18th November 2005, 01:14 AM
The IFA proposals for pay have been presented to RAOs for discussion. It is not yet a done deal.
My problem is not with the principal but the amounts. Where is the pay minima for 2006 in all this?
My on-going survey of BAJR job adverts reveals that (despite IFA claims to the contrary) it is actually RAOs who are amongst the worst payers in UK archaeology. This scheme does nothing to improve that situation.
The reality is that if these scales are adopted some RAOs will be paying as little as ?265 per week to experienced diggers in March 2008. The current 'average' pay for an experienced digger (based on BAJR job ads April-November 2005) is ?278 per week. So the IFA proposes a scheme where its registered 'best practice' organisations can pay less in 3 years time than the current industry average. That is sheer lunacy!!.
I hope the RAOs throw out this lousy deal.
My problem is not with the principal but the amounts. Where is the pay minima for 2006 in all this?
My on-going survey of BAJR job adverts reveals that (despite IFA claims to the contrary) it is actually RAOs who are amongst the worst payers in UK archaeology. This scheme does nothing to improve that situation.
The reality is that if these scales are adopted some RAOs will be paying as little as ?265 per week to experienced diggers in March 2008. The current 'average' pay for an experienced digger (based on BAJR job ads April-November 2005) is ?278 per week. So the IFA proposes a scheme where its registered 'best practice' organisations can pay less in 3 years time than the current industry average. That is sheer lunacy!!.
I hope the RAOs throw out this lousy deal.