ARL Annual Salary Survey 1999-2000




INTRODUCTION

The ARL Annual Salary Survey 1999-2000 reports salary data for all professional staff working in ARL libraries. The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) represents the interests of 121 libraries that serve major North American research institutions.1 The Association operates as a forum for the exchange of ideas and as an agent for collective action to influence forces affecting the ability of these libraries to meet the future needs of scholarship. The ARL Statistics and Measurement program, which produces the salary survey, is organized around collecting, analyzing, and distributing quantifiable information describing the characteristics of research libraries. The ARL Annual Salary Survey is the most comprehensive and thorough guide to current salaries in large U.S. and Canadian academic and research libraries, and is a valuable management and research tool.

Data for 8,595 professional staff members were reported this year for the 111 ARL university libraries, including their law and medical libraries (814 staff members reported by 69 medical libraries and 660 staff members reported by 72 law libraries). For the 10 nonuniversity ARL members, data were reported for 3,737 professional staff members.

This year's publication has been re-organized to include four new tables and provide a separate U.S. section. All the tables published in prior years are also included, but some renumbering had to be done to accommodate the addition of four new tables. A detailed appendix mapping this year's table-numbering scheme in relation to last year's is included at the end of the book.

The tables are organized in seven major sections. The first section includes Tables 1 through 4 which report salary figures for all professionals working in ARL member libraries, including law and medical library data. The second section includes salary information for the 10 nonuniversity research libraries of ARL. The third section, entitled "ARL University Libraries" reports data in Tables 7 through 25 for the "general" library system of the university ARL members, combining U.S. and Canadian data but excluding law and medical data. The fourth section, composed of Tables 26 through 30, reports data on U.S. ARL university library members excluding law and medical data; the fifth section, Tables 31-34, reports data on Canadian ARL university libraries in Canadian dollars excluding law and medical data. The sixth section, Tables 35-41, reports data on medical libraries, and the seventh section, Tables 42-48, reports on law libraries combining U.S. and Canadian data.

The university population is generally treated in three distinct groups: staff in the "general" library system, staff in the university medical libraries, and staff in the university law libraries. All branch libraries for which data were received, other than law and medical, are included in the "general" category, whether or not those libraries are administratively independent. Footnotes for many institutions provide information on branch inclusion or exclusion.

Most tables show Canadian salaries converted into U.S. dollar equivalents at the rate of 1.5103 Canadian dollars per U.S. dollar.2 Tables 4 , and 31 through 34, however, pertain exclusively to staff in Canadian university libraries, so salary data in those tables are expressed in Canadian dollars.

RACE AND ETHNICITY

There were 893 minority professional staff reported in 98 U.S. ARL university libraries, including law and medical--39 more than last year,3 the largest increase in the number of minority professionals in recent years. Note that the data for minority professionals comes only from the U.S. ARL university libraries following the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) definitions; Canadian law prohibits the identification of Canadians by ethnic category.

The Office of Management and Budget has revised the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity4 and according to the new standard there will be five minimum categories for data on race (American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White) and two categories for data on ethnicity ("Hispanic or Latino" and "Not Hispanic or Latino"). Respondents will be able to report more than one race by choosing multiple categories in response to the race question; repondents also will be able to choose the ethnicity category "Hispanic or Latino" and choose one or more race categories. The new standards will be used by the Bureau of the Census in the 2000 decennial census. Other Federal programs will adopt the standards as soon as possible, but not later than 1 January 2003, for use in household surveys, administrative forms and records, and other data collections. In light of these developments, the ARL Annual Salary Survey collected optional data based on these new definitions for the first time this year.

Seventy-one libraries provided complete or partial data on the new optional categories regarding race and ethnicity, reporting data for a total of 4,202 professionals. Only 47 out of the 4,202 professionals (1%) selected multiple race/ethnicity categories, half of which (21 professionals) were in the combined category of White Hispanic.

