12th June 2008, 09:36 AM
Interesting post by Museum of London Human resources on About.Archaeology
http://archaeology.about.com/b/2008/06/0...london.htm
including this line
"Just 87 staff voted to take industrial action, from a total workforce of 436 and the majority of staff are expected to work as usual today."
This is quite confusing as the 436 staff mentioned include all three groups of the Museum of London. The original statement specifically states the strike was by ARCHAEOLOGISTS at MoLAS - not the whole group... who are anyway under a different union. The statement that 86% of those who voted in the Strike Ballot by PROSPECT union members is therefore true.
I was under the impression that the MoL group was wanting to pay more - and it does say that later. However, making statement such as that... on an American site ... is strange. Statistics...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
http://archaeology.about.com/b/2008/06/0...london.htm
including this line
"Just 87 staff voted to take industrial action, from a total workforce of 436 and the majority of staff are expected to work as usual today."
This is quite confusing as the 436 staff mentioned include all three groups of the Museum of London. The original statement specifically states the strike was by ARCHAEOLOGISTS at MoLAS - not the whole group... who are anyway under a different union. The statement that 86% of those who voted in the Strike Ballot by PROSPECT union members is therefore true.
I was under the impression that the MoL group was wanting to pay more - and it does say that later. However, making statement such as that... on an American site ... is strange. Statistics...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu