23rd September 2011, 10:12 AM
Red earth, bajr, martin, ify, two points
1.stop pulling this same semantic “mistake”, example:
If someone is self employed it is impossible for them to have an employer or to be ‘staff’. They have a client. In commercial archaeology based on the tradition of polluter pays, the client is the polluter and by rights the landowner. That other people including archaeologists may act, as agents of the polluter is irrelevant. They, including RAOs are clients. If self-employed people do not pay their taxes they are criminals. If self-employed archaeologists do not fulfil their service they are not paid.
2. Freedom to do the “job”.
The freedom is to marshal and provide to the client highly intellectual observations on deposits that the self-employed archaeologist deems to be archaeological contexts. They are selling their trust and reputation. There is a word for this but I cant remember what it is. Obviously as client you may disagree that a deposit is 10yr and that’s probably why you would “employ” volliiytrees or uneducated or inexperienced people who are not archaeologists to get the colour that you want presumably using “control or disipline”. Beware about 4.5% of the population is colour blind and the majority are men.
http://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/
ify were right to point out the self employment is massively undefined in statutory law in Britain. Its almost as bad as commercial archaeology. It is still evolving at quite a rapid rate, and self-assessment is huge looming mess. But “self”-employment recognises individual responsibility which I would suggest to those in employment is a key attribute of an archaeologist who has to provide unbiased observations. That archaeologists don’t like “employing” other archaeologists is no surprise in a competitive world.
The what ever it is -statement- by ify is totally inadequate.
1.stop pulling this same semantic “mistake”, example:
Quote:[SIZE=3]A self-employed individual can do whatever they like, by definition, especially they don't really have any real agreement with their employer.
In terms of quality assurance, you end up with 'staff' you cannot control or discipline, working to their own methods, but for whom you are ultimately liable.
I spent a long time in a past life being treated like an employee on SE rates. rates I did not control going on sites I did not choose and working when I was told. I bust out of that over 15 years ago... thank god I had paid tax.. others had not... and suffered.. some still do! No mortage for them
[/SIZE]
If someone is self employed it is impossible for them to have an employer or to be ‘staff’. They have a client. In commercial archaeology based on the tradition of polluter pays, the client is the polluter and by rights the landowner. That other people including archaeologists may act, as agents of the polluter is irrelevant. They, including RAOs are clients. If self-employed people do not pay their taxes they are criminals. If self-employed archaeologists do not fulfil their service they are not paid.
2. Freedom to do the “job”.
Quote:[SIZE=3]A self-employed individual can do whatever they like, by definition, especially they don't really have any real agreement with their employer.It is irrelevant about when or where or how long you have to perform the service.
In terms of quality assurance, you end up with 'staff' you cannot control or discipline, working to their own methods, but for whom you are ultimately liable.
I spent a long time in a past life being treated like an employee on SE rates. rates I did not control going on sites I did not choose and working when I was told. I bust out of that over 15 years ago... thank god I had paid tax.. others had not... and suffered.. some still do! No mortage for them
[/SIZE]
The freedom is to marshal and provide to the client highly intellectual observations on deposits that the self-employed archaeologist deems to be archaeological contexts. They are selling their trust and reputation. There is a word for this but I cant remember what it is. Obviously as client you may disagree that a deposit is 10yr and that’s probably why you would “employ” volliiytrees or uneducated or inexperienced people who are not archaeologists to get the colour that you want presumably using “control or disipline”. Beware about 4.5% of the population is colour blind and the majority are men.
http://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/
ify were right to point out the self employment is massively undefined in statutory law in Britain. Its almost as bad as commercial archaeology. It is still evolving at quite a rapid rate, and self-assessment is huge looming mess. But “self”-employment recognises individual responsibility which I would suggest to those in employment is a key attribute of an archaeologist who has to provide unbiased observations. That archaeologists don’t like “employing” other archaeologists is no surprise in a competitive world.
The what ever it is -statement- by ify is totally inadequate.
Reason: your past is my past