ࡱ> @ ?zbjbjFF ",,q%%%8%t^&T/M&L ' ' ' ''(,(LLLLLLLNR3QdLj6''j6j6L ' 'L999j6 ' 'L9j6L99FI|RJ '& P7%8ILL0/MI~Q8Q$RJRJpQK($+>9'./w(((LL94Timeline for the Regulations 1974-2005 Status and Working Conditions of Professional Librarians That within the academic sector of the University, Librarians be given a special Librarian status in their own right, that is, Librarians as distinct from students, administrators and / or teaching staff 1997-Request for revision to the regulations VP Chan told the then Director of Libraries F.Groen that the regulations then in force should be revised in order to make them "isomorphic" with those of faculty. Professional Issues Committee members M. Richard, S. Rankin, S. Grant, C. Oliver, P. Riva, E. Yarosky and others spent months revising the regulations and producing ancillary documents. From the other side (administration) Donna Duncan, David Crawford and John Hobbins did a lot of writing of these. The request for parallelism originally came from the Appeals Committee (after a non-renewal case). 1998 -Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic Staff In Chapter 2, Regulations Relating to the Employment of Librarian Staff there is a preamble. Preamble: The Board of Governors resolved on January 27th 1974, that within the academic sector, librarians would be accorded a distinct status This line appears at the very beginning of Chapter 2 in the Handbook MAUT Librarians Section Annual Report With the arrival of a new VP Academic (Vinet) in July, the Section began again to explain to the Administration, the need for revisions to Chapter 2. Correspondence with Secretary General - Victoria Lees in October indicated that the VPs wanted to put the revisions on hold indefinitely. As the review had been specifically requested in 1996, and completed in March 1998, the Section did not want to delay any longer. In December, Pat Riva and Jane Aitkens met with Dr. Vinet to fill him in on the background to the project, and the content of the revisions. While the Libraries as an administrative unit have been assigned to VP (IST), Librarians, as academic staff, fall under the VP (Academic). In January, the VP-IST sent a memo to all librarians suggesting the eventual establishment of a committee to look at part of the regulations package. As the changes in the order of the sections (to conform to Chapter 1) would make adopting part of the package much more difficult than adopting all of it, this was not seen as a suitable compromise. Instead, on February 16, Senate approved the creation of a parity committee to look at the whole package and report by spring. The MAUT Librarian Section representatives to the Senate work group were David Crawford and Pat Riva. Due to numerous delays on the part of the administration, the first meeting was finally scheduled for May 26th. David Crawford indicated that this Senate Workgroup of 2000 was, as far as he can remember, initially trying to bring only the various promotion and tenure deadlines in Chapter One and Chapter Two into synchronicity. They were also trying to deal with the points raised by the University Appeals Committee who found that the Director was too involved in the process to be a suitable first hearer of appeals to the process. There were several meetings between Pat, David, Secretary General Victoria Lees, VP Pennycook and possibly a Dean. At some point in these deliberations, VP Pennycook asked Why do we have any differences between Chapters 1 and 2? Pat and David agreed that they should look at the whole of the two Chapters and see if they could really be brought into almost total synchronicity. To do this, Pat and David met with Victoria Lees over the next few weeks and presented a draft to the other members of the Work Group. Though these three realized that the organization and wording of Chapter 1 was in great need of serious editing work we agreed that if we were to try to fix Chapter 1 and then make Chapter 2 match it we would never finish and whatever momentum was there would be lost. After several weeks of hard work, discussions with librarian colleagues and SMG, our draft was presented to VP Pennycook and was accepted. The two Chapters were as synchronous as we felt possible. We made no secret of the fact and all realized that there would be some changes in our procedures and who sat on committees (more Faculty members) but most librarians felt that the gains far outweighed any losses. At the Senate meeting wherethe changes were being debated it took us (including Victoria) totally by surprise when VP Pennycook proposed a "minor amendment" to change the name of the Grey Book