22nd November 2005, 05:24 PM
Not really irrelevant. The point is not to have the same title, as the same structure for the title.
In a consultancy, for instance, an 'assistant archaeologist' is the same grade as an 'assistant ecologist' or an 'assistant engineer' (in archaeology terms, usually graduate to PIFA level). An 'archaeologist' is the same grade as an 'engineer' (PIFA to AIFA), while all 'senior [insert name of profession]s' are the same grade (AIFA to MIFA).
A consultancy, local authority, Environment Agency, Highways Agency etc (all of these employ archaeologists) could not comply with a standard structure for job titles that suits archaeological units.
I do think, however, that you could arrive at a standard set of titles for field units only, with associated defined levels of responsibility, and that might be a good thing.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
In a consultancy, for instance, an 'assistant archaeologist' is the same grade as an 'assistant ecologist' or an 'assistant engineer' (in archaeology terms, usually graduate to PIFA level). An 'archaeologist' is the same grade as an 'engineer' (PIFA to AIFA), while all 'senior [insert name of profession]s' are the same grade (AIFA to MIFA).
A consultancy, local authority, Environment Agency, Highways Agency etc (all of these employ archaeologists) could not comply with a standard structure for job titles that suits archaeological units.
I do think, however, that you could arrive at a standard set of titles for field units only, with associated defined levels of responsibility, and that might be a good thing.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished