2nd June 2004, 03:57 PM
Hello everyone, I'm a new boy here so please be gentle with me. I'm also an "outsider" - I am not a professional archaeologist, I have a proper job at present so would like to offer an outside view (although having been an amateur I am foolish enough to be starting in the 2nd year of a degree in archaeology in September).
First, I wouldn't get too excited about pay scales and governing bodies. Other professions don't have pay scales, you're paid according to supply and demand and how good you are (or can convince people you are). The professions themselves (eg architecture, which is what I know about) are no longer allowed to publish mandatory fee scales as they used to, they have to compete (fee bid) for work. A pay scale, if actually legal, would surely inhibit this process.
The very concept of fixed pay scales worries me a bit anyway. This is a very Local Authority idea and frankly the real world is not terribly interested in it. Minimum pay rates are a subtly different concept, but how would they be enforced? OK the IFA could require member organisations to adhere to them. So, when labour is cheaply available, how do you get organisations to join the IFA? Further, a minimum pay rate rapidly becomes the standard.
Similarly the idea of "grading" everyone (I can imagine the converstaion at parties, "hi, I'm a grade 2 Taurean...") is very LA and very cumbersome, and doesn't really exist in other professions. I suppose an informal sort of progression is evolving, slave/digger/supervisor/PO etc, which is roughly similar to architecture and more or less reflects what is actually done.
The problem begins with the fact that there are too many applicants for each vacancy (I don't expect to work when/if I get my degree, by the way, although I would love to). A viscous circle is formed as the fees charged by the units are too low, also depressing wages. The cycle could perhaps be broken - we have a captive client base, the developer HAS to employ someone. The costs will be recouped - construction coats will rise to compensate.
Well, a bit of a disjointed ramble for my first go, but there you go!
Hmm, ritual, I think.
First, I wouldn't get too excited about pay scales and governing bodies. Other professions don't have pay scales, you're paid according to supply and demand and how good you are (or can convince people you are). The professions themselves (eg architecture, which is what I know about) are no longer allowed to publish mandatory fee scales as they used to, they have to compete (fee bid) for work. A pay scale, if actually legal, would surely inhibit this process.
The very concept of fixed pay scales worries me a bit anyway. This is a very Local Authority idea and frankly the real world is not terribly interested in it. Minimum pay rates are a subtly different concept, but how would they be enforced? OK the IFA could require member organisations to adhere to them. So, when labour is cheaply available, how do you get organisations to join the IFA? Further, a minimum pay rate rapidly becomes the standard.
Similarly the idea of "grading" everyone (I can imagine the converstaion at parties, "hi, I'm a grade 2 Taurean...") is very LA and very cumbersome, and doesn't really exist in other professions. I suppose an informal sort of progression is evolving, slave/digger/supervisor/PO etc, which is roughly similar to architecture and more or less reflects what is actually done.
The problem begins with the fact that there are too many applicants for each vacancy (I don't expect to work when/if I get my degree, by the way, although I would love to). A viscous circle is formed as the fees charged by the units are too low, also depressing wages. The cycle could perhaps be broken - we have a captive client base, the developer HAS to employ someone. The costs will be recouped - construction coats will rise to compensate.
Well, a bit of a disjointed ramble for my first go, but there you go!
Hmm, ritual, I think.