to  HYPERLINK "http://upload.mcgill.ca/secretariat/Greybook.pdf" Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic and Librarian Staff as opposed to its old title of Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic Staff. Despite our protests this was accepted by Senate. Pat Riva has added to this that at some point before the new text was brought to Senate, that VP Pennycook had left the University. VP Masi then took over and it was Luc Vinet who represented Administration, who made the change in the name of the Handbook at Senate. MAUT Librarians Section Annual Report Since June 2000 the Senate Workgroup to Review the Revisions to Chapter 2 Regulations relating to the Employment of Librarian staff met to complete the text of the regulations and draft the covering document. On August 08th 2000, Principal Shapiro sent a memo to the Director of Libraries stating that the revision to the regulations were almost complete and he would be ready to support them before Senate and the Board of Governors. On December 06th 2000, Senate approved the revised Chapter 2 of the Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic Staff. The Board of Governors approved our revised Chapter 2 and all the corrections in other Chapters referring to it at its meeting of January 29th 2001. We expect the regulations to be implemented by June 01st 2001. Perhaps it is worth noting that the University, at the last minute insisted on inserting a decanal veto on certain appointments. John Hobbins spoke against this in Senate and he feels justified in that we have not hired a McLennan Librarian since. However, MAUT-LS asked him not to delay the adoption. December 06th 2000 Senate approval January 29th 2001 Board of Governors approval Implemented June 01st 2001 Principal Shapiros Memo: Amendments to the Regulations relating to the Employment of Librarian Staff These amendments will bring the regulations relating to librarians into almost exact conformity with the regulations relating to academic staff. Once these revised regulations are approved, librarians will have all the rights and responsibilities of the academic staff. these new regulations represent a significant raising of the bar. .for the purposes of recruitment, promotion and tenure the librarians fall within the portfolio of the Vice Principal Academic, on matters of daily administration and management of the libraries they will continue to report to the Vice Principal (IST) through the Director of Libraries. . [librarians] will be replaced more and more frequently with such specialists and we will see some reduction in the number of librarians. From the Librarians Section meeting of April 25, 2002 The Director of Libraries called a meeting of all librarians on March 15th to meet with VP Masi. On March 14th all librarians received a document by email called A Proposal to create an additional category of academic Librarian . The documents arrival close to the meeting date did not give the librarians a chance to discuss and react to it. The Librarians section organized a general meeting of all Librarians (MAUT members and non-members) on March 21st to discuss the memo from VP Masi and to review the March 15th meeting. There was a high level of attendance and the librarians expressed unanimous opposition to the creation of a new category of librarian with different academic duties. It was decided that the section would send a small delegation to meet with VP Masi in order to ascertain his view of the key issues and his position on certain basic principles regarding librarians working conditions. On April 8th C. Oliver, D. Canning and P. Riva met with VP Masi for two hours and all agreed on the need to work towards consensus quickly so that there can be a staffing plan for libraries because the libraries have seen almost no academic renewal. VP Masi affirmed his support for certain basic principles: Academic status, 3 categories of academic duties, peer review, involvement in University governance and secured appointment, whatever the label. He expressed the view that Chapter 2 of the regulations is too much in parallel with Chapter 1. He was well aware that it was the University administration that had pushed for the congruence between the two Chapters, but that this congruence had lead to a re-interpretation of criteria. This re-interpretation, was, in turn, creating problems in the area of recruitment and retention of qualified new librarians. He asked the librarians to come up with a proposal about possible changes to Chapter 2. He would like to see implementation of changes within a years time. At the Librarians