If a library doesn’t want to “fine”, then…that’s fine. But saying that those that do “fine” are also responsible for setting up alternatives like volunteering (not really “volunteering” if you are doing it to pay off a debt), donating books or food, etc. is silly. If a library wants to fool with all that, go for it, I guess, but I think it is irresponsible and a waste of time and public funds. The “donation jar” we all have is the tax dollar! Establishing a fund to pay off fines for people is a waste of tax dollars, and an insult to those taxpayers.

Patrons with outstanding fines at most, if not all, libraries may still “use” the library. To my knowledge, no one is keeping them from entering the building, using databases, reading books and magazines, using our reference materials, etc. They just can’t check anything out until their fines are under a certain level. Simple as that. And it really is AS SIMPLE AS THAT. All this bending over backwards to clear fines for those who agreed to follow the library’s rules when they received a card is ludicrous. All the things you propose strike me as less fair than a straight fines-only system. Fines would only be just if we all made similar incomes? Maybe those without the income to pay their debts just have the added “burden” of making certain they don’t accrue fines. Maybe that isn’t ‘fair” to you, but that’s life.

America has the largest percentage of its population in jail, compared to any country in the world. There are more prisoners than farmers. It is one of only 2 western countries to still have grand juries. It has the highest numerical number of prisoners compared to any other country as well. So perhaps your last comment was not apt.

I’ve noticed that if a limiting factor effects us, its called a reason. If it doesn’t, or we don’t understand it, it is called an excuse.

Libraries that think they need fines should keep them but give the librarian and the patron other options.

There are so many. If you can’t pay the fine, you can volunteer, donate books, food, other items, or make an appeal to have the fine waived or reduced. Payment plans could allow the patron to keep using the library but limit them to less items checked out at a time until the fine is reduced.Libraries should establish funds specifically to pay off fines for patrons who can do none of the above. This should be in their budget requests.

Or combinations of the above.

The people who can pay fines will because it will save them time and hassle. The people who can’t will make the appointment and show up if they wanna use the library. Plus, all libraries should have donation jars all the time.

I am shocked by the people posting here who feel fines are just. Sure they may be tough to do without for some-but we should not be ok with that long term. Fines would only be just if we all made similar incomes. Some patrons don’t even have homes.

The question is not “are consequences good?” (they are)
-but “is a fines only system fair?”, and the answer is no.
So the next question is to develop the alternatives.

You read the comment incorrectly. Try it again without your bias.

*if we look at it in purely economic terms, maybe some people choose to pay the fines instead of the hassle of having to get the item back on time.*

Hassle? Is there nowhere else in the world where there is a time-limit involved? How do these people keep jobs? “Gosh, I’d rather get fired and go on the dole than deal with the hassle of showing up at 8:00 a.m. every day! Gosh, I’d rather get chucked out of my house or lose my car rather than deal with the hassle of sending in the check and payment voucher on time!”

Enough with the excuses, already. Since when did librarians become enablers of irresponsibility? Aren’t there enough people handing out ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ cards in America already today?

*Fines discriminate against poor people.*
No, fines discriminate against irresponsible people.

…does not say poor people are irresponsible. Does it? Now maybe the term “irresponsible” is a bit strong, but isn’t it true that someone who is not turning their items in on time is either a) willing to eat the agreed upon cost or b) breaking the agreement and responsible for the set fees? What about the resentment toward the librarian when they can’t provide an item that would be back on the shelf if another patron didn’t have it overdue? You don’t think daily scenario pisses off patrons?

If a successful future for libraries is dependent upon the elimination of fines/extended use fees/whatever you call them, libraries are already a lost cause, IMO.

No, fines discriminate against irresponsible people.

* Fines discourage people from using the library.*

Fines discourage irresponsible people from using the library.

*Why is a public library in such a hurry to get a book back in three weeks? If nobody wants it and I return it eventually, why bother with the fines?*

Fines encourage people to return the book and if they do not, at least they are not using MORE books that people may want.

*The people running the library may think that $25 in fines isn’t much money, but for a poor person or an unemployed person, $25 is alot of money.*

People know the deal when they check the books out. If you can’t pay the fine, return the book on time.

Seriously, how difficult is that to understand?

*If you have a grocery budget of $75-100 a week, how in the world is it fair for a library to levy fines, even if they are capped at $25?*

If you don’t have a fine budget of 25 dollars a week, ensure that you do not run up a fine of 25 dollars in that week.

*I’m an avid book reader and librarian. I’m also a working class person without much money. I’ve gotten so tired of public library fines over the years that I just stopped using libraries.*

Apparently you’re a pretty poor librarian if you can’t return a book on time.

