Two-Way Interview: Fair Library Jobs and Helen Rimmer of The Kind Brave Leader - Part 1

This is a joint post between FairLibraryJobs and The Brave Kind Leader to share a two-way interview we conducted about our respective projects, our thoughts on recruitment in libraries and kind and brave approaches to library work. You can also read this interview at TheKindBraveLeader.

The interview is split in two, part 2 will be published on 4th November 2023.

Fair Library Jobs (FLJ) Darren: Helen, can you tell us about your role and what some of your main professional interests are at the moment?

The Kind Brave Leader (KBL)/ Helen: Well, I've just left my role as Head of Library and Archives at the University of Westminster and I’m now solely working on The Kind Brave Leader. My main focus, and it’s been a focus of mine for quite some time, is about improving how we work in libraries. Making sure that we are kinder and a bit braver about leadership, and how we can encourage good leaders. And I don’t just mean the current leaders, I mean aspiring leaders and how we can diversify. How do we get people who are really good leaders, but who might have barriers for various reasons, like hierarchies for example, up through the library profession? 

Then we can have different people round the table, different voices, and generally make working environments better for all. I really believe that if we have diversity around our “table” then well-being and kindness will follow. All of this links together. 

KBL Helen: What inspired the founding of Fair Library Jobs and what are your main objectives?

FLJ Darren: We always pass this on to Kirsten first to answer this because she’s our Founder.

FLJ Kirsten: The main inspiration for Fair Library Jobs (FLJ) was Fair Museum Jobs who are a similar organisation that campaigns for improving recruitment practices in the museum sector. They’ve been active for a while and I kept seeing people saying things like “Oh it would be great if this was for libraries too.” It eventually got to the point where, and there’s this Josie Long quote “If you want something to exist, sometimes you just have to make it yourself”, and I hit a tipping point with that. So I put the call out and Darren and Harriet responded.

There have been conversations in librarianship for a long time about equality and diversity, but particularly in 2020 with conversations about race and discrimination. There was also a feeling that these conversations had been happening for a while, but without concrete actions to improve things. Other inspirations for FLJ included Jen Bayjoo who runs Diversity in Libraries of the North (DILON) and Jass K Thethi who runs Intersectional Glam. However, to a large extent, I have to admit I had personal reasons behind setting up FLJ. I’ve applied for a lot of jobs. A lot. And I’ve had some really negative experiences and some experiences that could have been better. I’m conscious of how much time and effort applying and interviewing for jobs can take and the impact it can have on people’s well-being. So it was all these things I’ve mentioned coming together.

We ended up speaking to Fair Museum Jobs and used their manifesto as a basis for our own - with their permission! And created our FLJ manifesto with our own goals for improving equity, respect and transparency in recruitment in the library sector. 

FLJ Harriet:  I’d worked in museums and archives previous to libraries and was aware of Fair Museum Jobs, Jass’s work with Intersectional GLAM, and knew Jen Bayjoo and how she set up DILON. Similarly to Kirsten, I’d also had a lot of negative experiences applying for roles in the library sector and I was thinking “Well Jen has just set up DILON, there’s space for a Fair Museum Jobs but for libraries”. It was around the time, maybe the first time, when people thought Twitter was “ending” and a few of us temporarily migrated over to Discord and I saw Kirsten's post in one of the library groups about setting up Fair Library Jobs and asking who else wanted to help her out and me and Darren replied. I thought “Wow, this is great” and I had been thinking along similar lines and when Kirsten posted I thought yep I want to do this too.  

FLJ Darren: I have a similar story too. I also applied for a lot of jobs in libraries and had some really good experiences and some really bad experiences. Those experiences went from jobs that I applied for, those that maybe progressed to interviews, and those that ended up in offers and accepting or being declined for roles. If you apply for enough roles you get to see the diversity across the sector and see what recruitment looks like. Whereas sometimes you only see it from your own organisation, but if you apply for enough jobs you
get a real sense of what’s out there. 

Personally, I was interested in FLJ because I’m involved in a couple of different things, like Critical Approaches to Libraries Conference (CALC), and one of the critiques I have about critical library practice is it’s often very outward-facing. It’s about collections, it’s about users etc. Sometimes we’re not as good at turning that gaze back in on ourselves. I’m really interested in power structures and power relations in libraries as a workplace. They are institutions, they are collections, they are services, but they are also workplaces where real people are working. FLJ was a place for me to work in this area.

