Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
14th December 2006, 10:22 PM
The rules say:
::Level 7: ie Unit DIRECTOR / PROFESSOR / HIGH LEVEL SPECIALIST :: min. £28,221 + (but reasonable to expect min £34,986+)
Top of the ladder. Responsibilities for entire Units, Departments, Organisations. Must be able to cary out all aspects of chosen field, lead with confidence and have a standing within Heritage Community.
Is this grade really the highest grade for archaeologist?
Is 28k - less than the pay for a teacher with a few years experience the best we can hope for as being top of the career ladder?
I can not help but wonder that preserving differentials within a hierarhy is a contributing factor to low pay. Is the time right to define what the most senior posts in archaeology actually are and what the pay expectations should be.
What I have in mind are for example consultants who manage an inter disciplinary team or are head of the conservation sections of a planning department or even head of a planning department.
Peter Wardle
(expecting lots of comments about range rovers and suits.[img][/img]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
15th December 2006, 01:36 PM
Quote:quote:Is 28k - less than the pay for a teacher with a few years experience the best we can hope for as being top of the career ladder?
If the recent ad for Wiltshire County Mounty (Budget holder in charge of a team) is anything to go by, the answer is yes.
I would suggest that if you want the really high wages the public sector is [u]not</u> the place to look.
Not really a 'pot person'.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
15th December 2006, 02:53 PM
What sort of range Rover does your suit drive!!
Seriously though it highlights two problems...
one - you are right a Grade 8 should gome in!
two - the gap between being a dirt digger and director of a company with responsibilities over several projects, reports, publicatiopns and people is so narrow it is hardly worth climbing to the top... in IFA terms bottom min = 13854 top min = £20,898 a whopping 7 grand ... (and yes BAJR has the same !!)
Hardly worth getting out the trench
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
16th December 2006, 02:31 PM
Vulpes said
"I would suggest that if you want the really high wages the public sector is not the place to look."
Yes - but the point is the vast majority of archaeologists are employed in the private sector.
Peter
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
17th December 2006, 08:14 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
....the point is the vast majority of archaeologists are employed in the private sector.
Indeed the vast majority of archaeologists are employed in the private sector, so why do both the IFA and BAJR persist in linking their archaeological wage grades to the Local Government salary scheme? (Rhetorical question really, as it has been asked before and I am sure the last time the answer was 'Because they do!!').
What is worse is that as a result of 'tracking' Local Government wage scales, the annual increase in both BAJR and IFA wage levels is the same as that enjoyed by the lower levels of Local Government employees. As the Chancellor repeatedly tells Local Government negotiators that these increases must not exceed the rate of inflation, archaeology would appear to be stuck in a vicious loop with no hope of real improvement (and certainly no hope of achieving a dignity wage level) whilst Local Government tracking continues.
IF we are stuck with Local Government tracking, how about if the promised review of IFA and BAJR rates actually 'regrades archaeological 'wages to some reasonable point on the LG scales. I would suggest for starters, graduate entry at minimum LG grade 3, LG4 for excavators after 6 months experience for [u]any</u> archaeological employer, LG5 for supervisors and LG6 and above for managers.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
17th December 2006, 10:52 PM
In the summary of profiling the profession at
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ic...eport1.pdf
suggests 41% of the sector in the private sector and 22% employed by local authorities, although I should imagine this figure would rise to around 60% if the private sector was forced to put themselves out of business in the manner suggested....
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
18th December 2006, 10:18 AM
You may be heartened to hear Kevin that BAJR has stuck with IFA/LG grades as it was 'seen' to be an industry minimum. This coming year... this is changing. And with new benchmarking there will be a real understanding of what real wages should be ...
For those that were at the PROSPECT - BAJR - DIGGERS Forum meeting in London, they would have seen the horrible truth that (according to my figures) it is the middle grades that are worse paid.. with rates in some cases needing to rise by some 42% to achieve parity.. Now we all know that is impossible in a short term rise... so has to be phased in over a number of years... We also have to remember that we have to give in return. So training and professionalism must be the payback. The biggest headache for me has been the 4 different pay scales involved in archaeology... Museum, Private, University and Local Govt. --- each is slightly different and each looks at job positions in slightly different ways.
The new Scheme will look mainly at Minimums for Private Contractors. Museums/University and Local Govt already have scales. in fact the Teaching positions show just how bizarre the disparity is...
Lecturer A (roughly a Project Officer) or G5 are starting on c. £29,300 (G5 = 18450 minimum )
Research asst (like a junior supervisor ) or G3/4 are starting on roughly 21k (G4 = 16137 minimum )
So you see how silly it looksâ¦
However we have to start somewhere⦠and so BAJR is⦠even if it means risking my entire site⦠after all⦠if you (the employer) think I am being dictatorial and unfair⦠then you wonât advertise with me. And if you (the employee) decide to go for less than BAJR minimum jobs then I am equally stuffed.
What we need is a broad support, via SCAUM, IFA, PROSPECT and Diggers Forum. Representing the Employees, Employers and RAO organisations. Then BAJR can implemement the payscales they agree on. Until then thoughâ¦
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
18th December 2006, 11:49 AM
I would suggest that if you want the really high wages the public sector is not the place to look.
Or indeed the archaeological profession!!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
18th December 2006, 01:43 PM
Posted by BAJR Host:
Quote:quote:Lecturer A (roughly a Project Officer) or G5 are starting on c. £29,300 (G5 = 18450 minimum )
Research asst (like a junior supervisor ) or G3/4 are starting on roughly 21k (G4 = 16137 minimum )
Not sure at all about those comparisons. A lecturer, for instance, would normally expect to have a PhD and a number of good published research papers (not limited to excavation reports) before appointment, and how many Project Officers can say that?
Bear in mind as well that a lecturer will normally have been a post-Doctoral Research Fellow (or some similar title), not a research assistant, before appointment to teaching staff. Shifting from the full-time research grades to teaching grades often involves a pay cut - i.e. they may drop down to the scale you indicate.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2006
18th December 2006, 02:35 PM
'I would suggest that if you want the really high wages the public sector is not the place to look.'
Yes - but as previously discussed many times on this forum - the public sector positions hold the real key to quality control and enforcement.
Beamo
