30th September 2006, 11:27 AM
I disagree. Some archaeologist's prefer to work on a self-employed basis,and I know this because they have said.
I do not see how an evaluation or excavation will be in any way harmed by the use of self-employed archaeologists. The problem arises when many self-employed people are coming in and out of a dig (3 people one week, 3 new people the next week) with no coherent structure as to the team. Many of us know that sometimes you just don't have the staff at the right time. But what is wrong with having a team made up out of self-employed archaeologists? I do not see it as exploitation if that is what they prefer.
I do agree with your point about expolitation, though. OK, so some may not prefer it. When I stated working for the Unit I am at now, it was on a self-employed basis, but not by choice. If I started working, say, at the beginning of September, my first invoice wasn't paid until the end of October. No sick pay, holiday. However, my Unit soon realised that, by making all temporary staff self-employed, they were not doing themselves any favours. Why should archaeologists put up with that when they can get a better job offer elsewhere with holiday, sick pay, pension scheme, etc? So now, unless an archaeologist prefers to be self-employed, they are taken on as a member of staff, however temporary the arrangement. Do other units do the same, or is it still the norm to pay a daily rate to temporary staff?
The generalisation that all unit managers are just waiting to expolit all archaeologists is naive and also untrue. Well, not with my unit anyway. Is it me being naive or am I just lucky? This isn't a rhetorical question by the way.
The problem arises with exploitation, I think. Naive 'not long out of university' graduates seem quite happy to work for £50 - £55 a day, whereas they should be demanding £100 a day at the very least - yes, even as graduates.
I do not see how an evaluation or excavation will be in any way harmed by the use of self-employed archaeologists. The problem arises when many self-employed people are coming in and out of a dig (3 people one week, 3 new people the next week) with no coherent structure as to the team. Many of us know that sometimes you just don't have the staff at the right time. But what is wrong with having a team made up out of self-employed archaeologists? I do not see it as exploitation if that is what they prefer.
I do agree with your point about expolitation, though. OK, so some may not prefer it. When I stated working for the Unit I am at now, it was on a self-employed basis, but not by choice. If I started working, say, at the beginning of September, my first invoice wasn't paid until the end of October. No sick pay, holiday. However, my Unit soon realised that, by making all temporary staff self-employed, they were not doing themselves any favours. Why should archaeologists put up with that when they can get a better job offer elsewhere with holiday, sick pay, pension scheme, etc? So now, unless an archaeologist prefers to be self-employed, they are taken on as a member of staff, however temporary the arrangement. Do other units do the same, or is it still the norm to pay a daily rate to temporary staff?
The generalisation that all unit managers are just waiting to expolit all archaeologists is naive and also untrue. Well, not with my unit anyway. Is it me being naive or am I just lucky? This isn't a rhetorical question by the way.
The problem arises with exploitation, I think. Naive 'not long out of university' graduates seem quite happy to work for £50 - £55 a day, whereas they should be demanding £100 a day at the very least - yes, even as graduates.