In terms of how we’re set up and what we do, it’s been about the ability to be able to advocate and represent the needs of other people. When you are a job applicant you are in a very powerless position. You don’t have a lot of power over the process, you can’t always raise complaints or flag issues because you are applying for a job. You think “if I raise a complaint I won’t get this job and I need this job”.  It’s a really positive thing that we can act as an advocate whether it’s for individuals or that unspoken applicant out there. I was really interested in being able to do that because it’s something that wasn’t in the library sector before. 

KBL Helen: Yes, that’s really great and chimes well with the Kind Brave Leader trying to change the workplace and not just everything else. You hit the nail on the head. We look out a lot.  

FLJ Darren: Yes and I don’t think we can say we’re working to become equitable services if, actually, the people that are staffing those services and not being treated fairly and are not, you know, happy and well in themselves.

FLJ Harriet: I feel like us three are quite vocal in a lot of ways. There’s definitely been times at work when you have those conversations with people and say “Yeah, this isn’t okay” and they go “Oh yeah, maybe this isn’t okay.” Now we can raise these issues more widely and FLJ gives us that platform.

FLJ Harriet: How have you applied your work on kindness and braveness to how you recruit staff in your workplace in your previous role? 

KBL Helen: At Westminster we did a lot of work right from when I started about changing our recruitment process - very iterative - just like you all, said I, personally, had applied for jobs at different places, been through lots of different ups and downs and things. We started with the job description first of all. We removed unnecessary qualifications, tried to make the language less like you had to already be working in a university or a library to understand it. We did have to fight up against the panels who look at jobs and have some quite hard conversations about them, but those conversations worked,and those job descriptions came through.

We then had a student from the Employ Autism scheme come and work with us. I was actually on maternity leave at this point so kudos has to go to Daniella, Eleri, Amy, and the people who are around at that time. From that we started to look at our actual interview process. So they've applied for the job, what happens next? We don't have much control over the application part, but we have had conversations later about that, but what we do have control over is the advert. So we make that as clear as possible with information and, for example, using some of your manifesto and your good practice trying to make it as good as possible.

Then also looking at these interview packs, we sat down with the student, who became actually a full time member of staff in a totally different team, and talked to him about good practice, as well as Employ Autism, and we were like, well, if some of the issues are about how people approach the interview, so how do they understand what needs to happen at an interview they might not have had an interview. Well, actually, a lot of people won't have had an interview. A lot of people won't have had interviews at university. A lot of people won't have been to university. So we scaled it up and we thought “Why don't we just do this for everybody?” So our interview packs have photos of the panel in them, and a little blurb about the people, because there's nothing worse than thinking how many people are going to be in the room with you, let alone you know, what do they look like? You can research them a bit if you want. All of that's up to the person doing it.

We also have a bit about what to expect at the interview, so you will arrive ,we will ask questions, we'll take notes, all of that stuff that, yes, people might say at the beginning of the interview. However, if you're sitting there nervous, you might not quite get that. We also have photos of the route. If it's an in person interview,  we’ll have photos of the entrance to the building, you then have to go to security, here's security, you know, and working your way through because again, how many times have we turned up at interviews and thought “Where's this building?” you know, let alone anything else.

The big thing is that we give the interview questions in advance.This was probably one of the more controversial parts. People did sort of worry that we were giving away too much information. Questions like “Well, what what if they prepare everything in advance?” It's like “Well, why not?” One of the things we say in it is we aren't there to catch you out. We want to see your best you. We’re all experienced interviewers, you can tell if someone's reading off a piece of paper and just a script that someone else has written. I think that's a key thing is it's flipped it. The pressure is now on the people interviewing as much as the people being interviewed. In that we have to really pay attention because we have to ask good follow up questions. We have to really think about it. One of the things we did do is people were producing presentations so they were turning up with 20 min worth of material, we did have to say, we're only expecting 5 minutes for that question, because otherwise the interviews were getting a bit too long.

We learned some lessons along the way. Something we did, for example, for customer service roles is we did have a couple of questions which were more of a scenario that we asked on the spot, but we warned people we would be doing that, and gave them as much pre information as possible. What we found is that the people who prepared, be it, they might just have some bullet points, or they might have more evidence, if we were asking about social media they'd brought some printouts, or they'd, brought an ipad. It's really helping them prepare, but not wasting their time either.

