Job losses in the public sector - effects on heritage

[dundigging]

When Consultancies are making 300+ redundancies after already dumping 100s more last year we know we are in trouble. The problem is that the ConDem cuts have yet to take effect on our daily lives, as i said our 'profession' has to ride this out to survive....

[Optimus Trowel]

Where does the 300+ figure come from out of curiosity? I've heard that number a lot with regards to the potential merger of a certain two commercial units, but it always seems to be something someone's heard from someone else and I'm quite curious if anyone knows where it originated?

[Dinosaur]

.....Our 'profession' missed the boat when times were good and we were all shouting at each other about whether we should stay a loose knit institution or become chartered, as we have been doing since IFA conception....

Errr, can you explain exactly how IFA becoming a chartered institution is going to encourage the construction industry to build more stuff and keep us all in work???? :face-stir:

[dundigging]

Ummm..I did not say it would help, just that we had missed the boat. Without Chartered status we have been unable to claim a decent living wage, maybe if we get it we will be able to correct this state of affairs. sadly too late for many folk who will be dumped into other careers by the time the ConDems have finished. Oh happy daze!

[Dinosaur]

Sorry, misunderstood your gist :face-approve:

[trainedchimp]

it's the loss of another few hundred archaeologists to the profession and of the oversupply of graduates keen to work for nothing that's the only thing that will create the skills shortage required to bump pay and conditions up (when things improve, of course). It'll be great if you stay in work long enough...

seriously.

[chrysalis]

Heritage bodies affected by the cuts (edited by me but if I've missed one please feel free to repost corrected - I'm sure some of the buildings advisory and planning committees may have a heritage element also but not sure which). The source is the Telegraph.

Public bodies to be abolished (177 bodies)

Advisory Committee on Historic Wreck Sites
Advisory Committee on National Historic Ships
Churches Conservation Trust
Museums, Libraries and Archives Council
Railway Heritage Committee

Public bodies to be merged or consolidated (Maximum of 129 bodies reduced to Minimum of 57)

English Heritage, Single Heritage Body
National Heritage Memorial Fund, (as above)
National Heritage Lottery Fund, (as above)

Public bodies still under review (94 bodies)

Advisory Council on National Records and Archives
Advisory Council on Historical Manuscripts
Historic Royal Palaces
National Museums and Galleries (18 bodies*)
National Army Museum
National Museum of the Royal Navy
Natural England
Royal Air Force Museum
Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew
The National Archives

* Refers to those National Museums and Galleries in England which are publicly-funded by DCMS and receive rebates of VAT incurred in the course of their activities, in order them to enable free admission to the public. These are: The British Museum; The Imperial War Museum; The National Gallery; The National Maritime Museum; The National Museums & Galleries of Merseyside; The Natural History Museum; The Royal Armouries; The Science Museum; The National Museum of Photography, Film and Television; The National Railway Museum; The National Coal Mining Museum for England; The Tate Galleries; The Wallace Collection; The Greater Manchester Museum of Science and Industry; Sir John Soane?s Museum; The Museum of London; The Geffrye Museum; and The Horniman Museum. Other publicly-funded museums (The British Library, The National Army Museum, etc.) are separately referred to in this list, and museums in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are a devolved matter (although they also receive rebates of VAT).

No heritage bodies are on the safe list or the list to be privatised

[Mike.T.]

it's the loss of another few hundred archaeologists to the profession and of the oversupply of graduates keen to work for nothing that's the only thing that will create the skills shortage required to bump pay and conditions up (when things improve, of course). It'll be great if you stay in work long enough...

Unless you're an unemployed Archaeologist. In which case it isn't.

[trainedchimp]

Unless you're an unemployed Archaeologist. In which case it isn't.

I think that was covered in the last point I made, a sting in the tail...

on a corporate/professional level, as long as units get people falling over themselves to work for frankly sh1te money and conditions (er, read as willing to work for the going wage), that's all they'll ever offer. As long as there are more people frankly desperate to become or remain archaeologists that they'll take aforesaid sh1te, conditions will never get better. The only thing that will help pay, conditions and retention is a skill shortage - i.e. too few diggers for the jobs. The only two ways of creating this skill shortage are either by digging lots more stuff, or by enough diggers leaving the 'profession'. The simple fact that pay and conditions haven't improved at all (actually, much, to be fair) over the past 20 years, despite the volume of work multiplying several times over in that period is that the supply of willing diggers has overreached the demand.

No consolation if you're now doing something else and wishing you were still digging, or are out of work altogether. I'll admit that, and apologies for the depressing and fascistic world view....

On a personal level, I asked myself whether I lived to dig or dug to live, and came down just about in the second camp. I figured that if you live to dig, you've got to accept the sh1te and take the meagre crumbs of work as it's own reward, as it's never been any secret that pay and conditions are appalling. If you dig to live, you've got three options - put up and shut up, get out and do something about it or just get out. Logic about as brutal as the profession I'm afraid.