Currently, minority staff make up 11.4% of the professional staff in U.S. ARL university libraries (including law and medical). The number of minorities in managerial or administrative positions in the largest U.S. academic libraries is even lower: 5.1% are directors (5 out of 98), 6.5% are associate or assistant directors (23 out of 354), and 10.5% are branch librarians (50 out of 475). The overall racial/ethnic distribution of professional staff in U.S. ARL university libraries is: Caucasian/Other 88.6%, Asian/Pacific Islander 5%, Black 4.1%, Hispanic 2.1%, and American Indian/Native Alaskan .2% (see Graph 1). Recent race and ethnicity data from the American Library Association (ALA) on academic libraries show that the sample of academic libraries surveyed by ALA has a higher representation of Blacks, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and American Indian/Alaskan Native than ARL libraries.5

ARL U.S. university libraries have a lower proportion of Asians/Pacific Islanders (.5 less) but more Blacks (.4) and Hispanics (.3) compared to last year. Wilder had noted that ARL professionals of Asian ethnic background are likely to be reduced in numbers over the coming years because of retirements, as they tend to be older than their colleagues of other ethnicities.6

Minority professional staff in U.S. ARL university libraries continues to be disproportionately distributed across the country. In Figure 1, we can compare the number of minority staff with other staff, region by region. These patterns of distribution have been relatively stable for the entire history of ARL's data-collection experience. Minorities are underrepresented in the East South Central, New England, West North Central, West South Central, Mountain, and East North Central regions (see Table 25 for a definition of the regions). Proportionately to other regions, there are more minorities in the Pacific, South Atlantic, and Middle Atlantic areas.

 

Figure 1

MINORITY PROFESSIONALS BY REGION (U.S.)

IN ARL UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES, FY 1999-2000

Race/Ethnicity Category

New England

Middle Atlantic

E North Central

W North Central

South Atlantic

East S Central

West S Central

Mountain

Pacific

TOTAL

%

Black

20

55

52

24

102

16

18

7

27

321

35.95%

Hispanic

16

22

18

5

26

1

21

19

36

164

18.37%

Asian

42

77

71

13

53

3

25

17

94

395

44.23%

AI/NA

2

4

2

2

3

13

1.46%

                     

Minority Total

78

156

145

44

181

20

64

45

160

893

100.00%

Regional Percent of Minority Total

8.73%

17.47%

16.24%

4.93%

20.27%

2.24%

7.17%

5.04%

17.92%

100.00%

11.4%

                     

Nonminority Total

902

1,092

1,242

486

1,150

308

538

406

841

6,965

Regional Percent of Nonminority Total

12.95%

15.68%

17.83%

6.98%

16.51%

4.42%

7.72%

5.83%

12.07%

100.00%

88.6%

                     

Regional Percent

Total staff

12.47%

15.88%

17.65%

6.74%

16.94%

4.17%

7.66%

5.74%

12.74%

100.00%

100.00%

                     

Proportional Minority

                   

Representation

-32.55%

11.42%

-8.94%

-29.39%

22.76%

-49.35%

-7.22%

-13.55%

48.39%

 

 

ARL recognizes the difficulties that the profession has in attracting a diverse workforce and continues to work actively in the development of workplace climates that embrace diversity. The ARL Diversity Program focuses on issues surrounding work relationships in libraries while considering the impact of diversity on library services, interactions with library users, and the development of collections.7

Women comprise 71.56% of staff in the four racial/ethnic groups that comprise minority staff, as compared to 63.76% of Caucasian/Other staff in all U.S. ARL university libraries. The overall gender balance in the 111 Canadian and U.S. university libraries (including law and medical) is 35.35% male and 64.65% female. See Figure 1, above, and Figure 2, below, for more detail on race/ethnic and gender distribution.

 

Figure 2

RACE/ETHNICITY AND SEX DISTRIBUTION OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF

IN ARL UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES FY 1999-2000

United States

 

Men

Women

Total

 

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

 

Main

2,388

36.84%

4,094

63.16%

6,482

Medical

188

25.20%

558

74.80%

746

Law

202

32.06%

428

67.94%

630

           

Minority

254

28.44%

639

71.56%

893

Non-minority

2,524

36.24%

4,441

63.76%

6,965

           

All

2,778

35.35%

5,080

64.65%

7,858

 

Canada

 

Men

Women

Total

 

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

 

Main

213

33.33%

426

66.67%

639

Medical

11

16.18%

57

83.82%

68

Law

13

43.33%

17

56.67%

30

All

237

32.16%

500

67.84%

737

 

United States and Canada (Combined)

 

Men

Women

Total

 

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

Number of Staff

Percent of Total

 

