23rd April 2010, 10:15 AM
Well I don't think I have missed the thrust.... The 'thrust' was a throwaway comment that I think was probably regretable in that it more closely resembled a Mail headline than a reasoned arguement....
My point is that if archaeologists co-operate instead of competing and build strong unions that embrace all workers then many of your concerns will cease to be a problem. If archaeology faces a challenge to reasonable terms and conditions then that is a challenge that workers in co-operation should face together, but it is laughable to suggest it is even a problem whilst wages in archaeology lag so far behind other graduate professions. Even if an 'improvement regime' was launched immediately it is unlikey that in 10 years time we would have reached parity with other comparable professions. That is the other 'tabloid' fear contained in the 'thrust' of your contention. It plays upon a wholly imaginary set fears generated by unprovable future events (not unlike the Express headline 'Property values to crash as a result of volcanic activity' which might as well add 'Pompeii could become a wasteland for 2000 years').
I think it is fine to contrbute your views to BAJR forums. I think it is fine to hold a view that is contrary to mine, but I think for the sake of clarity you should consider more carefully whether the throwaway comments really put across your honest view.
My point is that if archaeologists co-operate instead of competing and build strong unions that embrace all workers then many of your concerns will cease to be a problem. If archaeology faces a challenge to reasonable terms and conditions then that is a challenge that workers in co-operation should face together, but it is laughable to suggest it is even a problem whilst wages in archaeology lag so far behind other graduate professions. Even if an 'improvement regime' was launched immediately it is unlikey that in 10 years time we would have reached parity with other comparable professions. That is the other 'tabloid' fear contained in the 'thrust' of your contention. It plays upon a wholly imaginary set fears generated by unprovable future events (not unlike the Express headline 'Property values to crash as a result of volcanic activity' which might as well add 'Pompeii could become a wasteland for 2000 years').
I think it is fine to contrbute your views to BAJR forums. I think it is fine to hold a view that is contrary to mine, but I think for the sake of clarity you should consider more carefully whether the throwaway comments really put across your honest view.
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...