Section meeting on April 25th a decision will be made on how to proceed. (See report on April 8th meeting with VP Masi for a more detailed report of this meeting on the section website) Memo from VP Masi last years revision of the Regulations Regarding the Employment of Librarian staff was designed to bring the regulations for librarians into congruence with the regulations for academic staff and to grant librarians the same rights and responsibilities as their colleagues who are tenure track faculty. There is no reason to believe that granting this equivalent status per se is problematic to the University. Librarians are academics and should remain so from the Proposal to create an additional category of Academic Librarian document March 2002. From the Librarians Section meeting of April 25th 2002 In the conclusion to her report on the April 8th meeting with VP Masi, Chris Oliver said I feel we need to respond fairly quickly to VP Masi to show a willingness to partner with him in finding a good path forward for librarians while also moving in such a way that we do not jeopardize the working conditions of future librarians At the same general meeting Darlene Canning reported on her April 08th meeting that VP Masi does not like the word sessional librarian and could we come up with a new name. Does he wants a new name or is there more to this? We brainstormed new names Term Librarian, Resident Librarian, Project Librarian etc.Members were invited to check the Section web page ( HYPERLINK "http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/" http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/ for reports of the March 15th and April 08th meetings. From the Librarians Section meeting of Dec 08th 2003 D. Boyer presented a brief historical overview of the issue Regulations re changes in librarian status: going back to 1998 with the administration wanting to harmonize regulations governing librarians and those governing faculty. It was understood at the time that the substance of these regulations would remain unchanged. It transpired, however, that the substance has been changed and that the so-called bar has been raised. There has been only one entry-level tenure track librarian hired since 2001 and those librarians hired outside the tenure track appointments undertake core functions. In March of 2003, at the administrations behest, the MAUT Librarians Section drafted a framework of new regulations and circulated this new framework among its members. Following this, a meeting with the Deputy Provost was held in early November 2003 and the MAUT proposed framework was accepted in principle. A committee was established for this purpose and the MAUT representatives were Daniel Boyer, Pat Riva and John Hobbins while the Director named Jim Henderson and Ann Walter. This framework was then transmitted to the Universitys Legal Department to be cast into a set of regulations and in late December of 2003 we are still awaiting the result of this exercise. Concern was expressed that the ultimate document, once reviewed by the legal department, might differ in intent from what was originally submitted. P. Riva, a member of the committee which constructed the new framework, assured the members that the document would be scrutinized very carefully by the committee to make sure no changes to the essence of the document had been made. The proposed framework diverges from the parallelism created in 1998. Daniel Boyer was of the opinion that this divergence from the parallelism was the thick edge of the wedge to eventually pry us from ۲ݮƵs Academic cohort. B. Robaire, from MAUT, indicated that it is becoming more frequent that universities, particularly in the U.S., are trying to change tenure guidelines in a major way. He sees it as MAUTs responsibility to ensure that its members retain their acquired rights. University Senate Meeting February 12 2004 Changes to the Regulations relating to the employment of librarian staff ( D02-11) were presented by V. P. Masi and approved by Senate. (This is a name change only - from sessional librarian to library professional). From the Librarians Section meeting of May 13 2004 John Hobbins reported on the status of the March 2003 document Framework for a Draft Statement of Principles Governing the Status and Working Conditions of Librarians at ۲ݮƵ University. ( HYPERLINK "http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.doc" http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.doc ) This document has been delivered to DP Masi who has passed it along to the lawyers for perusal. DP Masi claims that the resulting document will