ACRL College & Researc Libraries News

Association of College & Research Libraries

Inside Washington

Christopher Wright Assistant Director ALA Washington Office

With the coming of hot weather the subject of sex has arisen repeatedly in the sober deliberations of librarians, professors, and the government. On every occasion the topic was viewed with disfavor.

In the same four-week period: the president of Harvard University informed his alumni of the “dispiriting implications” of current university policies toward women; the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare issued a nine-page proposed regulation banning sex discrimination in academic institutions from nursery school to medical school; the American Library Association came within one vote of banning “pronouns denoting masculine gender to describe the membership at large”; and the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education issued a report written by a former Princeton dean criticizing government-imposed affirmative action programs in the academic world.

For librarians and library administrators the most significant of these events will be the publication of the proposed regulation by HEW which would implement for the first time the sex discrimination prohibition in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.1 Printed in the Federal Register on June 20, the regulation calls for an end to discrimination by sex in the employment and admissions policies of all institutions which accept federal assistance with the exception of certain traditionally one-sex places such as military academies, parochial schools, and small colleges.

Among other things, the proposed regulation could affect certain fringe benefits as they apply to women librarians. For instance, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act calls for equal periodic benefits or employee contributions to members of each sex in fringe benefit plans. But in the area of life insurance, the preface to the proposed rules points out, “assuming different life spans at particular ages between the sexes, and assuming equal contributions by all employees, Title VII implicitly requires payment of higher employer contributions for, and the possibility of higher total benefits received by, women.” The proposed regulation suggests alternative benefit schemes.

In addition the proposed regulation addresses itself to the question of fringe benefits such as health and retirement programs for part-time employees. “The Secretary will interpret the section concerning fringe benefits (§86.46) to require, where an institution’s female permanent employees are disproportionately part- time or its permanent part-time employees are disproportionately female, and the institution does not provide its permanent part-time employees fringe benefits proportionate to those provided full-time employees, that the institution demonstrate that such a manner of providing benefits does not discriminate on the basis of sex.”

The regulation would also apply to admissions and fellowship policies of library schools and to faculty hiring and promotion practices. While the large number of women enrolled in library education programs would seem to make this an unlikely field for male prejudice, Anita Schiller and other researchers have demonstrated the scarcity of women in faculty and administrative positions in the field.² With this in mind, library school deans should read the proposed rules with a careful eye.

Further, HEW would prohibit discrimination based on “such matters as marital or parental status” and “pregnancy and related conditions.” Presumably this would protect the father of ten who wanted to go to library school as well as the pregnant professor whose tenure was in question.

As President Derek Bok told the Harvard alumni, “The underlying issues are sensitive. They call into question familiar traditions and practices within the University. They sometimes provoke a passion and a rhetoric that arouse resentment in many listeners. But there is no denying the importance of the topic or the need to grapple seriously with the problems that are raised.”³

One man who has grappled with the problems of sex discrimination and the government’s attempt to promote affirmative action programs is Richard A. Lester, Princeton economist and former dean of the faculty. Lester has just completed a report to be published this month by the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education titled Anti-Bias Regulation of Universities: Faculty Problems and Their Solutions.⁴ The report is reputed to be sharply critical of some aspects of the government’s affirmative action efforts.

The Lester report would seem to be useful reading for librarians and library educators who should be carefully studying the proposed HEW regulation. The government is actively seeking suggestions or objections to the proposed rules. Comments should be sent before October 15 to: Peter Holmes, Director, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, P.O. Box 2974, Washington, DC 20013.

In addition, copies of comments would be appreciated by ALA’s Washington Office.

Notes

1. Proposed Regulation: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex (45 CFR Part 86), Federal Register, 20 June 1974, p.22227-40.
2. Anita R. Schiller, Characteristics of Professional Personnel in College and University Libraries (Springfield, 111.: Illinois State Library, 1969).
3. Derek C. Bok, Remarks prepared for delivery at the annual meeting of the Associated Harvard Alumni in Tercentary Theatre, Harvard Yard, June 12, 1974.
4. Richard A. Lester, Anti-Bias Regulation of Universities: Faculty Problems and Their Solutions (Berkeley, Calif.: Carnegie Commission on Higher Education; New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974).