What it's done is it's levelled the playing field. Everybody is coming with the same information. Some people choose not to prepare, but 99% of the time those people are not the people who get the jobs because they're not actually keen for the role.

It was really brave. It was a kind thing to do, but also a brave thing to do, because we were pushing.

What we were able to do is that it was within the library's sort of gift to do the interview pack - all we did was send the interview pack to recruitment, and said, “Can you send this out with the interview?” That's the other thing. You have to prepare it all in advance. So you have to know who your panel is, which also means, we had to set the interview date which we would set before the advert went out. The number of times I've been called for an interview and it's been way down the line and do you think you don't know when you're gonna meet? I actually had an interview in the summer, and that happened. They were waiting to tell me when the date was because the panel wasn’t ready. It's a bit chaotic, doesn't bode well, and I think it reflects on the organisation. 

From that we also have a document of interview questions, a bank which we're able to use that then saves time. We do revise them, but it means that we've got a set of grade 3 questions that we can pick and choose from. Then each team within the library, because obviously, that's the other thing with libraries, each team is approaching it in a very equal way. The kindness and the bravery were two things there and we got some amazing applicants through doing it, and feedback was often along the lines of “It doesn't matter if I get the job I feel like you're a compassionate place to work that you're living your values.”

That’s the thing people forget is everything you're saying, and everything I'm saying is a real reflection. You want workplaces that do these things well and don’t do naughty things.

FLJ Darren: There is a perception, I think it's fading away but not quickly enough, that recruitment, and interviews particularly, that they have to be a bit stressful, they have to be a bit difficult, and that you are trying to catch people out. As if you're setting traps for them by asking trick questions. It's a very old fashioned way of thinking, and the idea that you can't provide information to people, because they will cheat. It's not a memory test and that’s okay. It's very rare that you are instantly, in library work, anyway, put on the spot with a question where you have to answer immediately without any time to prep or anything. It's an odd thing.

KBL Helen: I think the other part is that if I stayed in my previous role, I don't think we had a problem within the library, but, and this is something something I will advocate for everybody, is that gap between having the interview and being told the result. I applied for some jobs over the summer, and the difference in that has been the most stressful, almost, because it's totally out of your control.Why don't people just say, for example, “We're talking to finance.” So someone I know was successful in a job but had to wait a week because the library director was discussing with Finance what the budget was because they wanted to go higher up scale, but didn't communicate that. She was crying, she thought she hadn’t got the job, she thought she’d done really well at the interview. The question is “What are you gaining?” She really wanted the job, but she could've talked herself out of it, and you could lose a great candidate. That’s the last part, it’s all part of the chain, just tell people where they are and if you're the second and that’s why there’s a delay just tell people.

FLJ Kirsten: I think that's a big thing and I think often people will read into it because you kind of know that the person who's successful is probably being told. The longer you get silence the the less optimistic you feel. I've been in a situation where I wasn't told. I knew what day the interviews were on. I was the backup candidate, but they didn't tell me that. I knew the interviews were on the Thursday. They told me I'd find out if I had an interview on the Thursday, and I was like “How? I have work! How are you expecting this to work?” Then I got a really sweet email from the hiring manager later, saying, “You were a really good candidate. We had an incredibly strong pool. I'm really sorry.” It was clearly the bureaucratic system causing the problem. Individuals within the system do care and were aware it was difficult, and were being respectful and taking that time. 

FLJ Darren: I think one of the themes that comes through this is about being human and being a person and treating people like humans, not cogs. One of the things I think I've had is you’ve got HR and they have a really really important functional role. They have a role in this which is to make sure contracts are issued, make sure that the salary scale is agreed, send out all the official stuff. I think sometimes there’s this temptation think “Oh, well, HR tell people whether they've been successful or unsuccessful”

and they'll do that through ticking boxes which then sends out an automated email. Just because they are sending that doesn't mean that you can't give people a ring or send them that email. To say to them [candidates], “You’ll hear this from HR, but I wanted to let you know personally”. Often you’ll get this as a successful applicant but not as an unsuccessful applicant and I think about who really needs that more sensitive hand holding.

I learned from my manager, the last question is “How do you want to be contacted? Do you want a phone call? Do you want an email? Do you want your feedback straight away or later?” I will say “I've got feedback for you, let me know when you want it” and little things like that that can make a big difference. If I'm expecting a phone call from somebody, that means that I'm looking at my phone every half an hour for the next 3 or 4 days, and that's a nightmare, and every missed call, which is probably actually a nuisance call about a car accident that I didn't have. 

KBL Helen: Totally agree. Yeah, we'll get there. As you say it's about putting the human side in and putting yourself in the shoes of the people who are applying, and I think it's easy to just get HR to send that email. It’s an easy thing to do, but you can also maybe get HR to send out a bit more information like the number of times you have second or third choices who are really good. You might want to say to them “Look, please apply again” or “We have this job coming up” and you have to be careful because you can’t promise anything. I had a recruitment consultant and he said “Oh I wanted to tell you over the phone you were unsuccessful.” and I was like “No, no, I wanted that in an email. I didn't want that conversation.” As you say it’s up to the individual another person might want that feedback over the phone. That might be how they want to receive it.

I also always say to people when they're waiting, I'm like, “Remember, it's the most important thing in your world at the moment. It's not the most important thing to the person recruiting.” And that's not actually okay.

…it's about putting the human side in and putting yourself in the shoes of the people who are applying

KBL Helen: We sort of touched on my next question, but I'll ask it anyway. How do you perceive the role of kindness and recruitment practices? Are there any library specific challenges or opportunities that you think particularly call for a kindness approach?

FLJ Kirsten: One of the the challenges can be where there are, and it depends on the workplace and the role,  with entry level roles I think there can be a really high level of candidates and therefore there’s a limit to the number of people you can see, so how to do that fairly is very difficult.

If you are at the point where you're applying to lots of entry or level roles you're likely to be experiencing quite a lot of rejections, and sometimes rejections where it's not that you weren’t good enough it was just there were five people that could have done the job and one nudged out. It’s a hard situation for anyone to be in. So, firstly recognising that that’s really stressful and hard and therefore thinking about how you, inevitably employers are going to have to reject people, but thinking about doing that in the kindest possible way. That touches on everything you’ve just been talking about Helen. So, how would they want the decision to be communicated? 

I think offering feedback is a big one, because often if people are rejected and don't know why, that can be really difficult. In terms of having a better chance next time, having doubts about what happened, if something happened that shouldn’t have happened, whether there was some discrimination there. If you don’t know why you’ve been rejected you don’t know. Providing meaningful feedback is part of that. We talk about being transparent and upfront, genuinely how people will be assessed so people can tell whether they’ve got a good chance or not.

In terms of opportunities I think there is, kind of culturally, though I don’t want to do the whole “Oh librarians, they’re such lovely people” because they are but also…. well often libraries or library departments that are within bigger organisations are to some extent values driven, or at least theoretically, and therefore that kindness - there will some kind of institutional KPI around diversity that can then be kind of leveraged and also the idea about caring about reputation as well because within the library community that's another potential driver.

FLJ Darren: We talk about in our manifesto these three core principles being transparency, equity and respect and I think these are specific ways of being kind. It can sound a bit agro’ when we use them but I do think it’s about being kind to people, because it’s about taking the time to think about everyone’s needs.

The other bit of your work Helen, the braveness bit, there are challenges in braveness when it comes to recruitment practice. I think that there is a culture in libraries, particularly in academic libraries, of being sort of small c conservative about things. People don't like to be the first place to do something a lot of the time, unless there is somebody quite senior who’s driving it, and they make it something they do. People tend to prefer to let somebody else be first and then copy it, which can be really good if there is somebody doing that, but can make it quite difficult if there isn't - so that’s a challenge. Some people who will push forward a lot of this stuff haven't made it to the levels of, say, management yet where they have the clout to make things happen, and I think that's an opportunity eventually, if they can get there that it can drive forward more change, because they'll have that lived experience that that will make them want to do that.

At the moment I think it's quite difficult to make that happen as it stands. There is an issue with braveness in libraries and often as a sector we can be a bit passive sometimes and when somebody says “Oh wait, HR say we can’t do that” just just accept that and don’t push back and say “Well, why not?” To interrogate that a little bit more, and sometimes we can be a bit fearful of pushing for what we want sometimes, because, yeah, we don't want to upset HR or another department that doesn’t do this already. 

FLJ Kirsten: I think I’d add to that one of the challenges is libraries are sort of one sector but also sit in lots of different sectors so there can be specific challenges in specific sectors like workplace cultures and institutional barriers, so the NHS for example. The stuff around pay bands is always based on the Agenda for Change and there’s going to be less scope for individual managers to change that. Universally the NHS does some things very well like show the salary, whereas, law firms don’t because of how lawyers are recruited so that can be part of the challenge as well. 

FLJ Darren:  What are some areas in the library world that you think would particularly benefit from a kindness or braveness perspective? Are there any problematic areas? 

KBL Helen: Leadership. I think it’s absolutely leadership. I don’t think, bravery is always valued by leaders at the top. There’s about a handful of us who are a few years ahead of you and we were able to get in and push, but we are also sometimes looked at by our peers as being a bit mouthy, you know, rocking the boat. 

However, to be fair I think people are kind, but over the years people haven’t been brave. We’re looking at 30, 40, 50 years, of a lack of bravery in our leadership, and that means there are systemic behaviours  going on that are not tackled. That are going on. There's systemic things to do with, for example, recruitment where people say “Well, that's just how we've always done it. Why would we change it?” The problem is we need to tackle it all and we need to be brave and tackle an awful lot of things, and part of that is allowing people to voice their concerns. I think, as leaders, we need to be brave, and this is what I hope to empower people to do. It might be the aspiring leaders that I'm really working with, but really equipping people in a way to be brave.

When I'm brave, in my old role, and I'm asking my team to be brave, for example, doing recruitment. We're all brave. We're all doing it. That wasn't really rocking boats elsewhere, but there's other things that I then need other people above me to be brave for. Often, if we're thinking about psychological safety, for example, these people don't have the skin in the game. They're like, “Oh, yeah, yeah, we've got your back”, but they're not there, and they're not at the forefront, and they're not doing it. Eventually people have to decide; are they brave enough to rock the boat and to change systems they've succeeded in as well. I think this is something that comes up, for example, with the working from home and post covid ways of working. Actually, the people who are calling for everybody to be working in offices are people who have succeeded because of that. That then really narrows it down. We've got to be really brave in pushing back, and not everyone is. Not everyone's prepared to put their head above the parapet, not everyone's prepared to have those conversations. If you’re not connected through things like Twitter and LinkedIn and part of those networks you may also feel that you’re on your own. How do we as a library world, that people might be, as you say, working in law firms and be a sole librarian, how can we support them to know that actually what they’re saying is okay?

That's the thing I've realised that you're tugging at a bit of string and it's just unraveling a big ball of toxic behavior. It's gone on and on and on, and what you think is a little thing like sending interview questions out actually starts to shift stuff. It's about equipping people so they can find their voice. Even people in their first entry level job, allow people to have those voices, and that will help people be braver as they go up. It’s a big thing and it’s a big thing to tackle the difficult things. People have said to me, like when we took away qualifications on job descriptions, “But I worked hard for my degree” and you did, but did you need it? Do you really need it? Or do we actually need people who are really good at customer service? Or do we need, for example, a site manager, do we need someone really good at running a site?  That might be somebody who's worked in retail for the last 20 years and never gone to university. That will be the person who actually transforms what we're doing.Let’s try and recruit them. It doesn’t mean your MA is worthless, but is it the thing that’s going to get you a job? Some of it is also looking at the Masters and how do we make them more valuable? I was looking at a couple recently and they don’t have leadership in there. They don’t have management skills. How are we supposed to get people to feel confident, to feel networked? How are we supposed to get the best leaders up to the top if we're not even giving people the option to think of it as a career path?

The other part of that, to do with leadership, is people get promoted a lot beyond their capabilities. For example they’re a very good cataloger and they become a manager, and then they become a leader. Then they go for a library director post, but it might be they're seen as a safe pair of hands. They fit the library stereotype, you know all of that, but actually they're not a very good leader. The best leader might be, like I say the person who's never been to university, got no qualifications, but absolutely will bring their people with them, and will make really good change for their users as well as their workplace, and so on. We need different pathways as well. We need leadership pathways, but also pathways where the only way to move forward isn't necessarily to manage people that there needs to be some value in the other parts of our jobs. If we can find that then we'll have highly paid people doing library jobs that are library jobs and highly paid people doing leadership jobs who are good leaders. So good librarians don’t necessarily have to go into leadership when it's not really their thing.

I truly believe in the power of aligning roles with individual strengths for the overall well-being of an organisation. When people are in positions that harness their unique abilities and strengths, it not only benefits them but also has a positive impact on everyone around them. I've noticed that some library directors may find certain aspects of their roles challenging, particularly when it comes to public speaking and advocacy. Given the evolving landscape of library services, it's crucial for directors to be well-equipped in these areas. There's always room for growth, and that's where specialised training can make a difference. I'd be delighted to offer my expertise to help current and aspiring directors become more effective advocates for change!

FLJ Darren: I was having a conversation with someone just today about that very thing. They want to progress, but they don’t want to go into management. Then you’re stuck. I moved into a management role. I really enjoy it, it’s really good and I like the problem-solving element of it, but I do miss the frontline stuff a lot. I really miss doing that aspect of the job. Fortunately, because I work in a relatively small institution, I still get to do it. Yet you're promoted on the basis of having been a good librarian and move on from there.  

KBL Helen: And obviously some of us are good at that, but yeah there are a lot of people where it's not their skill set. It also may be the wrong organisation, and people get promoted internally and actually they would thrive in a different type of organisation, maybe smaller, maybe flatter.

FLJ Darren: On that point about bravery as well I think there is an element, maybe it's part of the makeup of libraries or librarians, or people that work there, of perfectionism as well. About not wanting to be brave and to try new things until you know that it's absolutely, one hundred percent gonna work and there's gonna be no problems. Or we can't change this about recruitment because I'm not able to change this other thing. Well, you work with what you can. I sort of see it in my research side of my role; how many times do I see people say “we've run a pilot project of this”, and we've run this, and it's this very limited thing. I sense sometimes that there is a bit of a fear to really jump into something.  Because of fear,  sometimes rightly, of fear about blame, about what that feels like, or if you do that one thing wrong, they're just gonna abolish the library completely, and it will be gone forever if you make a mistake. I get an element that there can sometimes be a blame culture, because when you attempt to say “I want to try this thing” you get that conversation of “Oh, we tried that 10 years ago, and it was a disaster”. It goes down in the history of the institution about when you tried to do something and it didn't work so you can't ever do it again and the fear of blame that that brings.

KBL Helen: That goes back to that psychological safety. We talk about it, but actually, are people able to do it because in the end it’s down to the people at the top to do it? Institutional memories are horrific for a lot of things, because people don't move, either. I think that's the other thing, a lot of people stay in an organisation for a long time  and that then brings that “Well, we tried that 10 years ago”, you know different time, different places, different people.

One of my goals is trying to help leaders and teams see the safety in failure. Fail well and sometimes failing small is better than failing massively. I saw it a lot when I closed the library for Covid, which was absolutely the right thing to do, but a lot of my peers weren't doing it. So I wrote a blog post about it and some of my peers got in touch, and they were like “I want to do this. I want to go and have these conversations with my Vice Chancellor. It's the right thing to do. We do need to close, but how do I do it?” And we have a chat. Other peers, I heard from people closer to the ground that their library directors were saying things to them like, “Yeah, but you don't understand. I've got my seat at the table. I might lose it.” I know someone who did raise and did use my blogpost for raising it and he was basically ignored by the Chief Operating Officer for six months. He was brave and willing to put his head on the line, but other people were looking after themselves a bit.

I did a lot of research into the barriers for compassion and one of them is as people get higher up organisations, are they getting more selfish? Actually, to get higher do you often have to put yourself first? And when push comes to shove are you prepared to risk your status for the greater good? Obviously there's things that you would not risk. Most of us will go “Yeah, I need to pay my mortgage or my rent”, but there are times like “there’s a global pandemic and we’re in central London. Actually, no, I'm not asking my staff to come in.” There were times when I was prepared to do it. I was fine. Westminster was behind me. I just happened to be the first person who said anything. It is about being prepared to have those conversations, and being prepared to sometimes forget about yourself. Remember, your privilege is that you are at that table already. It is tricky though. 

 So yeah, it's tricky, though.

Part 2 of the interview will be published on both FairLibraryJobs and TheKindBraveLeader on 4th November 2023.