11th September 2010, 07:44 AM
Lets remember the start of this thread
The future of commercial archaeology from a digger's point of view
[INDENT]Archaeology has changed, the last 10-15yrs has seen the loss of many small geographically restricted companies with there specialist knowledge of local geologies, pottery ware's and specific urban stratigraphy. Taken over by a few 'relatively' large archaeological giants who have bullied and undercut there way through the UK (And too a lesser extent mainland Europe), knocking the small companies and there wealth of local knowledge aside and forcing them out of buisness. This growth of the giants is soon too reach its final chapter with the joining of two such companies into a force that will lead the way in setting wages and conditions for years to come. It is obvious that certainly the next few years will see wages and conditions kept down while this new company fights with the other major giant for dominance in the commercial field.
While this is great news for the developers it does mean lean times ahead for the field teams, but maybe just as importantly will the archaeology suffer? This year alone there have been a number of important sites that have been effectively trashed (Including an IA site ignored and bulldozed out of the way A Roman Villa being recorded as a field drain and a Medieval cemetry excavated with a 360) All the large companies have been guilty to a degree and appear more interested in profits then understanding our heritage. This mentality of promising to dig complex sites for progessively less money and time than any other company is damaging not only our image in the construction industry but also (More importantly) its forcing more and more experinced hands out of the field all together as they get disenchanted.
Anyone who has spent any length of time in the commercial field will have had contact with at least one of these companies, and no doubt will have been on sites with half the excavators needed whilst being forced to finish sites in less time then initally agreed. Many Project Officers (And increasingly supervisors who are forced into leading sites years above there experience level) are being progessively worn down as they battle from one site to the next. Many now seem to have lossed heart and see paperwork as something that slows the progress down, complaining when excavators try to record features to a standard that should be the norm. (Fill of ditch is of no use anyone! If thats all thats allowed to be said why waste the paper!)
This needs to change. But who is going to lead the way? Now most of the smaller companies have been forced out of buisness there seems to be nobody pushing for the quality that used to be the norm. If the companies are happy to let the quality suffer so they can rush onto the next site then who? Naturally the leading force should be the very people who are meant to be policing these companies already, the county archaeologists. Unfortunately in many instances they are just as bad if not worse. Sometimes bullied by there employer into allowing lucrative developments taking place many are willing to turn a blind eye.
So I guess this is what this rant is focused towards. We need change. Change in the system. We can't stop the growth of these 'mega-companies' (The developers often wanting large numbers of people eg. recent pipelines and road schemes) but maybe we can create an appropriate system in which the archaeology is given the time and focus it deserves, local expertise can be exploited and maybe eventually a proper wage can be given.
1st and foremost there needs to be a governing body that watches over the county archaeologists. I know that many councils (Mainly the more corrupt ones) are against this system, but it needs to be done. This needs to be done at goverment level and at the moment maybe EH are the only ones able to lead the way. Whilst I'm sure the IFA would happily take over this role it wouldn't work. The high numbers of large company managers involved at the very top of the IFA could bias the system to there advantage, and even if they were completely honest many would still percieve such a bias.
2nd We need to create a scheme that forces companies (Whatever size) to record and excavate to a set standard. Regardless of what the IFA say it isn't doing this! The last IFA inspection I witnessed comprised the inspector and manager arriving on site, not talking to a single digger and then vanishing into a pub across the road after a full 10mins. The IFA say that they would like to introduce a chartered type industry, but to do this they need a minimum 75% (Or there abouts) membership from current proffesional archaeologists. If they are to achieve this then they need to provide a cheaper membership option or ask companies to pay for there staff, many fieldstaff simply don't have the finances to pay.
3rd These large companies should focus on the mega jobs such as pipelines, road schemes, city centre developments, the recent london access etc... Leaving the smaller jobs to local companies with there better understanding and knowledge of spicific areas.
4th The large companies need to listen to there staff (We're smarter than we look! Remember). All the large companies appear to have the same mentality, abusing underpaid staff as a norm. Forcing most to do jobs at higher grades than they are being paid for, expecting them to work long hours for little reward, putting them in situations they simply have no chance of succeeding and then making them feel as if they are a failure when they can't meet the deadlines. Imagine if you will being a supervisor, asked to run a large complex site with half the numbers promised (Many being trainees new to archaeology) and when asked how long the site will take often cutting that time scale by a quarter or even half. And this happening over and over.
