4th December 2005, 03:10 PM
Quote:quote:For those of us old enough to have been working in the field both before and after the advent of PPG16 and competitive tendering, it is clear that pay, conditions of employment (if any) and the quality of (rescue) archaeological work done were all worse beforehand.posted by 1man1desk
I'm sure what you say is true 1man. Although I'm not old enough to have experienced life before 1990 in archaeology, it certainly squares with everything I have read about it and what others have told me.
However, I am not sure that it is fair to make the comparison as I do not think you are comparing like with like. PPG16 established our profession on a 'legal' basis for the first time ensuring that all development everywhere in Britain was subject to archaeological considerations. It replaced an ad hoc system that employed far fewer archaeologists.
It might even be fair to say that PPG16 established our profession for the first time. The fact that it also effectively privatised archaeology is unlikely to be the reason that wages went up and the quality of the archaeology got better. Many other factors were involved that seem to me to preclude a straight forward comparison.