16th March 2009, 06:41 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
The same T&C as before
Good, that is a relief if that is the case; as I said, personally I was worried there may have been a variation to normal T&C meaning a drop in effective income.
On a wider front until we get back to having a dearth of archaeologists (which may or may not be a while) we probably won't be seeing accommodation and subs for these type of situations. Paying for these items certainly increases costs significantly. As long as it is clearly stated, then maybe there is no problem with that: 'This is a local site, for local diggers!'
I hope that at these site 'places of work' staff have access to all the services normally available at HQ.
on the taxed accommodation front, taxed accommodation is better than NO accommodation, the issue is whether you are told it is 'free' and then get stung for tax later. I personally wouldn't want accommodation for real away jobs to halt over the tax issue, it just needs the pay sorting to make sure it doesn't penalise those sent on away jobs IF that is possible legally!
Kevin is right that a decent wage would mean this issue was less contentious, but it would still be a highly difficult issue:
If wages go up to cover accom/subs but digger X is sent away 8 months a year and therefore pays double accommodation/bills for those 8 months, whilst Digger Y has a family/is a carer/is doing PX so can't be sent away at all and therefore only pays their home rent/bills: Digger X is clearly worse off, in two ways!
A complex issue that wasn't so bad before when the inconvenience of away work was mitigated by the daily allowance....before the tax man got involved!!