Archaeology at the moment is in meltdown, it has no direction or purpose. The fieldstaff are losing hope, I know we always complain, that there is (and always will be) issues. But we only wish to do the job we have studied hard and put ourselves in debt for! We shouldn't feel guilty for wanting to record and excavate features in the appropriate manner. We know we're not on research and that features need to be investigated fast. We're not talking about taking 3 days to dig a single feature using only a trowel, we're simply talking about you listerning to our views. When we say it'll take 2 weeks to finish a site with 6 diggers then thats what we mean. Not 1 week with 3 trainee's. Thanks for your time. Sorry to rant [/INDENT]
The future of commercial archaeology from a digger's point of view
[INDENT]Archaeology has changed, the last 10-15yrs has seen the loss of many small geographically restricted companies with there specialist knowledge of local geologies, pottery ware's and specific urban stratigraphy. Taken over by a few 'relatively' large archaeological giants who have bullied and undercut there way through the UK (And too a lesser extent mainland Europe), knocking the small companies and there wealth of local knowledge aside and forcing them out of buisness. This growth of the giants is soon too reach its final chapter with the joining of two such companies into a force that will lead the way in setting wages and conditions for years to come. It is obvious that certainly the next few years will see wages and conditions kept down while this new company fights with the other major giant for dominance in the commercial field.
While this is great news for the developers it does mean lean times ahead for the field teams, but maybe just as importantly will the archaeology suffer? This year alone there have been a number of important sites that have been effectively trashed (Including an IA site ignored and bulldozed out of the way A Roman Villa being recorded as a field drain and a Medieval cemetry excavated with a 360) All the large companies have been guilty to a degree and appear more interested in profits then understanding our heritage. This mentality of promising to dig complex sites for progessively less money and time than any other company is damaging not only our image in the construction industry but also (More importantly) its forcing more and more experinced hands out of the field all together as they get disenchanted.
Anyone who has spent any length of time in the commercial field will have had contact with at least one of these companies, and no doubt will have been on sites with half the excavators needed whilst being forced to finish sites in less time then initally agreed. Many Project Officers (And increasingly supervisors who are forced into leading sites years above there experience level) are being progessively worn down as they battle from one site to the next. Many now seem to have lossed heart and see paperwork as something that slows the progress down, complaining when excavators try to record features to a standard that should be the norm. (Fill of ditch is of no use anyone! If thats all thats allowed to be said why waste the paper!)
This needs to change. But who is going to lead the way? Now most of the smaller companies have been forced out of buisness there seems to be nobody pushing for the quality that used to be the norm. If the companies are happy to let the quality suffer so they can rush onto the next site then who? Naturally the leading force should be the very people who are meant to be policing these companies already, the county archaeologists. Unfortunately in many instances they are just as bad if not worse. Sometimes bullied by there employer into allowing lucrative developments taking place many are willing to turn a blind eye.
So I guess this is what this rant is focused towards. We need change. Change in the system. We can't stop the growth of these 'mega-companies' (The developers often wanting large numbers of people eg. recent pipelines and road schemes) but maybe we can create an appropriate system in which the archaeology is given the time and focus it deserves, local expertise can be exploited and maybe eventually a proper wage can be given.
1st and foremost there needs to be a governing body that watches over the county archaeologists. I know that many councils (Mainly the more corrupt ones) are against this system, but it needs to be done. This needs to be done at goverment level and at the moment maybe EH are the only ones able to lead the way. Whilst I'm sure the IFA would happily take over this role it wouldn't work. The high numbers of large company managers involved at the very top of the IFA could bias the system to there advantage, and even if they were completely honest many would still percieve such a bias.
2nd We need to create a scheme that forces companies (Whatever size) to record and excavate to a set standard. Regardless of what the IFA say it isn't doing this! The last IFA inspection I witnessed comprised the inspector and manager arriving on site, not talking to a single digger and then vanishing into a pub across the road after a full 10mins. The IFA say that they would like to introduce a chartered type industry, but to do this they need a minimum 75% (Or there abouts) membership from current proffesional archaeologists. If they are to achieve this then they need to provide a cheaper membership option or ask companies to pay for there staff, many fieldstaff simply don't have the finances to pay.
3rd These large companies should focus on the mega jobs such as pipelines, road schemes, city centre developments, the recent london access etc... Leaving the smaller jobs to local companies with there better understanding and knowledge of spicific areas.
4th The large companies need to listen to there staff (We're smarter than we look! Remember). All the large companies appear to have the same mentality, abusing underpaid staff as a norm. Forcing most to do jobs at higher grades than they are being paid for, expecting them to work long hours for little reward, putting them in situations they simply have no chance of succeeding and then making them feel as if they are a failure when they can't meet the deadlines. Imagine if you will being a supervisor, asked to run a large complex site with half the numbers promised (Many being trainees new to archaeology) and when asked how long the site will take often cutting that time scale by a quarter or even half. And this happening over and over.
Archaeology at the moment is in meltdown, it has no direction or purpose. The fieldstaff are losing hope, I know we always complain, that there is (and always will be) issues. But we only wish to do the job we have studied hard and put ourselves in debt for! We shouldn't feel guilty for wanting to record and excavate features in the appropriate manner. We know we're not on research and that features need to be investigated fast. We're not talking about taking 3 days to dig a single feature using only a trowel, we're simply talking about you listerning to our views. When we say it'll take 2 weeks to finish a site with 6 diggers then thats what we mean. Not 1 week with 3 trainee's. Thanks for your time. Sorry to rant [/INDENT]