5th June 2007, 06:44 PM
Responding to comments: Peter perhaps there's a problem with our contact details for you. The policy was discussed at our AGM in December and there was a consultation exercise in January, to which a number of the members responded (all of them broadly in support of the policy). I also personally sent all members notification of the policy yesterday at 2.40 pm (again to the email address that we have for you), prior to asking BAJR and the CBA whether they would also place the new statement on their websites (at 2.49 pm). If you could confirm your contact details I will ensure that all future notifications are sent to you.
Picking up on trowelheadâs comments - no one believes that 14K is a great position, but everyone in the archaeological sector (and that includes managers) find themselves part of a far wider environment and therefore do not have total control of all aspects that might affect their organisation. This is particularly the case with regard to the market place (by definition) and related costs, of which the most significant in any archaeological organisation are staff costs. I realise that there is a well rehearsed debate about these issues (often played out with vigour on this forum!), but would ask that you consider that SCAUM is making this statement very much as an exploratory position. We absolutely recognise that the situation has to improve - and as such we thought it most significant that we take a stance on the matter. However, SCAUM can not negotiate on behalf of employers; it does not have that mandate, but in making a policy statement on pay we hope to focus attention on it. At the end of the day, we can only make progress in these areas through institutional dialogue and wider fora, not through solitary efforts.
David Jennings
SCAUM Chair
Picking up on trowelheadâs comments - no one believes that 14K is a great position, but everyone in the archaeological sector (and that includes managers) find themselves part of a far wider environment and therefore do not have total control of all aspects that might affect their organisation. This is particularly the case with regard to the market place (by definition) and related costs, of which the most significant in any archaeological organisation are staff costs. I realise that there is a well rehearsed debate about these issues (often played out with vigour on this forum!), but would ask that you consider that SCAUM is making this statement very much as an exploratory position. We absolutely recognise that the situation has to improve - and as such we thought it most significant that we take a stance on the matter. However, SCAUM can not negotiate on behalf of employers; it does not have that mandate, but in making a policy statement on pay we hope to focus attention on it. At the end of the day, we can only make progress in these areas through institutional dialogue and wider fora, not through solitary efforts.
David Jennings
SCAUM Chair