be in line with the spirit of the document the Librarians' Section gave to him. Although he says that the results will be available imminently, the old regulations still stand. University Senate Meeting May 19 2004. *** Report of the Administrative and Support Staff Counts (D03-90) This report shows bar graphs of the total administrative & support staff, counts semi-annually from May 1994 to November 2003 and a breakdown of M's, C's, L.A.'s, T's and U's. Library assistant staff counts are the same in 2002 and 2003 - 141, down from a count of 190 in May 1994. *** Annual Report on Full-time Academic Staff Changes (D03-85) This report indicates academic, tenure track counts by faculty, comparing December 2002 with December 2003, indicating hires and departures by quarter. The University Librarians have a net loss of 3 tenure track positions; from 50 to 47 for this period. The University faculty have a net gain of 50; from 1384 to 1434 for this period. Status Summary November 2004 to April 2005 Framework for a draft statement of Principles governing the status and working conditions of librarians at ۲ݮƵ University. --- Revision based on comments at March 24th 2003 MAUT Librarians section meeting. This framework was agreed to in principle at a meeting in early November 2003 and was transmitted to the Universitys Legal Department to be cast into a set of regulations and in late December of 2003 we are still awaiting the result of this exercise. It has now been a full year to the month since the agreement in principle and we have received neither written explanation for the delay nor a written timeline for the receipt of the proposed new regulations, despite repeated enquiries to DP Masi. At the MAUT General Meeting of November 16th 2004, Daniel Boyer reiterated the fact that we had not received the proposed new regulations. At this same meeting, John Hobbins stated that he had been told by DP Masi that the regulations had just come from the University lawyer and were on his (DP Masis) desk. DP Masi says he hopes to have them to us by next week. We await further developments. In December 2004, Dr. Masi held a meeting with the Regulations committee and another with the Committee plus the SMG members as well as the two Associate Provosts. In November 2004, Natalie Waters replaced Ann Walter on this committee. John Hobbins and Pat Riva were asked to work on another proposal to revise the areas of greatest concern. In late December the Regulations committee received the document in electronic form so that it could be worked on. This work was completed by January 26 2005 and Committee members Pat Riva and John Hobbins met with Professor William Foster (who is now interim Secretary General) who was at the time Associate Provost (Faculty). The resulting document was sent to Dr. Masi and it was intended that it be available for discussion and comments, first with the Regulations committee and then with the whole of the Librarian Staff. At the time of writing (May 2005), we are still awaiting a meeting date to be set. In response to a question at Senate on December 01st 2004, DP Masi promised Senate a progress report by the end of the academic year. April 2005 MAUT Council Meeting Daniel Boyer reported on the lack of progress with the librarian regulations revision. The current number of librarians at ۲ݮƵ is 64. 20 library professionals (contract appointments) 3 tenure track appointments 41 librarians appointed with tenure. May 2005 At the May 4, 2005 Senate meeting, Sharon Rankin asked the following question: University Senate meeting on December 1, 2004, the minutes record the following: "Dr. Masi acknowledged that it had indeed taken some time to complete the review of the librarian regulations. However, the final product would reflect the three principles that had been agreed to at the outset of the review process..... (and) there will, of course, be opportunities for all librarians to view and make suggestions about the revised regulations, with a target of early in the Winter term of 2005.......Dr. Masi indicated that he would return to Senate with an update on the librarian regulations before the end of the academic year." Given that there have been no meetings scheduled this term to discuss this very important academic issue and given that the librarians have been ready with a second draft proposal for discussion since January 2005. Could the University administration please provide an update on this issue? And, will the University commit to completing this work by the fall of 2005. Interim Provost Masi answered that he has begun to look at the draft with the new Director of Libraries. He cannot promise for the fall, but he will pick up the pace and hopes to complete the work sometime in the 2005 academic year. A follow-up question, requested that this information be sent to all librarians and this was agreed to. In May 2005, new Director of Libraries acknowledged that the Interim Provost had undertaken at the last Senate meeting to address matters relating to the employment of librarians and the regulations during the summer and fall term, and wondered if it were possible to hold on this action. In September 2005, the Director realized that the librarian regulations have been a matter of concern to all of us and initially requested that the members of the committee which would be advising her on merit might also be involved with the regulations. At this point Joan Hobbins indicated that she would have to decline serving on the Regulations Committee. She felt that individuals such as Pat Riva and John Hobbins, who have worked extensively on this file over the years and who already have detailed knowledge of the subject would be the better candidates. John Hobbins wrote that as a member of SMG he may be ineligible since that group already appears to be represented by someone else. Second, he already is a member of a committee, representing the MAUT-LS, chaired by the Interim Provost on the regulations. This committee has not been dismissed and he is unsure as to its future or relationship with the new committee. The Director then called for another nominee and Pat Riva was nominated as the representative for the Tenure Track stream on this new Regulations committee being brought together by the Director of Libraries. Sharon Rankin, current MAUT-LS Chair, sent the following information to the Section members. (amul-l Sept 15th 2005) I just wanted to let you know that I have written to both Tony and Janine to ask for a clarification on the regulations committee and its membership. Now that there is renewed interest by the administration to work on this issue, it is crucial that we have a committee composition that ensures progress is made. We need continuity and expertise for this very important issue. In the situation regarding the Tenure Regulations the following events have unfolded. On May 20th 2005, at the spring general meeting of the MAUT-Librarians section, under agenda item 3 Sharon Rankin reported that Senate recently approved tenure revisions to clarify procedures and improve transparency. These revisions apply only to professors, but librarians should also benefit from these revisions. S. Rankin and P. Riva drafted a document with respect to applying these revisions to librarians regulations. The document was accepted as a notice of motion and the proposed changes will be discussed at the September 14th, 2005 Senate meeting. NOTICE OF MOTION for Senate September 14, 2005, concerning the adoption of revised Tenure Regulations for Full Time Librarian Staff At its May 4th 2005 meeting, Senate approved the Tenure Regulations for Full Time Academic Staff (D04-76). The Librarians are now bringing forth revisions to the Librarians Chapter Two of the Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic and Librarian Staff matching the spirit of the recent tenure changes to Chapter One for academic staff. The Librarians view these changes as a necessary interim step to ensure that librarian staff benefit from the improved procedural changes in the tenure process made for academic staff. Greater clarity and transparencyGuidance with respect to certain aspects of processcorrect certain deficiencies in the processMake the regulations more accessible to the candidates the rationales behind the recent revisions to tenure regulations also apply to the librarian staff and for this reason we are bringing this motion to Senate The adoption of a similar timeline for both academic and librarian staff with respect to the tenure process will benefit tenure candidates, the academics participating in the process and the administration of the process by the Secretariat. The changes in the attached document (Annex A) Tenure Regulations for Full-time Librarian Staff modify the librarian tenure regulations in Section5.0 through 5.62 of the Regulations Relating to the Employment of Librarian Staff to accord with the academic staff tenure regulations, resulting in a set of tenure regulations that adopt the same procedures. Be it resolved the Senate recommend to the Board of Governors, for its approval the following resolutions Be it resolved that the regulations titled Tenure Regulations for Full-Time Librarian Staff, attached hereto as Annex