Main

2,601

36.53%

4,520

63.47%

7,121

Medical

199

24.45%

615

75.55%

814

Law

215

32.58%

445

67.42%

660

All

3,015

35.08%

5,580

64.92%

8,595

 

GENDER DATA

Many readers of previous surveys have inquired about evidence of gender-based salary differentials in ARL libraries. Data on salary comparisons for directors also are frequently requested. It is perhaps noteworthy that the average salary for female directors in university libraries is slightly higher than the average salary for male directors (see Table 17) for the fourth consecutive year. Many new hires have occurred in the last few years, contributing to the largest number of women in the top administrative library position (54 women directors out of 111 total directorships reported this year) and higher salaries for women directors of ARL libraries.

Looking at other job categories, though, as Table 17 demonstrates, average salaries for men in most cases still surpass those of women in the same job category. For nine categories (of the 27 used in the tables) do average salaries of women exceed those of men. Moreover, the overall salary for women is still only 94% that of men for the 111 ARL university libraries (93% for 98 ARL university libraries reporting data throughout the salary survey history). Table 18 provides average years of professional experience for many of the same staffing categories for which salary data are shown in Table 17. An inspection of data in Table 18 reveals that experience differentials between men and women cannot account fully for all of the salary differentials evident in Table 17. Table 19 further reveals that the average salary for men is consistently higher than the average salary for women in every one of the experience cohorts. This pattern is also repeated for minority librarians: the average salary for minority men is higher than that for minority women in nine of the ten experience cohorts (see Table 30).

Looking at the salaries over a longer period of time and holding constant the number of libraries over a 19-year period (Figure 3), we can see that women are gradually closing the earnings gap across different job categories, but the process is very slow. Women earned more than men in two job categories (Head of Documents and Circulation) in 1980-81; in 1989-90 women earned more than men in four job categories (Director, Functional Specialist, Head of Serials, and Head of Documents); most recently, in 1999-2000, women earned more than men in five job categories (Director, Head of Reference, Head of Circulation, Head of Computer Systems, and Cataloger). Overall, women earned the equivalent of 87% of men's salaries in 1980-81, 90% in 1989-90, and 93% in 1999-2000.

 

Figure 3

SALARY DIFFERENTIALS FOR MEN AND WOMEN FROM 1980-81 TO 1999-2000

(reporting data for 98 ARL university libraries)

1980-81

1989-90

1999-2000

Job Category

Women

Men

Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio

Women

Men

Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio

Women

Men

Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio

Mean

Mean

Mean

Mean

Mean

Mean

Director

$44,872

$48,128

93%

$89,598

$88,473

101%

$132,068

$125,211

105%

Associate Director

34,251

37,001

93%

56,982

59,193

96%

78,230

81,230

96%

Assistant Director

28,975

31,776

91%

50,074

52,869

95%

71,361

75,308

95%

Head, Medical

33,941

36,752

92%

64,064

64,792

99%

90,116

101,369

89%

Head, Law

36,839

40,248

92%

71,114

81,193

88%

108,777

119,938

91%

Head, Branch

22,671

24,946

91%

38,863

43,124

90%

55,689

61,346

91%

Functional Specialist

20,218

22,212

91%

34,588

33,870

102%

45,701

45,907

100%

Subject Specialist

21,034

21,820

96%

34,406

37,680

91%

49,038

51,529

95%

Head, Acquisitions

N/A

N/A

N/A

37,738

39,311

96%

51,355

53,345

96%

Head, Reference

22,956

24,257

95%

39,083

40,663

96%

55,802

55,004

101%

Head, Cataloging

23,659

24,315

97%

38,373

42,998

89%

54,079

54,768

99%

Head, Serials

21,557

21,768

99%

38,487

37,949

101%

50,625

55,498

91%

Head, Documents

21,830

21,293

103%

38,348

36,796

104%

50,005

51,491

97%

Head, Circulation

20,942

20,731

101%

33,270

35,385

94%

51,075

45,873

111%

Head, Rare books

21,979

27,138

81%

37,881

46,583

81%

56,653

65,988

86%

Head, Computer Systems

N/A

N/A

N/A

42,488

45,923

93%

61,234

60,185

102%

Head, Other

21,725

23,981

91%

37,626

41,035

92%

52,494

56,575

93%

Public services

18,004

18,950

95%

30,803

32,153

96%

41,217

41,988

98%

Technical services

18,163

18,668

97%

32,294

33,149

97%

43,536

44,469

98%

Administration

20,249

21,148

96%

35,172

35,943

98%

47,353

51,705

92%

Reference librarian

N/A

N/A

N/A

31,327

32,030

98%

42,726

43,389

98%

Cataloger

N/A

N/A

N/A

31,045

31,882

97%

44,336

43,790

101%

TOTAL

$20,329

$23,492

87%

$35,694

$39,864

90%

$50,429

$54,052

93%

 

