25th March 2006, 04:16 PM
The whole specialist title does seem a little unfair to me when it comes to field staff. Ok so an osteologist etc has to do all sorts of things to the remains. but for the fieldies skill at recovering this material they wouldnt even have anything to be specialist in! Any way as I see it this idea of a specialist only being in post exc also reflects on other strands on this messaging list regarding pay.
Devils advocate time- Is it fair that specialists, who can also technically be seen to be on short term contracts based on the work the fieldies are doing to generate 'artefacts', are by default paid more than fieldies? Recent graduate 'specialists automatically have a pay boost but surely they are as reliant in putting in the days/weeks/months/years to get the relevant level of expertise yet some are seemingly deemed fit to be set loose on the archaeological community as a 'specialist' straight out of an MA/MSc with no practical working knowledge and allowed to pronounce verdicts on the finds. I think a field arch with two months on a training dig with an MA in Field Arch for example was allowed to run and dig a site they would be in for a hard time.
Always look on the bright side
Devils advocate time- Is it fair that specialists, who can also technically be seen to be on short term contracts based on the work the fieldies are doing to generate 'artefacts', are by default paid more than fieldies? Recent graduate 'specialists automatically have a pay boost but surely they are as reliant in putting in the days/weeks/months/years to get the relevant level of expertise yet some are seemingly deemed fit to be set loose on the archaeological community as a 'specialist' straight out of an MA/MSc with no practical working knowledge and allowed to pronounce verdicts on the finds. I think a field arch with two months on a training dig with an MA in Field Arch for example was allowed to run and dig a site they would be in for a hard time.
Always look on the bright side