A-Librarians be adopted. Be it further resolved that the timeframe for adopting the above regulations match the timeframe contained in the Tenure Regulations for Full-Time Academic Staff) D04-76 Moved by: Sharon Rankin Seconded by: Pat Riva Should the changes pass, the tenure regulations governing librarians would be kept in parallel with professors' regulations. As the document had to be submitted quickly there was not time to circulate a draft to the members. These revisions, if passed, will affect the tenure cohort of 2006. Subsequent to a discussion regarding an email circulated on May 18th, 2005 by the Director of Libraries on the subject of the proposed changes to librarian tenure regulations, there was a motion to draft a resolution to indicate an official desire of the members of MAUT-LS, that the librarian representatives to Senate continue in their efforts to receive Senate approval for these changes to librarian tenure regulations.. On September 14th, Sharon Rankin reminded members that Today at 2:30 on the University's Senate agenda is the motion proposing changes to the tenure section of the librarian regulations. The proposed changes relate to process. The proposed new wording for the librarian tenure regulations are based on the recently approved academic tenure process. In May 2005, the membership indicated its support of this effort. Resolution passed at the MAUT Librarians' Section General Meeting, May 20, 2005: "We encourage our senators to continue their efforts to bring Section 5 of chapter 2 " Regulations relating to the employment of librarian staff" of the Handbook of Regulations and Policies for Academic and Librarian Staff in line with recent changes to the regulations regarding tenure and promotion of faculty." Moved by J. Aitkens, seconded by M. Richard The Director of Libraries has asked the Library Senators to withdraw the motion and to wait for three months to allow the new regulations committee to make progress on drafting new regulations for the entire Chapter two. The Library Senate reps will be discussing this request to delay the motion at noon today. We need to hear from you concerning your opinion on this issue. From the Senate results of the Library motion (AMUL-l posting Sept 15th at 9:37 am) Sharon Rankin wrote: I presented the motion at Senate yesterday afternoon. The Library motion received strong support from the teaching faculty. The Deans and the Director of Libraries spoke against the motion. I accepted the Director's motion on the floor to refer the text to the Interim Provost's office for review. When this motion was voted on, the result was a tie. The Principal cast her vote for the motion. The result is that the proposed tenure regulation changes will go the Masi's office with the clear expectation that they will return to Senate in Feb 2006. The ۲ݮƵ Reporter, in its issue for Thursday September 22 2005,  HYPERLINK "http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senate" http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senate provided a summary of the discussion which included comments by Senators Nicholas Kasirer, Patrick Glenn, Gary Pekeles, Anthony Pare, Kohur GowriSankaran, Sam Noumoff. After much discussion and a tie breaking vote by the Principal, the matter was sent back to the Interim Provost Tony Masi. The Director of Libraries has made the Regulations a priority and we await the deliberations of the Directors new Regulations Committee. As of September 22, 2005, the new Librarian Regulations Committee is formed. The full composition of the group is: Janine Schmidt, Trenholme Director of Libraries (Chair) Robert F. Clarke, Senior Management representative Pat Riva, Tenure-Track Librarian representative Anna Stoute, Library Professional representative Sharon Rankin, MAUT-Librarian Section, Chair Marc Richard, MAUT-Librarian Section, representative Vilma Di Rienzo-Campbell, Associate Director, Legal Services Hudson Meadwell, Associate Provost (Academic Staff) Carole Renahan, Manager, Administration & Personnel - Libraries The following email was sent on October 5, 2005 to the allibrarians listserv, from Prof. Anthony C. Masi, Interim Provost and CIO. I am writing to let you know about progress in our plans to revise Librarian Regulations. A considerable amount of time and effort has been devoted to attempts to change the regulations over the last two years. During the last academic year, a work group composed of John Hobbins, Daniel Boyer, Natalie Waters, Jim Henderson, and Pat Riva undertook extensive work. I am grateful to them for their significant contributions. In order to move ahead more quickly, I have asked the Trenholme Director of Libraries to form a Regulations Committee to examine the valuable work previously done, as well as other material, and take the matter forward to the next phase of review of the Librarian Regulations. The new group consists of Janine Schmidt, Pat Riva, Sharon Rankin, Marc Richards, Robert Clarke, Anna Stoute, Carole Renahan, Vilma Campbell and Hudson Meadwell. The group thus includes representational interests as well as expert knowledge, and will be able to take a fresh look at the issues while building on work conducted in earlier phases. In order to comply with a referral from Senate dealing with the amendments to the current tenure regulations, I have asked the group to complete its work and bring forward recommendations to me by February, 2006. The group will communicate regularly with you and with me about the nature of its deliberations and an opportunity will be made for wider discussion. Corrections and additions: October 13th , 2005 L. Piatti MAUT Librarians Section, Professional Issues Committee. Compiled by Louisa Piatti. Page  PAGE 1. October 2005 )*,d7 ; < c e g r '  T U $ s u  > e j *+  ͻʹܯhApzhih0ahb h_IH* h_I6 h)5 h0ah) h0ahb h0ahApzhzK h0ah_IhKVh) h_I5h_Ihb5h_IB* phhb5h_IB* CJaJph:*+fg6 7 d e ;    = > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!`gdd` & F & FgdZ ^gd0zy>z=gipxTUvgޙ}x h_IH* h_I6 hQ5 h_I5 h 5hf^h 5 hf^h{05hf^hX@0Jhf^hX@0JB*phjhf^hX@U hf^hX@hf^h_I5 hf^h_I hf^ht hf^hd hf^h h{05h)h)H*h)h_I/ Q R T ~ 8!9!J"K""#B$C$D$|$!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!gdZUz`gdApz & FgdX@`gdd"#Q R 8!D$V$Z$|$$$$$I&K&&&(("($(G,I,,,..//0/B/D/E/F/`/b/g/////0 h_I5H*h4hi hQ5 h_I5 h_I6hzKhApzh_IB*ph h0ah) h0ahApzhApzhApzB*phhApzhApzhApzH* h_IH*h_IA|$}$((,,.///0/l/m/0122222P5Q5w9a:e;f;g;;! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! 7$8$H$gdzK` <^<`<^<01'2(2[2\2]222222222222222233_34444446666666797:7999-:8:\:]:^:`:e;g;;hzKhzK5hKV5B* ph h0ah0a h0ahKVhApzhZUz h0ahApz h0ahZUz h0ah_IhzK h_I5\ h_I5H* hQ5 h_I5 h_I0Jjh_IUjh_IUh_I h_IH*3;;;w<<<<<h=k=l====>>W?X?Z?]?v?}??sBuB~BBBBBBBB"C'CMCOCEEEFFFFGGνݹݖݑݑ݊{hyhApz h0ah_I h0ahKV h_IH* h_I6 hRKhRK hi5hRKhRK5 hZ 5 hRK5hRK h_I0Jj h_IUjh_IU h_I6]h_I hQ5 h_I5 hzKhzKhzKhzK5 hzK5-;;;;.<u<v<w<<<>W?X?Y?Z?[?\?]???@@sBtBuBvB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!gdApzgdRK 7$8$H$gdRK` 7$8$H$gdzKvBwBBB'CwCxCtDuDnEoEFF>K?K@KAKcKdKKL:L_L`LaL!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! & FgdQ & Fgdd$a$gdQgdQ ^`GGGGGSHTHHI"I#I0I5IJJ>K@KAKcKdKpKLLL_L`LaLiLjLkLLLMPPºԶԱԭ{skbYbkhy6^JaJh_I6^JaJh_I^JaJhd^JaJhdh_I5 ht5hdhd5 hQ5hdhih @hQhQ5h hQ h_IH*hApzhApzB*ph h0ahApz h0ah_Ihyh_I h0ah0ahyh_I5B* phhyhy5B* ph h0ahy"aLjLkLLLPQQ!SYUWWXXYYYJZKZ\!!!!!!!ddgd`gd 7$8$H$gdH 7$8$H$gdvh 7$8$H$`gdnj`gdH 4`gdH 7$8$H$`gdgd^PQQ RRR%R&RRRRR S!S$S2SSST T!T/Th_6 hHh_hHhH*hHhT5CJaJ hHh hHhthHhH6h^ hHhZ hHhvh hHh20)hZ hvhB* CJOJQJ^JaJphhHhvhOJQJ^JhHhTH* hHhnj hHhThHhHhvhB* ph hZ hnj hZ hd!\\\\\\\L\X\q\\\\\\]]]]]^%_&_``a7a8amanarbsbƾƯ}v}nf^f^fhHh4Hk6hHh/6hHhZ6 hHhhHh6hHh206hHhx6 hHhhZ hZB* phhHhZH* hHhZhHh4Hk5hHhx5hHhZ5hZ h^B* phhT>hZ6B* phhT>h6hT>h_6hT>h_6H*\\\]` asbtbbsc dVdWd|e&g'g^g_gh 7$8$H$gdKJP ^`gd20dd^`gd20 dd^gd4Hk dd^gd/ dd^gd20 dd^gd_ddgdsbtbubbb cd dVdWdeeee*f1ffff%g&g'g6g8g:gCg]g_g`gagֶ|umufu_XPhT>h4Hk6 hT>h4Hk hHh4Q hHhWxhHh4HkH* hHh4HkhZ hZ B* CJaJphhHhZCJaJhHh_CJaJ hHhZ hHh @ hHh_ hZ hZ 6B* CJaJph hHh/hHh4Hk6hHh/6hHh/5hZ h/6B* phhZ h^6B* phag%h&h-h.hjkkkk.l/lFlHlclilklllmlnnnnnnnooo=o>oppʻʴí|qcqVqRhT>h1Rh1R0JB*phjh1Rh1RUjh1Rh1RU h1Rhb5 h1Rh1RhZ h^B* phhT>h^6hT>hx6hT>hT>6 hHhx hHhZ hHhT$-H* hHh4Hk hHhT$- hT>hT>hWx hT>h4Q hT>hKJPhT>hKJP6B* phhT>hKJP6 hhjjakkkllnndpaqqqq-rZrrrs 7$8$H$`gdb5`gd1R`gdT> 7$8$H$`gd4HkgdZ 7$8$H$gdT> 7$8$H$gdZ 7$8$H$`gdZ 7$8$H$gdKJPpcpdpppppq qqq%q:q;q@q`qaqqqrrss5sAsCsDsasdslsossssssssxxYyZy[y\y]y`yÿǻǻǪݦݦݦuh^h1R6CJaJh1R6CJaJhT>hb56hT>h4Q6hT>h^6h4Qhb5h4Q5B* ph h1RhthT>h^ht hththtB* ph hb5ht hb5hb5 hHhZ hHh4Hk hT>hb5 h1Rh1R,sBsCsDsssuuvuvvww[y\y]y^y`yaybycydyeyfygyhy!!!!gd4QH$gd4Qgd4Q`gdZ 7$8$H$gdt 7$8$H$`gdb5`yaybyhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyz z&z'z(z)z*z/z;zB* phh0zB* phhth4QB* phhyyyyyyyyyyyz?z!!!!!$a$$a$`gdZ z?zh_Ih3hAN9 1h/ =!"#$% DyK &http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/yK Lhttp://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/DyK Khttp://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.docyK http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.doc!DyK +http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senateyK Vhttp://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senate@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH H@H Heading 1$@&^`5DA@D Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k(No List HH  Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJ4@4 Header  !4 @4 Footer  !.)@!. Page Number6U@16 Hyperlink >*B*phFVAF FollowedHyperlink >*B* ph@B@R@ _ Body Text x*$1$PJtHB^bB vh Normal (Web)dd[$\$*W@q* X@Strong5\?r*+fg67de;=>  QRT~89JKBCD|}  $$.'/'0'l'm'()*****P-Q-w1a2e3f3g33333.4u4v4w4446W7X7Y7Z7[7\7]77788s:t:u:v:w:::';w;x;t<u<n=o=>>>C?C@CACcCdCCD:D_D`DaDjDkDDDHII!KYMOOPPQQQJRKRTTTUX YsZtZZs[ \V\W\|]&_'_^___``bbacccldffdhaiiii-jZjjjkBkCkDkkkumvmnnoo[q\q]q^q`qaqbqcqdqeqfqgqhqqqqqqqqqqq>YMO|]&_baccldfZjjBkCkkkumvmnnoo]q^q`q@r^>008^>00^>00?^>00^>00^~00^~00^>008?^~00^>00^>00^>0 08D^>0 0^>0 00^>00>00@0@0@0@0@0@0@0>0080>00>000>00>0(0@0@0@00?00?0>0%0>00>00>0-0>0-000@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0R0;GPVACEFIKLMOPRTV|$;vBaL\hshy?z?BDGHJNQSU>z@T'*\**k556fg=g?rXXXXipr!8@0(  B S  ? _Hlt89156060 _Hlt89156061 _Hlt116980067 _Hlt116980068 OLE_LINK155gg0o@r@@@@55 g go@r9PPPP!P !PL!P!P!P!P!PL"P"P"P"P<"P|"P\"P"P"P"P\"P"P"P"P"P"P"P$"Pd"PD "P "PD "P "P "P "P "P "P "P, "P "P|"P$"P"P\"P"P"P"Pl"P"PT"P"P"P"P "P"P"P4"d i3 T~4 X'...12234w7;;;E;==>??@ABrDDPQST*\L\j_cLdVdfhjjdk o oq@r      !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345678nz ; !f7 g'../122347;!;!;T;==>?@@"AB}DDPQ TT7\T\n_cSdcdfijjsk&o&oq@r  !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345678>8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName8 *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagstime87*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsdate99*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplaceB$*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity %0110111213141516191974220200020012002200320042005222425262729330374569DayHourMinuteMonthYear987# $ 88887$ #7$ #7# $87$ #7$ #7$ #87$ #88889$7$ # 87$ #97$ #7$ #88887# $87$ #7$ #7$ #7$ #7$ #7# $7$ #88 !" !" !"87# $7$ #97$ #97# $ ENF4O44L;LLL^MeMOObbib>fDfgggggggggg]hahjjjjjjjjjj kk{kkllnno o oo'o/oq=r@r{.424#9'90:<::";EFOPX[Z[ggh&hqqqqr)r=r@r333333333333+>KD)*.4w4468w::';D8GOOPZt[fgqqqqqqr)r/r;r=r@r'**k56qq=r@rh)JALrĠbfM&737zb4b{j$^^`.77^7`.RR^R`.nn^n`.^`.^`.^`.^`.  ^ `.^`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHopp^p`OJQJo(hH@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoPP^P`OJQJo(hH808^8`0o( ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.`^``o(`^``o(-`^``o(-.`^``o(-.. `^``o( -... `^``o( -.... `^``o( -..... `^``o(-...... ^`o(-....... ^` 5o( 88^8`hH. L^`LhH.   ^ `hH.   ^ `hH. xLx^x`LhH. HH^H`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.`^``o(`^``o(-`^``o(-.`^``o(-.. `^``o( -... `^``o( -.... `^``o( -..... `^``o(-...... ^`o(-.......Lr37zfMb{h)Lz        ƇM                 A9 fz4yKdd u}i_9C8@n:H_)@n:fz4@n:yKdd ]#>fz4RFA9 jRfz4^~S@n:cdA9ppfz4p8{fz4(|@n: q~@n:>=^2 4QT>RKZvhnjF3 T$-3{05b5AN9 @X@AzKKJP1R Wf^0aacdSe4HkWxZUzApzd|T@yilb]t 4KVx ) b$*H!^G/0z-~_I20QZ _@?r@@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial?5 z Courier New5& zaTahomaI& ??Arial Unicode MS;Wingdings"qh20l%l O`:`:!4d|q|qL3QH?yTimeline for the Regs Lawref $      Oh+'0  8 D P \hpxTimeline for the Regs imeLawrefeawrawrNormale rm9rmMicrosoft Word 10.0@B @~n5@@e7`՜.+,D՜.+,\ hp  ۲ݮƵ University Libraries:|q Timeline for the Regs Title P _PID_HLINKS_AdHocReviewCycleID_EmailSubject _AuthorEmail_AuthorEmailDisplayName_PreviousAdHocReviewCycleID_ReviewingToolsShownOnceAt0~ +http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senateiKhttp://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.docA&http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/1http://upload.mcgill.ca/secretariat/Greybook.pdfrTimeline for the regs filesharon.rankin@mcgill.caSharon RankinmcXhar  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWYZ[\]^_abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry Fπ7Data X1Table`QWordDocument"SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjj  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qRoot Entry F@xs7@Data X1Table`QWordDocument"  _PID_HLINKS_AdHocReviewCycleID_EmailSubject _AuthorEmail_AuthorEmailDisplayName_PreviousAdHocReviewCycleID_ReviewingToolsShownOnceAt0~ +http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/38/03/senateiKhttp://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/librarian_regulations_final_draft.docA&http://www.library.mcgill.ca/mautlib/1http://upload.mcgill.ca/secretariat/Greybook.pdfKrTimeline for regs Oct 13thlouisa.piatti@mcgill.caLouisa PiattiSummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjj  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q՜.+,D՜.+,\ hp  ۲ݮƵ University Libraries:|q Timeline for the Regs Title<H