Unitof1 Wrote:as I said a tenner and you can wash my pot. But seriously how many volliiyretter worker employees who you dont pay should anybody have before you can call yourself an archaeologist. should there be some scale? Maybe an unemployed graduate should have between 5 and 10 before they can apply for practitioner.

archresearcher Wrote:I've only just come across this thread and think it's about time that these issues are being raised. I graduated in 2008 and then undertook a year long PG degree to make myself 'more appealing' to employers. I have since undertaken numerous volunteer roles/ 'voluntary work placements' to gain more skills and knowledge of various archaeological employment routes (not only commercial archaeology). During this time I have worked outside of the archaeology field because I have no other option, bills need paying and bank of mum and dad only goes so far (I should state that 3/4 years after gratuation I am still living with parents because I can't afford not to).

Last summer I accepted a Grampus Heritage placement to spend 2 months on excavation abroad to increase my digging skills and build towards that '6 months experience' threshold. To do this I had to give up my non-archaeological day job but since returning I have not been able to find work. So I gave up my source of income to improve my archaeology experience to land in a position worse than what I started with. I now have a CV that is considered 'very attractive' with a wealth of various voluntary positions making me a 'catch' to anyone wanting to take on volunteers but not to employ?
To me there should be paid intern positions offered not only by commerical units but also in other areas of archaeology so that graduates can have a chance to get a foot in the door because eventually people will move out of archaeology for better paid jobs or move into retirement but without training fresh graduates at the bottom end of the spectrum who will replace the specialists once they move on?

Herne Wrote:Might I suggest that in addition to the fears expressed here as to the potential spread of unpaid internships within the industry, there is another potential monster lurking.
Payment by results seems likely to lead to a more ruthless chasing of contracts by those ?employed? under such a system. Cold-calling of clients, disruption of and disregard for any existing linkages between local/regional units and clients, basically anything to tempt a potential client, so as to win a precious contract and claim a prize? sorry? wage. Or am I just being cynical as to where this may be heading?

TheKillerPenguin Wrote:I'm as cynical as they come but I don't think that will really happen, mainly because the clients won't let that happen, they'll just go elsewhere. Advertising through a means other than just word-of-mouth may actually be of benefit to everyone though. I can't imagine units would have or be willing to spend that sort of money to get people doing cold-calling on a commission basis either. Has anyone actually seen this sort of thing happening?

kevin wooldridge Wrote:Seen it happening? Surely its almost all that has been happening over the past 20 years!! It's not the archaeological units who do the cold calling, but of course the consultants, who having gained the project than choose to 'tender' that work out to the profession or appoint their tame contractor. I can't see that situation changing much. Units who want to cut out the consultants may occassionally be successful, but I suspect the 'dark side' will ultimately prevail....