16th October 2005, 05:43 PM
[quote) I must ask where the below average arch wage comes from
[/quote]
Apologies, I should have added a note that the 'average wage' was based upon the mean of BAJR advertised posts. I think the point I was trying to make was that a relatively few 'high' paying advertisers sit atop a ziggerat of employers paying considerably less than the average.
My own personal solution to this problem would be that the IFA raise its recommended pay levels for RAOs. I don't think it would be too much to ask of RAOs to pay a minimum of ?277pw to their experienced digging staff, ?311pw to supervisors and ?344pw to PO's. My figures seem to suggest that if RAO's took the lead, non-RAO's could follow and perhaps even exceed these levels.
I also believe that the IFA should set a target for reasonable increases in their recommended levels to create a 'dignity' wage threshold for archaeologists. My suggestion if asked, would be that this should be at least 3.7% a year, enabling the ?300pw minimum 'digging' wage to be achieved by 2007/8 and ?360pw by 2012/13. For supervisors the minimum recommendation would raise to ?330pw by 2007/8 and ?410pw by 2012/13. For POs the minimum would raise to ?370pw by 2007/8 and ?440pw by 2012/13.
This could of course only apply to IFA RAO's and could not be applied across the board. I don't know that it would harm the IFA's image however if it were widely advertised that the IFA endorsed better wages and would not tolerate organisations that paid below the level of an industry defined 'dignity' wage.
[/quote]
Apologies, I should have added a note that the 'average wage' was based upon the mean of BAJR advertised posts. I think the point I was trying to make was that a relatively few 'high' paying advertisers sit atop a ziggerat of employers paying considerably less than the average.
My own personal solution to this problem would be that the IFA raise its recommended pay levels for RAOs. I don't think it would be too much to ask of RAOs to pay a minimum of ?277pw to their experienced digging staff, ?311pw to supervisors and ?344pw to PO's. My figures seem to suggest that if RAO's took the lead, non-RAO's could follow and perhaps even exceed these levels.
I also believe that the IFA should set a target for reasonable increases in their recommended levels to create a 'dignity' wage threshold for archaeologists. My suggestion if asked, would be that this should be at least 3.7% a year, enabling the ?300pw minimum 'digging' wage to be achieved by 2007/8 and ?360pw by 2012/13. For supervisors the minimum recommendation would raise to ?330pw by 2007/8 and ?410pw by 2012/13. For POs the minimum would raise to ?370pw by 2007/8 and ?440pw by 2012/13.
This could of course only apply to IFA RAO's and could not be applied across the board. I don't know that it would harm the IFA's image however if it were widely advertised that the IFA endorsed better wages and would not tolerate organisations that paid below the level of an industry defined 'dignity' wage.