14th August 2008, 10:23 AM
I think all the organisations that were chosen are branches of the civil service, or quangos. The IFA web page states:
"Under the guidance of an external consultant, the project used job evaluation techniques to assess a sample of archaeological posts. Using the JEGS system of job evaluation, scores were assigned to each post which would then be compared with JEGS scores and salary data from a range of other organisations. Archaeological salaries were also compared with salary data from the Institute of Environmental Managers and Assessors and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors 2007 salary surveys. The results indicated that IFA minimum salaries were 13% lower than the nearest comparator and in some cases were up to 53% lower than some comparable posts."
EH (and presumably other state heritage bodies) does not use JGES, and perhaps the data that they produce was not suitable for comparison outside the JGES sceme, like the IEM and RICS. However, I feel that specific archaeological jobs should have been included. There was a thread which discussed this, but I can't seem to find it just now.
I would opt for a staged increase over inflation over several years. An immediate increase of 13% would be difficult to acommodate in jobs which have already been tendered for.
"Under the guidance of an external consultant, the project used job evaluation techniques to assess a sample of archaeological posts. Using the JEGS system of job evaluation, scores were assigned to each post which would then be compared with JEGS scores and salary data from a range of other organisations. Archaeological salaries were also compared with salary data from the Institute of Environmental Managers and Assessors and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors 2007 salary surveys. The results indicated that IFA minimum salaries were 13% lower than the nearest comparator and in some cases were up to 53% lower than some comparable posts."
EH (and presumably other state heritage bodies) does not use JGES, and perhaps the data that they produce was not suitable for comparison outside the JGES sceme, like the IEM and RICS. However, I feel that specific archaeological jobs should have been included. There was a thread which discussed this, but I can't seem to find it just now.
I would opt for a staged increase over inflation over several years. An immediate increase of 13% would be difficult to acommodate in jobs which have already been tendered for.