Are university librarians stealing legitimacy?

Maybe what university librarians' are ultimately heading for is a piecemeal inclusion of other's legitimacy into our conceptual framework in order to improve our legitimacy as a field in the eyes of others.

University professors may get two terms on and one term off to do research and writing but there is no comparable notion for university librarians. Our perception of who we want to be (Faculty) is outstripping our capacity to enable this perception or to convince library management to act as an enabler (e.g. build in the same time allotments) subject as they are to the larger university administration.

Documents such as CAUT's "Discussion Paper: Image and Recognition (UNDER REVIEW)" help relate the work we do to faculty work, thus legitimizing an already legitimate field (ironically enough) in other people's eyes. But why are we limiting ourselves to becoming Faculty as it has already been defined? Shouldn't the concept of Faculty work be modified to reflect our inclusion? And lets move beyond "faculty". Archaeology borrows from multiple fields to create a framework unique to its own needs. What are our needs and why not borrow legitimacy from multiple fields of endeavor by relating their concepts to what we already do?

If we are starting a quilting bee, and such is my impression by wrestling with our inclusion as Faculty, we should be very aware of our process and the final pattern. Becoming ourselves is both the process and the end result.