*I’d buy books, borrow them from friends, or just read stuff on the Internet. If I’m soured on public libraries, how many other people stopped going because of fines?*

Just the irresponsible ones who don’t have money, I guess.

As long as you have a cap on them, have a liberal renewal policy, AND allow staff to waive trivial amounts (say, $5-$10) to avoid the irate “more trouble than they’re worth” types, higher fines seem like a way to get people to take seriously their responsibility to return items in a timely fashion. I once had a patron immediately threaten to contact her lawyer over a $.25 fine. Of course I waived it, but that’s just idiotic and not worth fighting over. If they don’t want to come back over such a ridiculously low amount, someone else will be there for us if the item has appeal.

Yeah, patrons pay the taxes and it is “their” library etc. etc. blah blah, but that doesn’t give them to the right to practically “own” the book with such minimal consequences. A $.25/day overdue fine isn’t the outrage we seem to think it is, IMO. Those calling for an “extended use fee” seem to thinking correctly about this issue. If you’re worried about a drop in circulation, you (and your patrons) aren’t putting much value on your collection.

- Do you think fines really encourage people to bring materials back on time?
Yes & No
- Do you think removing fines meant that you got fewer materials back on time?
No

- Do you think having a catalog that allowed people to place holds on checked-out materials lessens the need for fines?
Yes

I wish to implement [only for those who don't consider overdue charge as revenue]

A conscience box – the collected amount should go for charity – [display the purpose and where the collected amount would

go clearly on the box]. I feel that patrons will be happy to pay the overdue charge. Circulation librarian will find it easy to convince
the patrons who are late to return. Moreover accounting can be totally avoided, no need to keep change to give the balance [Patron can drop little more or less in the box] and feel happy that it is going for a genuine purpose.

Email reminder is the best method to get the books back on time as delivery is ensured. It will be nice to send advance

Reminder [before the due date], Personal requests to return the documents. If the patron sets an auto reply indicating he is out-of-station library can wave overdue when he returns – or can think of renewing the documents, quote the library rule at the end of the request to invite the attention of the patron

Announce no-fine week/month so that we give patron a chance to return the documents without overdue charges

Reward patrons by announcing the names who transacted more documents with no overdue charges

Talk to patrons personally who hold the documents for long and find a solution

Set a time to return the document and then recover the current cost + procurement charges [this decision should be firm]

Conduct a survey and ask the patrons to suggest an alternative – after all the patrons will suffer one day or other if a document required by them is not returned on time

VSSC Library, ISRO PO, Trivandrum, PIN 695 022, India

There are one or two further issues that might need consideration in general; firstly nobody wishes to deter junior readers and I would generally be in favour of setting a fines ‘cap’ on junior memberships.
Secondly if fines accrued approach or exceed the replacement costs of the borrowed items then we are actively providing a disincentive to returning late loans. Additionally, I would personally favour waiving or seriously restricting fines in cases where people wish to pay replacement costs for lost / irreparably damaged items as, if a patron is sufficiently good to come in to pay, it almosts seems to add insult to injury.

Lastly, a user-oriented service must always allow front-line staff a margin to vary or waive fines depending on personal circumstance, particularly with relation to homeless, junior or very elderly patrons. Providing an excellent service, without contrived ‘barriers’, to ALL the community should be prioritised over revenue gain once a modicum of common sense and good judgement is retained in doing so.

For my pleasure reading/listening/viewing, I am thrilled to have free access to expensive books and media and am happy to fulfill my end of the contract and respect other patrons’ access to popular media by returning things on time and/or paying negligible fines.

I’m finding this difficult when doing research, though, and wishing I had the option to check out low-circulating materials for extended periods (ideally till someone else requests them, but more realistically 2-3 months…) and applies some sort of popularity algorithm for calculating loan periods and/or fines.

Of course, this would only work with really good software in place, with a web client for patrons and various non-headache-provoking overrides for libraries.

I have more trouble with the folks who’re outraged that I charge the retail cost to replace an item. Often they go to WalMart or Borders and grab a new copy of a damaged item and bring it in without talking to me first — when I charge them $2 to reprocess the item they get mad because they’ve already done me this huge favor. Don’t get me started on the people who research audio books at amazon and want to know why I can’t just replace the recorded books library version with the $30 retail version…

Then there’s the value of browsing. It isn’t enough to say ‘no-one wants it’ because they mightn’t know it yet. I don’t know if I want that particular book until I come across it, which certainly won’t happen if it’s sitting forgotten under someone’s bed.

I’m not a big fan of excusing people for being either lazy, ignorant or selfish. I’d abolish fines if they weren’t that much help in controlling circulation, but they are. The people who abandon the library because they don’t want to have to follow rules are gonna do it regardless. The people who take off with books because they’re embarrassed or pissed off have bigger issues than fines.