Graph 2 shows the annual female-to-male earnings ratio since 1980-81. Female directors have closed the earnings gap, but women overall are still being paid less than men. The gender gap in salaries is closing slowly in ARL libraries.

There is also a sense that the gender gap persists in academe in areas beyond the library and that a renewed commitment to resolve the problem is needed.8 A variety of reasons have been offered as to why these trends persist, most notably the perception that work is peripheral in a woman's life and, consequently, female-dominated professions are undervalued. Librarianship is predominantly and persistently a woman's profession. The scarcity of men in the profession has been well documented in many studies-the largest percent of men employed in ARL libraries was 38.2% in 1980-81; since then men have consistently represented about 35% of the professional staff in ARL libraries.

INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND SALARIES

A. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS

Salaries in private U.S. ARL university libraries continue to exceed those paid in publicly supported U.S. university libraries. In FY 1999-2000, the differential has slightly declined, compared to last year, to $2,181, or 4.2%, more for the average position in a private institution. In a few cases-Heads of Acquisitions, Serials, Government Documents/Maps, and Circulation, and Reference Librarians with over 14 years of experience-do average salaries in the public sector exceed those paid for similar positions in private university libraries (see Table 21).

B. LIBRARY SIZE

Size of the library, as measured by the number of professional staff, is another significant determinant of salary. As a rule, the largest libraries pay the highest average salaries, not only overall, but for specific positions as well. The cutoff staffing levels used to determine the largest cohort of libraries has declined since 1995-96, indicating a general trend towards downsizing in the largest cohort of libraries.9 For the first time this year, the second largest cohort of libraries, with staff levels between 75 and 110, has the highest average salary, $52,961, compared to $52,799 for the largest cohort, with staff over 110. Libraries with staff of 50-74 professionals paid an average salary of $50,167 and those with staff between 24 and 49 paid $48,901. The difference in salaries between the highest paying cohort and the lowest paying cohort is $4,060, a smaller difference compared to last year's of $4,427 (see Table 23).

C. GEOGRAPHIC AREA

The highest salaries are found in the Pacific area (see Table 25), followed by New England and, the Middle Atlantic. All three areas have overall average salaries higher than $50,000, with the Pacific area averaging as high as $58,605. Canadian salaries are the lowest; Canada's currency has had a declining purchasing power against the U.S. dollar since the early '90s (Table 4). Note that the Canadian dollar has hit new lows (1.5103 Canadian dollars to one U.S. dollar).10 Within the U.S., salaries in the West South Central region are the lowest, followed by the East South Central, and West North Central, and South Atlantic areas.

D. RANK STRUCTURE

Rank structure continues to provide a useful framework for examining professional salaries in ARL university libraries. The following table displays average salary and years of experience in the most commonly used rank structures. Readers should be aware that not all individuals have a rank that fits into the rank structure the library utilizes. Most commonly, directors may have no rank or a rank outside the structure, and it is common for nonlibrarians included in the survey (business officers, personnel staff, computer specialists, etc.) to be unranked as well.

The pattern of relationships between rank and salary seen in past years continues with the present report where higher rank is associated with higher average years of experience and a higher salary. Over 65% (5,631 professionals) of the 8,595 librarians in ARL university member libraries occupy a rank within these three most commonly found ranking systems. And the largest number of librarians (3,312 or 38.5%) occupies a rank in a four-step rank structure.

