1st March 2007, 05:52 PM
Apologies to Illuminated. I wasn't intending to suggest that the current wage levels in UK archaeology were anywhere near sufficient. I am suspicious however of pay campaigns that [u]limit</u> their ambitions to aims such as 'a living wage', unless that aim is clearly defined. Because as Illuminated suggests one persons living wage may not be another's.
If the Camapign is looking for a definition of a 'living wage' it might like to consider some of the factors that the European Parliament takes into account when it pronounces on a 'dignity wage' for its member citizens.
A 'dignity wage' takes into account factors which would be common to most of us, the right to be able to afford to live in a secure environment, to be able to afford to raise a family, to be able to afford to use ones holiday leave to have a holiday rather than take another job to earn more money, to ba able to earn sufficient to invest in achieving qualifications that further an individuals career prospects, to be able to afford to invest in a pension and make savings towards ones retirement etc etc. A campaign for an undefined 'living wage' may well stop short of many of those objectives.
Whilst on the subject, I have just seen a BBC newsflash saying that the Chancellor has announced public sector pay for the coming pay round will be limited to less than 2%. That is to mine (and apparently the TUC's reckoning), at least 2% below headline inflation and therefore in effect a pay cut for workers in the public sector. As the public sector increase is normally reflected in the local government salary increases (which the IFA and BAJR use to benchmark their pay minima), it might be useful if all parties could indicate whether the Living Breathing Wage Campaign is going to be stalled at 2%.
I can't imagine that many archaeologists are going to waste their time gettting involved in the hard work of a pay campaign that at the end of the day is going to be limited to confirming a [u]decrease</u> in real terms of 2%. I already detect a hint of tea-hut cynicism that might follow such an announcement. As the late departed Chairman might have said 'Although at present we appear to be going backwards, believe me folks this is the start of The Great Leap Forward' [?]
If the Camapign is looking for a definition of a 'living wage' it might like to consider some of the factors that the European Parliament takes into account when it pronounces on a 'dignity wage' for its member citizens.
A 'dignity wage' takes into account factors which would be common to most of us, the right to be able to afford to live in a secure environment, to be able to afford to raise a family, to be able to afford to use ones holiday leave to have a holiday rather than take another job to earn more money, to ba able to earn sufficient to invest in achieving qualifications that further an individuals career prospects, to be able to afford to invest in a pension and make savings towards ones retirement etc etc. A campaign for an undefined 'living wage' may well stop short of many of those objectives.
Whilst on the subject, I have just seen a BBC newsflash saying that the Chancellor has announced public sector pay for the coming pay round will be limited to less than 2%. That is to mine (and apparently the TUC's reckoning), at least 2% below headline inflation and therefore in effect a pay cut for workers in the public sector. As the public sector increase is normally reflected in the local government salary increases (which the IFA and BAJR use to benchmark their pay minima), it might be useful if all parties could indicate whether the Living Breathing Wage Campaign is going to be stalled at 2%.
I can't imagine that many archaeologists are going to waste their time gettting involved in the hard work of a pay campaign that at the end of the day is going to be limited to confirming a [u]decrease</u> in real terms of 2%. I already detect a hint of tea-hut cynicism that might follow such an announcement. As the late departed Chairman might have said 'Although at present we appear to be going backwards, believe me folks this is the start of The Great Leap Forward' [?]