16th June 2004, 05:08 PM
The biggest flaw in the archaeology pay scale as it stands is the level of the starting salary. A salary of under 12,000 for a trainee is an insult for someone who's been to university. A person who did an apprentership rather than going to university, by the time the student has left University would expect to be on 16,000. The whole idea that a fresh graduate should be on such a low salary straight from university, after collecting student loans and various debts is just what I stated earlier, an insult. With the average student debt after leaving university fast approaching 20,000, repayments of student loans now started at earnings of over 10,000, rising house prices, steep rises in rent of even shared houses and large increases in council tax to expect any graduate to start for under 14,000 is unreasonable. The way the term trainee is banded about by units suggests that what graduates gained at university counts for nothing and doesn't count as relevant skills. Units in fact in general always seem to be in a rush to pay the least money possible. This statement is based on being in the profession for over four years.