Movement on the living wage?

[1man1desk]

Posted by BAJR Host:

quote:CHARTERED STATUS... how many times must I cry for it!!

Well, I am a big supporter of chartered status too - but will it make much difference here? Those qualifying for chartered status will, in the nature of things, be those that have climbed a few rungs on the ladder, not the diggers at the coalface.

Posted by Kevin Wooldridge:

quote:My guess for a ballpark figure to bring us into line with average graduate salaried posts would be something like inflation plus 5% for 10 years.

Of course, we as a profession regularly employ graduates and non-graduates in the same sort of job. That rather undermines any claim that we should be paid the same as professions where a degree is the first entrance requirement.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[BAJR Host]

Ah.... but then chartered stus can come in different levels and flavours..

and as to graduates/non graduates.. thats what all the degree or relevant XP as well as the PDPs, CPDs NVQs are about... even the Skills Pass

A degree or equivelent should be the first rung.

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[trowelfodder]

Thats more like it - working in deepest darkest Wales at the mo and havent been near a computor and its great to see that the disscussion is finally moving forward in a more possitive way.

Chartered status would seem to provide a much greater degree of protection for diggers reguarding a minimum wage - is this being brought up at the IFA conference:face-approve:?

[BAJR Host]

http://www.bajr.org/bajrforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1167

See the above thread ...

I will ask it (though I know the answer) but if you want to come up with a real good question (and perhaps some good reason why) then I will ask it.

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[1man1desk]

Posted by Trowelfodder:

quote:Chartered status would seem to provide a much greater degree of protection for diggers reguarding a minimum wage

I don't see why. Diggers would be very unlikely, in most cases, to qualify for Chartered status. Comparison with requirements in other professions suggests that Chartered status is much more likely to be granted to people at MIFA level (it could even exclude some of those).

However, it may well lead to higher pay at those levels - which would create more room for pay increases at digger level.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[mesolithic viking]

My advice on low-pay jobs: Just say no, at short notice. >

Careful, it might be hallucinogEeEe**33nnnn..

[trowelfodder]

1 man 1 desk stated that

"I don't see why. Diggers would be very unlikely, in most cases, to qualify for Chartered status. Comparison with requirements in other professions suggests that Chartered status is much more likely to be granted to people at MIFA level (it could even exclude some of those)".

I disagree with this - and the onus should be on the units to be chartered and have a ridigly enforced code of conduct and standards.

If units had to abide by this in order to be able to practice archaeology it would stop the ridiculous situation we have now of it only being voluntry to agree to set any standards, and in the case of the ifa to continuosly turn a blind eye to malpractice.

It would also mean that a minimum wage would be mandatory and enforcable and set at a reasonable level as there would be no danger of an unregistered company/volunteer group undercutting on the tenders.

In other proffessions such as engineering and law there is an entry level for new starters and a career path with progression through to different levels rather than about 80% of the workforce from digger through to PO all clumped toghether within a 5grand pay bracket. There could be progression! Experience could count for something and everytime you moved units you wouldnt have to fall back down to the bottom of the pile!

[putt1ck]

Well, gee, I've joined this debating hall, so I'm going to join in some debates...

Let's discuss some concepts:

underpaid = paid less than others for similar work. So, in an archaeological excavator is underpaid only if being paid less than the mean average for that job (per country).

paid well = highly subjective - I am well paid from my perspective, yet directly equivalent positions (by which I mean word for word job description, responsibilities, skills, etc. bar any reference to archaeology or heritage) pay 25-50% more. So, I am badly paid from that perspective. But I am paid what the organisation can afford, and earn considerably more than diggers. So pick a perspective.

bad pay = also relative to perception. Yes, graduates from universities can go straight into £30k+ jobs. Less than 100/year exist, competing against not just UK grads but world grads. So not a good measuring stick. In 04/05, average household income ~ was around £27k p.a., including any benefits payable (e.g. child support). Because of the skew to these figures caused by the excessively well paid, a household income of £30k is inside the top 40%. So two diggers at supervisor level, living together, are pushing into that top 40% bracket. Badly paid?

Actually what is interesting is to note that archaeology has the lowest differential pay of any sector I know of. Take schools - entry point of ~10k, a good head can earn ~£100k, a factor of 10. Archaeology manages what, 3? 4? Rules out union action as an effective tactic!

Simple answer to the problem - archaeology is a low margin sector. It is that way for many reasons: because it is highly fragmented, because the buyers have huge power, because archaeology is a vocation, because the curators and planning departments won't set and stick to standards in pre-qualification. Maybe other reasons (archaeology just don't communicate well, for example). Fix some of these and margins will increase, and along with them salaries. Despite rumours of fatcat directors and other senior management just wanting to take the cream, in almost all cases they are (a) also us and (b) would be happy with an equivalent percentage rise. The IFA is probably the best angle.

What will prevent any improvement is a focus on a "them and us" scenario - it isn't true and belongs to the 1970s. "We" all work in archaeology and (company by company) "we" all work for the same organisation.

Just, as always, MNSHO.

Chris

------
Strictly my views, which occasionally may also be those of my employer!
------

[BAJR Host]

I think you brought up a good point... one that I coughed out at the IFA conference - and glad to see yer boss had the same wheeze as me!!

What is the point of a tight pay scale we need to telescope it out so that extra responsibility and work = significant increase in pay.. banded for progression through a grade. so you can start out as a junior PO for example and as years pass you actually increase in pay up to a level that may exceed a junior PM job.. but the main point is that from what I was hearing the benchmarking is moving.. the problem is making sure it is backed up by 'worth' of the job in the Historic Enviroment Sector AND is sustainable by the employer.. where if everyone puts 20% onto a wage.. then within a year there would be nobody left to work for.. which might be a tad counterproductive. The best we can hope for is a steady increase AND and telescoping of the top end to allow the grades inbetween to increase relatively too.



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[garybrun]

The one boss I had a lot of respect for when I was training to be a herdsman in Cheshire paid me FULL craftsman wages from day one.. even though I didnt know that much. He said he could teach me to do the job the way he wanted it done and not by some smart fella straight out of college. A man is worth his pay he said.
"Pay peanuts... you get monkeys"

Today Im not an archaeologist nor do I intend to be... but I still 20 years on have a lot of respect and admiration for that man that gave me a trade that lasted for 10yrs.

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.