
end of the day go do your best to change the laws if you feel they are
wrong. But keep in mind this is not a black and white issue. Like
librarians' lungs, there's a lot of grey. My own take on this is you won't
get anywhere on weight-lifting requirements that an employer can show are
reasonable, and that there are already laws that apply to breathing dust. If
you feel you are being required to work unprotected in an unsafe
environment, contact your local OSHA office. I've testified (against the
employer of a worked killed on the job) at an OSHA hearing and can assure
you they enforce compliance issues. Ditto with ADA, with whom I've also
dealt when building new EMS and fire station facilities.

Kevin
@
Mac Donnell Rare Books
9307 Glenlake Drive
Austin TX 78730
512-345-4139
info@macdonnellrarebooks.com
Member: ABAA, ILAB
**************************
You may browse our books at
www.macdonnellrarebooks.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Poul Henningsen" <phdotcom@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <EXLIBRIS@MAIL.ECW.NAME>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [EXLIBRIS] Position Announcement - Cornell - 40 lbs of dust


> I want to know if an employer can morally defend such expectations.  Sole
> practitioners in any profession may be expected to perform numerous
> administrative tasks in addition to their professional tasks, but I repeat
> my assertion that lifting is not a professional function of a librarian,
and
> that in larger settings, such administrative tasks are rightly the
province
> of someone else if the librarian can't perform them.  That this fact may
> cause inconvenience and expense to management must be one of those
> "indignities" you speak of that life is heir to.
>
> It is cheering to know that you yourself are sufficiently hale and hearty
to
> lift 40-lb. boxes in the course of your daily work.  I suspect that you
> routinely lift them two at a time.  But what will happen when you are no
> longer able to do so?  Will you simply close your business in humiliation,
> or will you possibly break down and hire a younger assistant, who may lack
> your extensive bibliographical knowledge but have a stronger physical
> constitution?
>
> The definition of "disabled" in this country continues to appall me.
> Disabled from what?  The answer seems to be "disabled from functioning at
> 100% capacity."  Personally, I have become disabled from working 100-hr.
> weeks.  I simply can't do anymore what I could do when I was 25, and I now
> must content myself with working 60-hr. weeks.  Fortunately, my employer
has
> either not caught on or decided that my limited contribution is still
worth
> paying for.
>
> ph
>
> Oprindelig meddelelse sendt 1/26/06 8:00 PM fra "Kevin. Mac Donnell"
> <info@MACDONNELLRAREBOOKS.COM>:
>
> > It is if the employer can legally defend it. You might also be required
to
> > type, be able to turn pages in a book, point people to the nearest
restroom,
> > and refill paper in the photocopier. In a small town branch library you
> > might have to clean a restroom, sweep a sidewalk, or drive a truck. I
will
> > leave to your imaginations the skills required of school librarians.
> >
> > As one who has collated a few thousand books and hefted just as many
boxes
> > (not to mention breathing dust), I can well understand why lifting a box
may
> > not seem (or feel) like a "professional function" but employment (and
life)
> > is full of indignities, and many of them conform to Federal Labor Laws,
ADA
> > II, and OSHA.
> >
> > Kevin
> > @
> > Mac Donnell Rare Books
> > 9307 Glenlake Drive
> > Austin TX 78730
> > 512-345-4139
> > info@macdonnellrarebooks.com
> > Member: ABAA, ILAB
> > **************************
> > You may browse our books at
> > www.macdonnellrarebooks.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Poul Henningsen" <phdotcom@EARTHLINK.NET>
> > To: <EXLIBRIS@MAIL.ECW.NAME>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 5:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: [EXLIBRIS] Position Announcement - Cornell - 40 lbs of dust
> >
> >
> >> Lifting is not a professional function of a librarian, irrespective of
who
> >> else might or might not be available to do it.
> >>
> >> ph
> >>
> >> Oprindelig meddelelse sendt 1/26/06 5:06 PM fra "Kevin. Mac Donnell"
> >> <info@MACDONNELLRAREBOOKS.COM>:
> >>
> >>>> The open question is whether the ability to lift 40 lb. is an
> > "essential job
> >>>> function," that is, whether it is "fundamental or necessary to the
> >>>> position."
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Exactly so, and it depends on the particular situation. In a smaller
> >>> institution the archivist might be pretty much on their own to do
their
> > own
> >>> heavy-lifting; in a larger library there might be studs a'plenty who
> > come
> >>> running when you put your lips together and whistle.
> >>
> >>
>
>