30th March 2009, 02:34 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle(my italics)
I cant recall the exact figures ....The pension entitlement alone was about an 8% rise ie over a grand, the leave entitlement was for 4 weeks plus banks holidays worth about 2k and over a 1k in basic increase. Then there is the entitlement to a months sick pay 1.5k. This I think equated to about a third increase in the pay package.
However most people saw little increase in there take home pay. In my view this benefits package was misplaced - what people need is more cash now.
Peter
That might be a third increase in the overall pay package IF previously archaeologists had had NO paid holiday pay AT ALL, NO paid sick leave AT ALL (and now use up all their allowance, every year) and had a pension. Which of course wasn't and isn't the case for the vast majority of archaeologists. Plus the leave entitlement at least was a legislative change. You are being disingenuous in your use of these figures, looking at the IfA's page on this (http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ic...p?page=206) it appears that your figures are out as well. Whilst we all acknowledge these increases, such as they were, place an increased cost on employers, they give the employee essential rights and security, which make them more productive employees in the long run.
Whilst we all want to see an improvement in baseline pay, decent sick leave, holiday and pension rights are important as well and underpin the basic pay in providing a secure and balanced employment package. We have to move to a position where we have decent pay and decent conditions, not barely adequate pay and no security.