Debating CILIP subscriptions: we will all need our professional body more in 2010, not less
There has been a bit of a debate, especially in the blogosphere, around the proposal to increase personal subscriptions by £7 a year (£5 for some of the concessional bands). The proposal will be discussed at the AGM on 15 October. This is no bad thing since it brings me the chance to debunk some of the commonly held myths about CILIP finances. I realise this blog post is a little longer than the usual, but there are a lot of points I want to make.
Moving offices out of London
While there are still critics who believe the Ridgmount Street office is expensive, in practice there are no costs other than utilities (heating, lighting etc.) Indeed, the top 2 floors are rented out and bring in a third of a million pounds a year. We did cost moving to Sheffield (just as an example) a couple of years back; the results showed that operational costs would go up as a result of the loss in rent.
Flat rate
There are some critics of the flat rate of membership fees where members currently earning above £17,000 all pay the same rate. The flat rate proposal went to a postal ballot of all members, with an overwhelming majority (77% of the voters) in favour of the change. Despite of the change, 48% of our members remain eligible for a discounted rate, and the average subscription paid in 2008 was £128. For 2010, Council and I agreed to propose raising the salary band at which the flat rate applies from £17,000 to £17,500 - this change will help more members on lower wages.
Financial health
Over recent years several commentators have referred to "CILIP's financial problems." In fact, CILIP is financially sound. Those who have commented are referring to the fact that Council and the Management Team at CILIP have made sure that CILIP's expenditure does not exceed its income by taking action in good time. As a result there have been reductions in expenditure and staff numbers. In November last year, Council cut £400,000 from the 2009 budget, with the loss of 4 posts. The staff agreed to a voluntary pay freeze. The pension scheme has been closed to new entrants, while the original scheme has been changed to a career average rather than final salary basis, among other cost savings.
Apart from its valuable building, CILIP has substantial financial reserves; the problem is that they are in a wide range of investments, which were worth £3.5m two years ago, after which they reduced in value in line with the falls in the stock market and interest rates. While the FTSE has climbed back in the last few months, it is still not a good time to cash in any of our investments at such low values as we are seeing now. So we are trying to live off income, both subs and surpluses from CILIP Enterprises, as far as we can.
Different subscription models
There have been a number of good ideas on subscriptions in the various blogs, i.e. the suggestion of a refundable element in a subscription where members are on short contracts or lose their job. Council will look at these as well as reviewing other bodies' subscription and service packages, including the British Computer Society and the Museums Association, in search of best practice. CILIP did a detailed benchmarking exercise in 2006 against 61 comparative bodies, taking into account the services provided to members, qualifications, policy development and advocacy, the size of membership, and areas of professional activity. Three in particular proved a close match to CILIP. These are the Institute of Town Planning, Royal Institute of British Architects and the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health; their 2009 subscriptions range from £370 to a free sub for students.
Impact of the recession
Personal subscriptions remain vital to CILIP, bringing in about £2m a year. This represents 66% of CILIP's income. The rest comes from the surplus generated by CILIP Enterprises, by the return on our investments and by rent. This surplus helps subsidise the cost of delivering services to members by £1m per annum. The reason for going for an increase in subs this year is the recession and the resulting fall in income generated by CILIP Enterprises and our investments.
The need for advocacy
At the same time, we need money to spend on challenging library authorities who are cutting jobs, de-professionalising staff and closing branches (also on the agenda for universities, I fear). There are several other initiatives which require support including areas such as diversity in LIS employment, supporting research to develop evidence on the value of our services.
I would finish by suggesting that people, before they vote, read the article in the next Gazette and bear in mind the fact that we will all need our professional body more in 2010, not less. In that case, it really does need the extra few pounds next year.
Nigel Macartney, Honorary Treasurer
