17th April 2007, 06:04 PM
Maybe I didn't put my argument very well, or the discussion has pushed off down one particular aspect i.e. enforcement of standards. While enforcement is essential, to have a solid impact on the archaeological sector (in terms of both wages and the quality of output) higher starting standards need to be set, creating barriers to entry. These standards need to be present at the first stage, the PQQ and tender.
The simplest standard to set and enforce would be RAO status or the equivalent measures thereof. While this puts a burden on the IFA to monitor RAOs and RAO applicants, it would also tend to increase their membership, providing the additional resource required.
Doctors, lawyers, accountants and engineers; teachers, personnel managers, chartered surveyors; all have two things in common: they get paid more than archaeologists and they have enforced standards for entry to the profession. This is not a coincidence.
Currently archaeology has no barriers to entry; it is easiest to start by raising the bar for the employing organisations than for the people - that will come naturally in time.
------
Strictly my views, which occasionally may also be those of my employer!
------
The simplest standard to set and enforce would be RAO status or the equivalent measures thereof. While this puts a burden on the IFA to monitor RAOs and RAO applicants, it would also tend to increase their membership, providing the additional resource required.
Doctors, lawyers, accountants and engineers; teachers, personnel managers, chartered surveyors; all have two things in common: they get paid more than archaeologists and they have enforced standards for entry to the profession. This is not a coincidence.
Currently archaeology has no barriers to entry; it is easiest to start by raising the bar for the employing organisations than for the people - that will come naturally in time.
------
Strictly my views, which occasionally may also be those of my employer!
------