Pay and Conditions

[GnomeKing]

developers seem to be under the impression that the archaeological investigation of a site is something that can be left to the last minute? ?Is this a problem with perception of archaeologist within the construction industry??

I think develops are fairly predicable creatures - perhaps the problem is they have become aware of how we view ourselves....as somebody said a while back, are we a profession capable of stabbing ourselves in the back?

@Jo ? yes if we all stood our ground collectivity like that (like some much else) it would be a glorious achievement! As far as unilateral action is concerned, the numbers involved are actually quite modest, when compared with vaguely applicable historic precedent ? disconnection and individual fear are the enemy...

But perhaps its not the same people with knives in their backs as those with the knives...lets us consider the (alleged) behaviour of of certain RAO 'representatives', as first suggested in the IfA Council Statement on Archaeological Salaries thread...

let us also consider a number of comments in this thread, first Ken Denhams about the wilful falsification of site records ? an extreme example only in that, more commonly, genuine ignorance, narrow mindedness, authoritarianism, and self-promotion ? rather than naked fear ? are to blame for comparable acts of neglect.

Is this a problem with perception of archaeologist? ?

Yes ? crucial workers have been undersold in the tendering processes. Developers often are given unrealistic estimates and blurry, short-sighted interpretation. Archaeology is shoe-horned around, quibbling details bated about, all in an attempt by ambitious, under-informed managers to maintain the personal interpretation they have given their clients. No surprise that developers assume the value of archaeological work is limited.

Worse ? either that person is too weak to be anything other than transparent, or they have put so much effort into promoting their own narratives and agendas that they lose contact with alternatives suggested by the evidence. They fail to see the need for 'proof', and the abandon any pretence of research ? a thing that could truly generate Value.

Stupidity, greed and competitive tender will be the death of any meaningful commercial archaeology.?

Please wake up ... the main thing being lost is the archaeology just so we can live the dream.?

But who, pray tell, gets the best dreams Mr and Mrs RAO 'Representatives'?

And don't they just so well jolly deserve it ? like the bankers ? for all the hard work they've done, the experience they embody, their inspired leadership?

Or perhaps RedEarth is right...

Exploitation combined with those who seem only too willing to be exploited is a dangerous combination. We need to do more to look after our own?

How can units justify giving such a small cut to the individual who earns them their money

? apparently quite easily, the way all exploiters mask their actions from their own face, with a self affirming mantra, and a sickly air of undeserved worthiness.

We ... need a certain number of archaeologists for the contracts that are around, ... People talk about competitive tendering driving down quality and wages. Isn't that what your doing if you take a job that's badly paid?

How right you are Clare King.....however I take issue with Benmoore, and Moggy for applauding the sentiment that:

I tend to accept pay cuts in the same way I accept pay increases...if we had an effective and knowledgeable union we could sort the bastards out.

oh dear, oh dear.......

a union can not sort out all these problems ? they can only enforce general employment law and best practice - the structure of employment and wages, if not agreed upon by archaeologists themselves can not be solved externally by a union, whose membership amongst archaeologists is somewhat less than could be desired if these sentiments are widespread and truly held...

But why just cut the pay for junior staff, why not for the managers as well. In fact why not the managers alone.....Just a thought.

But a good thought Kevin Wooldridge...perhaps Equality is the issue rather than Size of wage per se.

There are Bad Apples out there ? they have undersold both the archaeology and their staff ? take a look around and ask if all those 'managers' really deserve the extra money ? have they contributed more than you have? Is their knowledge sufficient? Have they taken responsibility? Have they enabled your archaeological work, or have they hindered it?

Chiz is right ? the 'best' should be kept when there is oversupply (? but then again fresh young minds are so much easier to Exploit aren't they....)

Like Bankers, the Bad Apples justify their position :
-?we are working hard in difficult times?
-?i deserve my extra money because of my experience/qualifications/arcane 'knowledge'?
-?i generate contracts?
-?i take all the responsibility? ?.....................................................and so on............

Often these fall down on contextual examination ? most fundamentally the central concept that:

?if you don't pay these wages, then you don't get the best people?

While we might argue about our role as Temporal Waste Contamination experts, (imho) it is clear that archaeology MUST be for the Cultural Benefit of Society ? the more like a Construction Contractor the profession becomes, the more it will resemble and incorporate the deficient social norms that underpin Modern Capitalism.

Bankers and Bad Apples need that underpinning ? but We don't need Them. They CAN be replaced by people with equal or superior ability and knowledge, who really are prepared to work in a co-operative and equitable way.

Archaeology can try to operate within a Capitalist system, but it can NEVER be a Capital Enterprise, without also being a Farce and a Lie. Business Managers who think otherwise are poisonous and a liability to the archaeology.
Wages will always be relativity low, and as Craft, there will be an extended 'apprenticeship' period ? but this should be offset by Fulfilment ? the heart of which is Equality, Community, and Shared Purpose.

There is no point 'discussing' wages with some of the slimy, self-serving, overvalued individuals who might be found 'representing', for example, some IFA RAO's. Better to take radical action - abandon those employment hierarchies altogether...or cull the Bad Apples who routinely undersell the archaeology and archaeologists.

A Co-Operative, equitable company, with a harmonious community at its heart, not a fictional capital enterprise - it would not be able to pay anything like the 'top end' wages, but the central community would be Fulfilled and able enjoy the quality of their craft. Direct wages might fluctuate, but collective approaches to life have many other potential benefits.

Ask not whether wages should or should not be lower/improved ? only collective action can prevent/enable that ? if such collective action is possible, then why not make more radical changes for the long-term benefit of archaeology and society?