They are the requirements for the position we want to hire, included after consultation with HR to make sure they were reasonable and considering the current and future needs of the library. It is not entry level and that is clearly indicated, and it does have a fairly specific set of required/preferred qualifications beyond that. The thing is, there may have been people who applied who met the qualifications, but the committee couldn’t tell from the materials, and we can’t assume they have X when there’s no mention of it or anything related in their materials.
Now, we never expected to get a huge amount of applications considering the specificity of the posting - and that’s ok, because I’d rather have a smaller pool of high quality applicants than a huge pool of mediocre ones.
Is it full time with benefits and a market rate salary?
We have lots of those positions that are part time. Hard to fill and high turnover. Because no one can live and eat on what we’re offering. It’s ridiculous. Especially now that the economy here is improving. Everyone’s fleeing to full time positions.
Yes (market rate salary for academia, which I suspect is part of the issue). I know it’s the specificity of the posting that’s problematic - that, and I’ve seen a chunk of very similar positions posted (and reposted…) in the 6 months since we posted ours. It’s a high demand aspect in academic libraries now and honestly, it’s one area of the field where applicants can be very picky about where they apply - and if they choose to go academic or to private industry (where they will make more than at any of these library positions).
I have a simple rule: if you can think of a reason that would stop you from getting a graduate degree, then don’t get it: you’re in the wrong field. Save room in the library schools for people who are there because they can’t imagine doing anything else with their lives.
Getting an MLIS might make sense if you need, or want, a master’s degree for some purpose other than getting a job directly related to the degree’s discipline. E.g. getting a master’s degree for the sake of learning itself, as a trophy, or as a tick mark on a pay scale.
For example, many public employers have formally graduated pay scales where any accredited master’s degree gets you a raise and/or a promotion. Maybe you’re a cop and you go and get an MA in Medieval Italian Literature because you just love Dante. You got a master’s degree, so you get that extra $3k a year or whatever.
My mother’s opinion is that all of her children should earn at least a master’s degree. I think a big part of this is because she has a master’s degree and wants all of her children to achieve at least as much as her (i.e. no generational backtracking). While she probably prefers that the degrees be in practical areas, it’s “getting a master’s degree” that seems to matter to her the most.
There’s a newfangled concept going around called a job interview. Ever heard of it? That’s where you can ask a candidate to expand on that job they held between 2005 and 2010 - when they said that they were responsible for hydrostatic epistemological runoff mitigation, did they mitigate that runoff with transchromatic departiclizers or neoreductive departiclizers?
Yes, I know. But before they get an interview - phone or in person - they have to meet the required qualifications. They’re required for a reason. Their cover letter and resume are what I have to tell me if they meet those. If they do not meet those, I cannot consider them further.
Also, just as a point of applicant suitability, if said applicant can’t look at the job description and requirements listed and make damn sure that those appear to be clearly met or exceeded on their application and resume, said applicant has not impressed me enough to go hoofing around trying to see if maybe possibly I can figure out how to make them fit.
They’re the applicants, the onus is on them to be desirable to the institution.
Although, that said, our library is right next door to a much more prosperous county, and we can’t compete salary-wise, and boy can you tell sometimes. It would be lovely to actually have competitive pay.
This is a perfect example of why people say academia is so f’ed up. You (not you, but your institution) are willing to risk losing a perfect candidate rather than make a 15 minute phone call to confirm a couple of questions.
“I can’t tell from your resume, do you have experience in X, Y, and Z? When and where did you do these things?”
I’ve worked with libraries for over a decade, and they are incapable of making rational decisions. They’ll hem and haw and refuse to make decisions for months and months and then at the end of June they’ll call you and say “I have to spend this money NOW! I’ll take this and this and this and a bunch of other things I don’t know anything about!”