Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify the best approaches management should embrace to successfully attract and retain high quality human resource talent within the Niagara region's hospitality industry.

A selected cross‐section of relevant and recent publications are reviewed. The key findings from a mini survey involving 14 senior hospitality managers in the Niagara region are shared.

This paper suggests that the hospitality managers should: understand the basics related to good human resource management practices; know the “fair market value” for each position; foster relationships with colleges and universities to tap into student labor; encourage mature workers to apply for part‐time work; and cultivate a good relationship with seasonal employees and educate them on the rewards of a career within the hospitality industry. Through the industry survey, it was discovered that hospitality managers within the Niagara region are already executing some of these strategies. However, it was concluded that a stronger working relationship with the seasonal employees is required in the region.

Two academics with hotel general manager experience in five countries join hands with the president for three four‐diamond hotels to write this paper. Given the background of the authors, it is expected that the viewpoints would be welcomed by hospitality managers.

ELSEWHERE in this number we list libraries which have Esent us copies of their annual reports which we are glad to have. Now and again we are able to elaborate on these, but in the present issue that has not been possible. We would say, however, that these reports are deserving of the attention of librarians generally, and of students at the library schools. They are records of work in progress, and they do suggest the development of library policy. The best of them are of textbook value.

LIBRARIANS in Britain stand at the threshold of great possibilities. Having passed through the ages of the ecclesiastical library, the rich collector's private library, the academic institutional library, and the rate‐supported public library—all general libraries —they have reached the age of the special library. The next will be that of the co‐ordinated, co‐operative library service.

The correspondence recently in the T.L.S., rising from a reader's failure to get a certain work of fiction from a branch library in a great city, raised once again the charge that the public librarian was a censor, an office for which, it was indignantly assumed, he had neither capacity nor authority. The subsequent letters reiterated the arguments with which every experienced librarian is only too familiar: that public librarians operate with limited funds and “select” books of which they know their readers have need. They cannot provide every book. It is always fiction that raises this hubbub from the reader who assumes that he should be provided with anything his fancy suggests at the expense of his fellow ratepayers, many of whom may greatly dislike the book in question. As Mr. O'Leary, in his part of the symposium wrote, any form of censorship may not only be wrong ; it may be fatuous. The whole history of literature indicates that. But librarians are trusted by the community to give what is best to the greatest number of people and, if they do not stock particular books, this, as another correspondent points out, is not censorship if the book can be got through any bookseller or at the subscription libraries, although the latter were compelled to experiment some years ago with a form of exclusion. That is not unreasonable seeing that thousands of readers come upon books as it were by accident and are often displeased at what they find ; and it is useless, to be quite practical, to point out that no one need read a book he finds to be offensive, and all should at least try to determine the character of any book they intend to read. Obviously, as we have long known, the question is complicated and these and many other factors have to be borne in mind in practice.

WE do not apologize for devoting space this month to the Scottish Government Report on Libraries. It is, as our writers affirm, an important document and many themes for debate may emerge from it. If a reading circle of young librarians were formed in any district it could consider this document page by page with much profit. It is, for an official document, interesting in style. It starts many old ideas, it has the verve and certainty which we look for in the amateur rather than the professional writer. To some of its statements, for example its assertion that “libraries have reached or are approaching a temporary limit to their usefulness, because the schools have not yet given adequate training in the use and power of books,” librarians may well ask “why?” in relation to the second part of this statement; and they certainly refuse to admit or believe the first part of it. In fact, the use of libraries in such universal manner is largely the result of the work of modern libraries for children. The librarian teaches children what to read. We have not reached any such limit as is affirmed ; we are indeed only on the margin of our possibilities.

IN The verdict of you all, Rupert Croft‐Cooke has some uncomplimentary things to say about novel readers as a class, which is at least an unusual look at his public by a practitioner whose income for many years was provided by those he denigrates.

THE summer is not a good time for writing editorials. In the first place it has been too warm, but more particularly, no matter how hot the topic at the time of writing, it will be cold as mutton before it eventually reaches its readers. Secondly our thoughts seem to have been devoted to anything except libraries: a little light reading perhaps, or a gentle discussion of next season's lecture programme? So now, not an editorial proper (or improper), but some editorial miscellany, beginning with the late but unregretted printing dispute. The LIBRARY WORLD has not been affected as much as some periodicals, and this issue makes its appearance only some three weeks later than planned. We have occasionally encountered comments which suggest that our journal is not anticipated each month with undue pleasure, and is quickly placed on the Chief Librarian's desk, from which honourable position its subsequent circulation is frequently delayed. Many libraries do not appear to have a professional journal circulation scheme, and this is a regrettable state of affairs. It is important that the younger members of the profession should be well informed about library affairs, and only the regular perusal of periodicals can achieve this. May we recommend that Chiefs institute and maintain a circulation programme in their libraries; we hear that it is much appreciated in those libraries which already do so.

LONDON proved to be successful as a Conference centre, and the Fifty‐Seventh Annual Meeting was one of our best. As for the programme generally, the forecasts which appeared in THE LIBRARY WORLD last month were in most cases justified. The Presidential address, delivered by Mr. Pitt while recovering from a rather serious illness and while suffering from anxiety as to the health of Mrs. Pitt, was remarkable in the circumstances, and, as we premised it would be, was a statesmanlike survey of the accomplishments of the Library Association in the past, and a forecast of hopes for the future. These it would undoubtedly be impossible to summarise here. They included, however, a suggestion that so far as professional training is concerned, that there should be a joint examination award of the University, the Library Association and the employing authorities. This seems to be an avenue of development worth exploring, to use a Parliamentary phrase.