UW's library expects to cut "eight to ten" people from its 180-member staff by next year, and eliminate some of its services. Layoffs of library staff are likely. University librarian Murray Shepherd broke the news to his department in general meetings Thursday morning. "We'll have to stop doing things that are not central to the mission of the library . . . eliminate nonessential functions," he said. Shepherd said his hope is that "the quality of what is left will be maintained," but clearly the library won't be able to provide all its existing services. He said the necessary cuts are the result of financial constraints that are being felt all over campus. Every other department is going through similar pain as it tries to cut spending -- by an average of 6 per cent over the three years between 1992 and 1995. But the library becomes the first department to say clearly that some staff are likely to be let go. The warning conforms to this year's university-wide staff salary agreement, which included a promise of no layoffs before the end of the 1992-93 fiscal year, Shepherd said. He stopped a little way short of saying definitely that people will be let go from the library. A task force will work from now through January to see what budget cuts are possible. Shepherd said he will take its recommendations -- which could include the specifics of what library functions and jobs will be eliminated -- to top UW officials for their approval. The need, he said, is to cut $325,000 from the library's operating budget of about $7.5 million by the time the new fiscal year starts on May 1. The budget for books and other materials being added to the library, about $4.4 million, is not affected. Shepherd said he tries to avoid the word "layoffs" because that seems to imply that the people who lose their jobs may be called back later, as in a factory where shifts come and go, but that isn't the case. "This is not a short-term problem," he said. "It's gotten more critical since the beginning of the recession, and it's going to continue for two more years and likely beyond that." If any jobs in the library are eliminated, the staff involved will be protected by the usual UW policies, says associate provost (general services) Bob Elliott. He told the Gazette that Policy 18, in particular, "applies to all staff". That policy provides for a notice period that varies with how long the individual has worked at UW -- six months for a 10-year employee and 12 months for a 22-year employee, for example. During the notice period, the individual gets a preferential chance at any UW job that comes open for which he or she is qualified. Elliott said there have been no layoff notices during UW's current budget-cutting, and he is not aware of any that are expected soon. "We would certainly do our best to find jobs elsewhere in the university for any library staff whose jobs were eliminated," agreed Dr. Jim Kalbfleisch, associate provost (academic affairs). He is the senior UW official to whom the library reports. But, Kalbfleisch added, jobs elsewhere in the university are difficult to find in hard times. The library is actually short about $515,000 for the coming year, Shepherd told his staff, but a few people are scheduled to retire, for a saving of $190,000, leaving a $325,000 gap. "The significance of that is eight to ten positions -- people presently employed in the library," he said. He said the cuts will have to be made based on the priorities for library activities. Jobs could be combined, and people will look for more efficient ways to do things -- "some redesign of systems to reduce the number of staff performing routine transactions". He added, "More people will be doing more different things," and promised adequate training for staff who find themselves with added, unfamiliar responsibilities. There is no real chance of saving money from non-salary expenditures, Shepherd said, since the library spends 94 per cent of its budget on salaries. Much of the rest goes for such purchases as shelves, computer terminals, book carts and other basic equipment. At Thursday's meeting, library staff asked whether there are alternatives to layoffs, such as job sharing, reduced work weeks and early retirements. Any early retirement "certainly would help", Shepherd agreed, saying that suggestions about other kinds of cost-cutting will certainly be considered by the task force. He encouraged library staff to pass any suggestions along to their own department heads or to task force members, who include top library management, three other department heads, and the chair of the library's Staff Advisory Council. In answer to a question, he said that about half the budget shortfall would be made up if none of the library's staff members accepted a 1993 pay increase -- but "in fairness, I would require unanimity on that: every man and woman in the library." If just the department heads turned down their 1993 raises, the saving should be about $30,000, enough to preserve one position, he added. Another possibility is to close the library for a week, probably in August, and give everybody a week of unpaid vacation, for a saving of $134,000. Again, "I think it would have to be unanimous," Shepherd said. There's nothing to prevent individuals from taking unpaid leave as a way of saving money, he said -- nothing except the need for the work to get done, which means that managers within the library sometimes have to say no to such requests. Shepherd was asked why the prospect of layoffs now faces the library, in spite of frequent assurances from top UW management that everything possible will be done to cut the budget in other ways. The central problem, he said, is that the attrition -- turnover -- rate in the library has dropped to just about zero. Two years ago it was 9.8 per cent, last year 5.3 per cent, but this year less than 1 per cent: almost no staff are leaving. Without that turnover, there's no flexibility to eliminate positions without layoffs, he said.