17th April 2006, 02:51 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
On site take an adult skeleton assumming good weather and all other factors (like skill and quality) except the efficiency of work are equal then people should take the same time to excavate them. If somebody can do the same standard of work faster should they be paid more?
Is that not simply describing the difference between different grades of archaeologist (e.g. G2 and G3)?
Quote:quote:
By the same token if an archaeological company worked as a collective with all the profits being shared would this be a bad thing?
We (almost) accept that archaeology is a profit making activity now so is there a mechanism by which the employee can share in those profits?
The difference between a worker's co-op and a company, public shareholding or not! And the most conventional way around sharing wealth generated in a company is by offering a stake in that company - an investment opp. But that requires job security and long-term contracting, purely from the point of view of the employees, let alone the requirements on the financial structure of the company (out of my depth in economics and finance now).
Are you not talking about by-passing traditional capitalist techniques of money-makeing. I think there's a lot of unit owners/upper management who would have an issue with this at some point!
The trust type units are quite nice for putting money back into the archaeology (not directly relevant), although not necessarilly for the employees. There's no reason a cooperative based unit couldn't work, but how many are there? And is there not a limit to scale inherent in such a set-up, before it becomes another tiered unit?? There's almost certainly available niches for them in the current system though, surely???[:I]
Gizza job!!!!! ....please!!!!!