+- 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: Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? (/showthread.php?tid=4161)
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Dinosaur - 2nd November 2011
Wax Wrote:like it or not the current state of archaeology is dependent on the construction industry. In the current world economic crisis what are the forecasts for construction. It is difficult to grasp the wider picture so what is the feeling out there? Deregulation of planning will help construction but not archaeology.
There are definitely dormant large construction projects going through the process of waking from hibernation (I've recently been surprised by an enquiry about one I did the DBA for a few years back, massive green-field housing site), and it's not been obvious that landbanking ever stopped - there's always been a steady stream of DBAs?EAs etc coming through, its just that they haven't been leading straight on to development like they were a few years ago, so eventually they'll have to do something with all the land! I don't think the developer high-ups are really as pessimistic about the economy as they make out in the media, presumably they've now figured out that the crash didn't stop the world turning
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - GnomeKing - 3rd November 2011
Although "small outfits" may be do just fine on those "crumbs", are they really all paying the rates they should, or moving industry wide progression forward?
(not that the corporate ones necessarily do either)
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - P Prentice - 3rd November 2011
sorry everybody - my 12 year old has been posting in my name again
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Marcus Brody - 3rd November 2011
From speaking to friends who work for some small companies, I'd say that the pay rates seem to be marginally higher than for similar jobs with the big companies. Possibly this is because they don't have such substantial overheads in terms of maintaining offices and specialist staff, so they can set a charge-rate that's lower than the big companies, and so win tenders, but is high enough that they can afford to pass slightly more on to the diggers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the rates are likely to have any city bankers jumping ship for a career in archaeology, just that they seem to be slightly better paid in terms of day-rate.
I'd also say that I have in the past worked for fairly small companies and one-man bands, and I found that you actually learn a lot more. Digging for a big company, you can become just one digger among many, expected to simply excavate and record on site. Working for a small company, you'll probably have to do a bit of everything, from dealing with developers and curators to running small sites on you own. I found it offered a greater sense of responsibility, and I felt that I learned a lot more about the practical side of commercial archaeology, including an understanding of where it fits in the planning and development system.
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Jack - 3rd November 2011
Talking corporate.......I've often wondered why someone like the National Grid (i.e. large company that owns large utility companies e.g. transco) doesn't start their own in-house unit. Not for the purpose of doing shoddy work but to cut costs in the long run.
Also other smaller companies could use this to boost profits if working under a larger company.
Similar to a big company beginning with L that have it written in their contracts (with the principle contractor) that when hiring plant they will only use company X (their sister company). Now company X then charges way over the going rate for machines etc and both companies share the profit at the detriment to the principle contractor and usually the customer or the tax payer (i.e. us).
Also their is a similar 'deal' between a certain big (maybe the biggest) car-windscreen-replacing company and most (if not all) insurance companies. A quote from the company in question to replace a windscreen (covered by the insurance) was around ?300 (ish I think) but a quote from a small-scale bloke specialising in replacing windscreens was ?30 and it took him 5 minutes to do it.
Seemed like a dodgy deal designed to profit the insurers and the big car-windscreen-replacing company and ramp up our insurance costs to me.
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - kevin wooldridge - 3rd November 2011
At one time British Gas did have in-house archaeologists and they were responsible for contracting staff for several pipe-line jobs in the late 80s/ealy 90s. The archaeological managers then left BG and formed an archaeological unit which seems largely to work on pipeline jobs... Similarly British Waterways although much smaller scale projects...
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Dinosaur - 3rd November 2011
Jack Wrote:Talking corporate.......I've often wondered why someone like the National Grid (i.e. large company that owns large utility companies e.g. transco) doesn't start their own in-house unit. Not for the purpose of doing shoddy work but to cut costs in the long run.
Don't give them ideas! :0
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Jack - 3rd November 2011
Wax Wrote:PS I thought Torchwood was the international Xenoarchaeology Unit?
Nah torchwood is a bit too camp for me.
Great build up........but usually ends up in a benny hill style chase scene...........well the few that i saw anyway.
Not enough space marines, exploding suns and 'attack ships on fire off the shoulder of orion........'
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Dinosaur - 3rd November 2011
The third series was miles the best (if you want to try any more I've got series I-III on DVD, trade you for B5), but give the recent 'Americanised' one a miss...did anyone understand the ending?
'Industry' archaeology units are always going to be open to accusations of dubious practices etc since they're under the thumb of a single client/employer - I've certainly heard a few over the years about sites getting trashed to save money/speed jobs etc, but no idea if they're true or not since they invariably seem to emanate from disgruntled ex-employees....and judging by previous posts on here, a few people have had bad experiences of Enviro consultancies trying to do DBAs etc 'in-house'
Corporate archaeology: Is it the future or is it the past? - Madweasels - 3rd November 2011
Wax Wrote:Sign me up for that! Where do I send a CV?I have heard this before, Wax, that the local societies could get involved. I am not sure how that would work, though. Irrespective of whether they could muster the person-power and time to do this, nearly all the people I know in the voluntary sector would not be willing to do work that ought to have been done by professionals. Many of them are qualified in other fields and certainly have the skills and knowledge to do this, probably with dividends, but they too have principles. They would not want to be used by political (Coaliton) ideologists to man the front line and so be a retrospective justification of the policy of cutting.
However well informed and motivated local archaeology groups can use some of the ideas encapsulated in "Localism Bill" to query and counteract some of the nonsense going on in local councils. The well informed public might be the only hope.
They would campaign to support professionals and fight to keep posts etc, but no one I know would be willing to be the scab that might be the 'answer' that the Coalition claims exists in the local communities. They already balk at being described as 'Big Society' in action when they do do free heritage-related work (and get scoffed at by many pros for undermining their potential gross earnings and standing). Do not expect many, if any, to rush forward to fill the breech.