Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
12th March 2009, 04:12 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Kathryn Whittington
Quote:quote:Originally posted by RedEarth
I'm sure many people have pointed out before how practically difficult it would be for people to be on the council and actually attend meetings
Members of IfA Council and IfA committees can claim travel expenses for meetings back from IfA, though we don't pay for time spent at meetings.
Quote:quote:Originally posted by bob
I can't afford the conference either, but was asked about doing a paper there, if I did would I have to pay to speak?!
Speakers at IfA Conference do not have to pay to attend the day of the conference their paper is being given on.
No wonder IFA subs are so expensive... sorry, I'm being flippant. Thanks Kathryn, that is good to know.
Seriously, one day (probably when days are 36 hours long) I would love to have a more active role in the IFA. Where are committee meetings usually held? Can you claim accommodation too?
As for units giving time off work to attend meetings, that doesn't work as well when you work for yourself, which undoubtedly puts a lot of sole traders and smaller unit managers off. If there was some way of helping with that it would almost negate the interest in BAJR Fed being set up :face-stir:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
12th March 2009, 04:25 PM
If people want to discuss the pro and cons of being on IFA council - or the value of joining good. Please start another thread.
Peter
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
12th March 2009, 04:38 PM
I would rather that any negative comments about the IfA to be thought about before posting.. after all we are better without prodding and goading.
When I was in the Council, my expenses were paid, which made it possible for me to go to meetings.. True as a sole trader I would lose a days work.. but it was worth it... (yes honestly) companies who could send people also lost a person for a day.. true they were paid... but not for the company.
Lets keep IfA bashing out.. it ain't useful
?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
12th March 2009, 06:13 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Oxbeast
Not sure about aother areas of the construction industry, but I've certainly heard of it happening in archaeology (before the credit crunch). Either you can do it on an ad hoc basis, charging out a couple of supervisors as POs, or on a wholesale basis, charging everyone out at a step above their pay grade. Its a bit of a risky strategy: profitable, but you wouldn't want the client to find out about it...
Mmm...fair point...that may happen once or twice, now I come to think about it.
I don't know about charging people out as experienced diggers when they are trainees (which would be hard to spot, tbh). However, certainly it's not unheard of if a company hasn't got enough supervisors or POs (e.g. if they are contractually obliged to provide a certain number) for someone to be drafted up but not given the pay rise commensurate to that new role. Technically, that's fraud; however, the adage that you've got to do the job before you get the job isn't particular to archaeology. In any case, I think it's more cock-up than conspiracy.
freeburmarangers.org
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2008
12th March 2009, 09:22 PM
You think it would be hard to spot the difference between experienced diggers and trainees !?! On every dig i've ever worked on the difference is obvious.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
13th March 2009, 02:34 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Mike.T.
You think it would be hard to spot the difference between experienced diggers and trainees !?! On every dig i've ever worked on the difference is obvious.
I wondered after I posted whether anyone would say that.
Yes, I think I can just about manage to tell the difference between good and bad fieldworkers. I was referring to whether the people who write the cheques can tell. Of course, that's one of the reasons why they employ consultants.
freeburmarangers.org
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
13th March 2009, 02:51 PM
To return to the topic of the thread...
"So, the market reacts to a labour shortage with a reduction in skills requirement, whereas what we want is to react to a labour shortage with an improvement in pay and conditions.
What we need is a shaven monkey test."
the problem that Matt is eluding to in his blog is the inelasticity of supply of labour. If I were in a pub (I wish), I would probably have started to draw a graph on a beer mat by now, with number of archaeologists going up and down over time. I really am that dull. Big spike between 2001 and mid 2007. It would be great if we could get the market not to react with a reduction in skill requirement, and the only way that I can see of that happening is further barriers to entry.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
13th March 2009, 03:32 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
I would rather that any negative comments about the IfA to be thought about before posting.. after all we are better without prodding and goading.
When I was in the Council, my expenses were paid, which made it possible for me to go to meetings.. True as a sole trader I would lose a days work.. but it was worth it... (yes honestly) companies who could send people also lost a person for a day.. true they were paid... but not for the company.
Lets keep IfA bashing out.. it ain't useful
?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake
Who was bashing the IfA? I certainly wasn't, I remain firmly committed to it, I was just enquiring about the practicalities of council membership. I really couldn't be arsed to start another thread on the matter and my query has been answered.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
13th March 2009, 03:50 PM
?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
13th March 2009, 04:23 PM
I spent most of yesterday trying to jump into this discussion and move it back on track, but had a password failure....What I was going to say was that the most recent BAJR advert for digging staff has raised the threshold for required site experience form 6 months to 1 year and also asked for significant survey experience.
What do folk think about this?
I personally can see some pros as well as a lot of cons, but it does suggest that if repeated elsewhere, come the recovery archaeology will be a much harder profession to enter. But I am interested in everyones opinion ......
![[Image: 3334488270_7156e71b8b_t.jpg]](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3405/3334488270_7156e71b8b_t.jpg)
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
