12th March 2012, 09:44 PM
Dirty Boy Wrote:Fook me lads, you try and make some constructive comments and you get jumped on. Remind me not to bother next time!
Welcome to my world.
Dirty Boy Wrote:It therefore may be difficult to keep a database relevant and up to date, so maybe the info should be tied in specific jobs in adverts. This obviously is less use to jobs that may not be advertised and staffed tgrough word of mouth. Also, as it was only 9? Units that replied to the survey how would a useful database be compiled.
I was interested as i've a background in computing and have developed databases for firms both inside and outside of archaeology and often see people run off a cliff designing stuff like this without setting out the basics, and wanted to prompt to see if these were being considered.
Want to volunteer to help write the app or website?!
Seriously, your post did read like overtime was negotiated for each and every job -sometimes you got it, sometimes you didn't; you make your point more clearly now. Yes, some unit's T&C varies wildly according to job, but many stay remarkably consistent. Obviously its easier to capture the stable T&C than ones that fluctuate wildly, but I'd like to know that a unit varies its wage on a month by month basis. At present how do I do that?
As I outlined in my previous reply, the first step is more transparent advertising, then provide an 'app' so people can compare what they would really earn, with the possibility of a comparison website as the farthest end of the recommendation spectrum. This idea has been aired before (and Dinosaur has raised it since), and it could be an official DF website or culled from job adverts and word of mouth by someone like the dear departed Digger. Remember that wage figures have been successfully gathered over the past years by individuals (including Kevin W), so it is possible, although there are many issues with it as you say.
The key point we were trying to make is that at the moment Diggers can't compare 'real' pay rates easily due to the hidden 'extras'. We were drawing comparison with areas where the government have said it was ok to have 'light touch regulation' as the ability to compare and choose who you used for e.g. gas/water etc meant that The Market could still operate fairly. No such ability exists in archaeology which is one contributing factor to why The Market is dysfunctional. We are suggesting several constructive ways to change that. One of those (and to be honest the most unlikely) is for employers to list their wages and T&C, whether that is via the IfA, the RO scheme, BAJR or FAME. We are looking for mechanisms to support those who pay better wages, and shame those that pay terrible wages and no travel, and there are a variety of options. Talking to Diggers they want to know what wages other employers pay, and what that wage would mean to them, that's what we're trying to provide.
There were 24 employing organisations who participated (the nine figure is for those who were prepared to be associated with their answers), which obviously wasn't great, but it was about 20% of employers, with some large employers prepared to put their name to their wages. Given that this was the first piece of detailed research by the DF, and it was a very detailed (and time consuming survey), I think that was a good start.
Thanks for your feedback, we are very grateful for all comments on the report and the next steps, and you've made some good and useful points:face-approve:.