 

Figure 4

Average Salaries and Average Years of Experience of Library Professionals

In Libraries with Three, Four, and Five Step Rank Structures

Three-Step

Four-Step

Five-Step

Salary

Experience

Salary

Experience

Salary

Experience

Librarian 1

37,970

9.6

36,125

5.9

36,071

5.2

Librarian 2

46,783

17.5

42,208

12.4

42,635

13.1

Librarian 3

62,194

22.7

50,432

19.5

48,390

17.5

Librarian 4

   

62,222

24.4

60,447

21.1

Librarian 5

     

65,643

25.8

No. of Staff

1,360

3,312

959

 

INFLATION EFFECT

Tables 2 and 6 reveal changes in beginning professional and median salaries, as well as changes in the U.S. Bureau of Labor's Cost of Living Index (CPI-U) for university and nonuniversity research libraries. Table 3 is similar to Table 2 but reports data only on U.S. libraries. Table 4 shows trend data for Canadian libraries and compares them to the Canadian Consumer Price Index changes. Tables 2, 3, and 4 include law and medical library staff in ARL university libraries. All tables indicate that the purchasing power of professionals working in ARL libraries increased faster than inflation.

The median salary for all ARL libraries was $47,377 in 1999-2000; for only U.S. ARL libraries it was $48,000; and for Canadian ARL libraries it was $41,316 converted at the rate of 1.5103 Canadian to U.S. dollars (that is a median of $62,400 Canadian dollars).

Table 6 reveals that the median salary for nonuniversity staff has increased about 7% in the last year. The median salary for combined U.S. and Canadian salaries increased 3.4% (Table 2); for U.S. salaries 4.1% (Table 3), and for Canadian salaries denominated in Canadian dollars 2.4% (Table 4). At the same time, the U.S. Consumer Price Index increased only 2.1% in the last year and the Canadian Consumer Price Index increased only 1.8%.

These increases indicate a 15.3% increase in the purchasing power of the median U.S. salary in university libraries and a 10.2% increase in the purchasing power of the median nonuniversity salary since 1984-85.

Beginning salaries have increased even faster, gaining 17.5% and 16.5% for university and nonuniversity salaries respectively. The median beginning salary in ARL university libraries is $31,100; in ARL nonuniversity research libraries it is $30,849.

A likely explanation for these rapid salary increases is that libraries are in need of hiring professionals with advanced technological skills and the demand for these skills is pushing salaries up. At the same time, as people are hired with increasingly higher salaries, a need to adjust the overall salary structure to achieve some equity for the experienced staff members is another factor contributing to salaries increasing faster than inflation. This combined with other evidence from the ARL Statistics, which shows that libraries' proportion of materials expenditures is increasing faster, leads to a future picture of libraries with fewer staff members that are being paid higher salaries.

Readers are reminded that these data reflect only salaries, and that there are other compensation issues, which may have influenced the pattern of salaries in various institutions. In addition, a highly standardized structure for capturing data has been used, which may portray results in a way that cannot be fully representative of a local situation.

Martha Kyrillidou
Association of Research Libraries
28 January, 2000


Footnotes

  1. George Washington University became an ARL member in 1998 and this year, its salary survey data are included in the publication for the first time. Linda Hall is not a member of ARL, as of 2000, and is not included in this year's publication.
  2. This is the average monthly noon exchange rate published in the Bank of Canada Review for the period July 1998-June 1999.
  3. Ten of these 39 are from the new ARL member library.
  4. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html
  5. Mary Jo Lynch, "Librarians' Salaries Smaller Increases This Year," American Libraries (November 1998): 68, http://www.ala.org/alaorg/ors/racethnc.html.
  6. Stanley J. Wilder, The Age Demographics of Academic Librarians: a Profession Apart (Washington: Association of Research Libraries, 1995): 46-47.
  7. For more information on the ARL Diversity Program see http://www.arl.org/diversity/.
  8. Yolanda Moses, "Salaries in Academe: The Gender Gap Persists," Chronicle of Higher Education (12 December, 1997): A60.
  9. In 1995-96, the largest cohort of libraries was determined based on staff over 124; in 1996-98, over 120; in 1998-99, over 115; and, this year, over 110. See Table 23.
  10. This is the average monthly noon exchange rate published in the Bank of Canada Review for the period July 1998-June 1999 and is used in converting 1999-2000 figures that are collected as of July 1999.

Table of Contents



[Image: ARLlogo button]

ARL Statistics and Measurement Program Home | ARL Home


Maintained by ARL Web Administrator
 © Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC