+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Eating Cake (/showthread.php?tid=4734)
Eating Cake - Martin Locock - 2nd February 2013
Councils have no problem signing up with accreditation schemes like Investors in People, sustainanability etc, or with individual members of staff belonging to surveyors, planning and other membership groups. I don't see why there would be any issue in principle with IfA. As I said earlier, I welcome councils signing up to an externally-defined code of practice rather than being free to act however arbitrarily they choose.
Eating Cake - Unitof1 - 2nd February 2013
A first issue might be what their subscription should be. Another organisation which likes to go around giving advice is english heritage and cadw in fact they paid for this standard surely they should be ROs
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
Martin Locock Wrote:...I welcome councils signing up to an externally-defined code of practice rather than being free to act however arbitrarily they choose.
No problem with the concept of a Code of Practice, just not one which appears to promote the commercial interests of other members of the same organisation to which they're paying subs to....
In general I've got no grouse with the content of the IFA standards, the general principles appear excellent, its the harping on about ROs and MIFAs without pointing out that there are equally competent contractors without such baggage. Luckily the curators we usually deal with aren't so blinkered, and work on the quality of work they see, phew!
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
Its just struck me that its the RO scheme itself which seems to be at the route of an awful lot of the discussions/arguements on these threads...time for a re-think?
Eating Cake - P Prentice - 2nd February 2013
Dinosaur Wrote:Its just struck me that its the RO scheme itself which seems to be at the route of an awful lot of the discussions/arguements on these threads...time for a re-think?are your lot still paying below minima?
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
Have to admit not sure exactly what they're getting currently (been stuck in the office so haven't had much direct communication with the diggers recently, except via context sheets...) - they're all on PAYE currently and as the 'day rate' certainly hasn't gone down I'd imagine that puts them above the minima anyway - can remember a conversation before Xmas where it was pointed out that we could in fact advertise on BAJR if we wanted to, i.e. we're presumably paying over David's then minima (so also over IFA's)....our 'fringe benefits' seem to be far better than most (decent accom seems to be popular), people certainly seem to like coming back whenever there's work on so must be doing something right
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
...of course if people would stop undercutting with stupidly low tenders we could put the rates up across the board, I certainly wouldn't object, well paid diggers (and other staff) are happy diggers (etc) who do a better job and make my life easier...
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
...interesting point that we've stayed in business (and in fact grown) through the recession without ever having to cut wages despite the competition - kinda suggests that outfits who have cut diggers wages are either taking the ***s or need fresh management? :face-stir:
Eating Cake - kevin wooldridge - 2nd February 2013
Personally I think UK archaeology has a few Jessops and Woolworths out there on the contract 'High Street'....it can only be a matter of time before one goes and the dominos start tumbling. It may well be the '99p' shops and the charity stores are doing good business at the moment and even thriving through the depression, but does that mean a lot for the long term future of the profession? Probably not!!
Eating Cake - Dinosaur - 2nd February 2013
Over the years I've worked for a few outfits where the management seemed to have little idea how to run a business, suspect not too many archaeologists have been to business school
...not sure about the pound-shop thought though, we're rarely the cheapest tenderer (possibly cos the local ethos is to actually bother to look for any archaeology, unlike some...why do curators put up with them?) yet still seem to secure enough work
Anecdotally some clients, as policy, normally go for the middle tender anyway, to get a balance between 'cost' and 'quality'and avoid significantly low tenders like the plague...hope for us all then