14th October 2010, 03:18 PM
Cant say that the figures make much sense to me. It’s a pretty micky mouse statement. Whats the budget spent on? Infrastructure., heating leases? It appears that they are proposing to reduce staffing numbers from 33.8 by 27.8. leaving 5 which is an 82% reduction in numbers but they only come out with a 75% saving although 381000 does not look like, a 75% saving on a net budget of 1013000 although 763000 does but that is for two years. Why haven’t they broken it down to HER officers and curatorial levels (maybe they don’t know). I would have thought that redundancy costs would also affect the initial saving rate. Why have they opted for 75% rather than 25%?
Maybe the commercial/private are going to have to take over the HERs and the curation. Thing is that when you take a business over you like to see a record of the accounts. Have the “archaeologists” who work(ed) in this environment considered taking their accounts and showing them to the commercial sector to see if other management could be preferable/cheaper than just having one body left pretending that they are trying to keep up.
Maybe the commercial/private are going to have to take over the HERs and the curation. Thing is that when you take a business over you like to see a record of the accounts. Have the “archaeologists” who work(ed) in this environment considered taking their accounts and showing them to the commercial sector to see if other management could be preferable/cheaper than just having one body left pretending that they are trying to keep up.
Reason: your past is my past