13th February 2006, 06:32 PM
Quote:quote:We'll have to agree to disagree there mercenary. Such people exist but not in the numbers to affect the way that field unit managers cost up jobs. They do not constitute the reason why field archaeologists are low paid and why they continue to be low-paid. The reasons for low pay existing in the profession are far more wide-reaching than a very small proportion of the digging population being over 50 and willing to put up with the wages.
We will have to disagree. You are right that the numbers are few, but it produces a disproportionate effect in the units that employ such "part timers". It allows units to continue old fashoined policies like short contracts, no notice periods, rubbish wages etc, if it has one or two "part timers" to take up the slack. Now I would have absolutely no problems at all with these individuals if they refused to accept these conditions and fought hard at getting treated as professionals like the rest of us. The ones I have known, don't, they don't need to.
I don't think wages are low because of these people at all, but attempts to improve things are hampered somewhat while some individuals will accept bad employment practices.
As for the ageism accusation, you couldn't be more wrong Invisible. Amusingly, I am probably of an age to be the recipient of ageism now.
I'm not an employer so couldn't put into practice any ageist beliefs even if I had them. I don't.
I would be equally scathing of young people who were willing to take a low salary, and work part time, and generally undermine attempts to professionalize the industry, just because they saw it as a hobby and didn't really need the money. unsurprisingly I've not met any young people like this.
PS Roy,
I didn't mean to target you personally with my final comment.