British Women Archaeologists new survey

[BAJR]

British Women Archaeologists have developed a new survey for 2010. It aims to investigate how the recession has affected archaeologists in developer funded archaeology, with a particular focus on women but with stats that can be used more widely.

We have available two questionnaires: one for women, one for men (to provide comparative stats). The surveys are generally the same, but there are extra questions contained in the female survey which will usually not apply to men ? although, as ever, do feel free to debate this with us! They are anonymous, complied through Survey Monkey, and should take less than 10 minutes to complete.

The IfA have been investigating the impact of the recession by polling companies; our survey is designed to see the impact of this on individuals (both workers and managers).

This is a chance for your voice to be heard!

For Women
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DYVF6WC

For Men
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DY2KNMZ

The BWA is entirely volunteer-run and non-profit. Please support us by joining our group or sending a donation.

http://britishwomenarchaeologists.org.uk/

[Gilraen]

I have noticed that on 3 - Women and the Workplace Q2 - I cannot choose the same option twice - ie, I can only pick 4 once or 5 once. Am I misunderstanding something?

[trowelfodder]

Completed the survey but have to admit that i feel that a number of the questions are specificaly tailored to provide the answered wanted by the questionaure writer - particularly those concerning maternity rights by stating what is comparable for other industries - if you were not aware of this fact before answering the question i think many would answer differently

And why do you wish to include time spent in univeristy in the experience section as you skew the results - new/more recent graduates are more likely to be unemployed

More women than men are likely to be affected by ressession lay offs but this is not specificaly a gender issue. It has already been shown that a disproporionate number of women leave the proffession in their thirtys, and given that women outnumber men in the early years of their careers then surely this can be the only outcome as it is those at the lower level who will be laid off in greater numbers as they exist in greater numbers.

From the wordings I feel you have already made your decisions and are now setting out to gain the data to support it

[Dinosaur]

Completed the survey but have to admit that i feel that a number of the questions are specificaly tailored to provide the answered wanted by the questionaure writer - particularly those concerning maternity rights by stating what is comparable for other industries - if you were not aware of this fact before answering the question i think many would answer differently.....From the wordings I feel you have already made your decisions and are now setting out to gain the data to support it

Had distinctly the same thoughts while filling it in....the 'reasons for leaving' section in particular has a strangely restricted (??weighted/biased???) range of options? - most of the women I know who've left archaeology over the last 10 years have left for completely different reasons not on that list (like deciding that running a diving school in New Zealand would be more fun etc etc), things like having kids have mainly just resulted in them moving to office jobs (in archaeology) or just working more flexible hours...or is my employer just more reasonable about such things than most?

[BAJR]

Did you fill in the right survey..?

things like having kids have mainly just resulted in them moving to office jobs

maternity rights for employees..

well believe it or not, these are protected by law.. so not giving them would be against the law...
Discrimination and pregnancy

It's unlawful sex discrimination for employers to treat women less favourably because of their pregnancy or because they take maternity leave. Such treatment includes things like:

• trying to cut your hours without your permission
  
• suddenly giving you poor staff reports
  
• giving you unsuitable work
  
• making you redundant because of your pregnancy (you might still be made redundant for other reasons)
  
• treating days off sick due to pregnancy as a disciplinary issue
  

Your employer can't change your terms and conditions of employment while you are pregnant without your agreement. If they do, they will be in breach of contract.


That is of course as long as they are protected by being employed... of course the conditions of anyone who is self employed would be entirely different...



THe same is true about flexible working..
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/E.../DG_184569


So rather than your company being a paragon of virtue... it is complying with the law.. for employees of course.

[Oxbeast]

Speaking as someone who has just had a kid, there's no way that I'd realistically be able to go back to fieldwork. Quite apart from the money issue, there is also the prospect of an hour and a half's unpaid drive time each way being thought of as normal, and the prospect of being sent to a site on the other side of the country for months on end. I don't want to put my kid in nursery for a 12 hour plus day. Maybe not all career choices are down to discrimination, some must be pragmatic reasons. That said, its going to be a bugger trying to pursuade my partner's company to be flexible. It is run by entrepreneur types who think that employment law should only apply to other people.

[Dinosaur]

Think BAJR's just being argumentative cos it's me. Any changes of working referred to in my previous post were at the request of the women concerned, so I'm not sure why he's going off on the rant about sexual discrimination - he's fully aware that one half of the Company Directorship where I work is female/working mother, he's had enough communication with her in the past :face-stir:

[BAJR]

I am merely pointing out that your company is not being reasonable it is obeying employment law... he did communicate... but it was terminated from one side with no explanation.

Remember why and how you are here Dino... and constant mention of how great your company is will result in me losing patience. and an explanation of why... without of course me mentioning your company.

You are reading too much into things... I gave everyone information about the law and you read it as an attack on your company...and a rant about sexual discrimination stay focussed on the thread... stay on topic
:face-topic:

ps if you want to discuss further with me... pm me... do not include a reply in this thread.

[ecmgardner]

I think some of the questions on the questionairre do seem to take an intrisically pessimistic view towards the treatment of women who choose to have families. I have one small child and another on the way. I know that unless I was prepared to be an absentee parent there's no way I could have stayed as a field archaeologist (although I left the field because of an injury rather than pregnancy). I don't personally think it's a sexual discrimination thing, just a fact of the job.

[braindeath]

This survey made my **** boil. It is so badly constructed - with many questions appearing to be deliberately constructed to make you supply data that will support the questioner's view of the world and little/no opportunity to put stuff in that might challenge it. I am a man (last time I checked) and believe it or not I now have an office job, which I chose to pursue because I wanted to have a family and thought it would be nice to see them a bit more often than just at weekends. Was this sexual discrimination? Host's reply to Dino rather implies that it was.

For the record my wife is also an archaeologist, post-children (when not on maternity leave) she has worked part-time in field archaeology.

Having questionnaires that look at one part of the workforce in isolation is ridiculous particularly if you're at all interested in the impact of children. Archaeologists are frequently married to/partnered by archaeologists, so when it comes to the effects of parenthood in archaeology you can't just look at women. A male archaeologist is very likely to be involved at some stage! If I hadn't found an office niche I certainly would have left archaeology upon becoming a father because site work is very family unfriendly. The pay gives very little reason to stay and as you advance you actually do less fun stuff anyway, so why stay in archaeology? I know several other men who have made a similar choice. Unless we see a return to units only working in their own county this is pretty unlikely to change. Come to think of it local 12 hour-day watching briefs aren't great for family life either.

I saw last year's women in archaeology survey and it had the same negative view underpinning the questions.

Hey ho spleen vented. I feel a bit better now.