4th September 2008, 04:39 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by gorilla
Surely if we wanted to profit from archaeology... we should have become the tombraiders we abhor, and not had bothered with all that education and mud-buddy stuff to become the archaeologists aspire to be (or already are).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree with this I'm afraid. Working profitably isn't automatically about expliotation of anyone or about not undertaking our work in a professional way.
I'm glad you disagree... because I wanted someone to disagree! Because at the root of it all we, as archaeologists, are responsible for ourselves and the archaeology we record. We should [u]all</u> aim (strive?) to work profitably and undertake any work in a professional way. Don't get me wrong... I love profit! I'd like some right this minute (show me the moneY). It's just I think most (not all) of us should be fully recompensed for the hard work we put in, the hours of education we undertake and the conditions we often endure. Staff (particularly the lower eschelons) should be treated fairly and given due reward. This doesn't necessarily involve financial reward... sometimes it would have been good enough to receive a "thanks and really well done for all your hard work". Often, I have found that companies have been quick to criticise and slow to praise. "If things go wrong, its not our (managerial) fault, 'tis our lay-about.. and expendible... workforce". (yep, heard that one... many years ago I admit). I have worked for companies where thay value their staff, provide training, benefits and even gave out bonuses. How many of them are there compared to those that take the p*ss? 50/50? 60/40? Whatever... it should be across the board, 100% or what's the point?
Also whatever financial profit there is should be spread across the board and ,possibly, invested wisely (not just in times of boom). If the company is doing well, then it's great if everyone gets a cut. But what about those times (ie now) when it ain't so great? Staff being laid off while the directors get a bonus isn't limited to the world of high finance (seen that one).
Field archaeology can be an immensely satisfying and challenging job, and many put up with the poor situation that they find themselves in because of their love for the work. But this proves intolerable for some, who leave archaeology, disillusioned and disappointed, before they feel it is too late to begin to forge a new career outside the field. The profession is then only able to survive because there is a constant 'crop' of enthusiastic young diggers replacing them, who will, in their turn, be frustrated by the lack of opportunities and poor financial rewards and ultimately be forced to abandon their career in archaeology.
We need change. We deserve a regulatory body that is responsible and answerable to us all and actually has our best interests at heart, from the bottom up. We deserve a regulatory body that isn't afraid to rightly castigate wrong-doers and mavericks (and stick to it). If they can't follow the rules, they don't get the work. We deserve a regulatory body that actually acts, available and affordable for all levels of archaeologist. The fees are just ridculous, particularly for those lower grades. The IFA is top-heavy and is only truly representative of senior levels.
Suggestions of equitable scales of pay to comparable industries is fine... but that is all they are... suggestions. Suggestions that have been bandied around for years and years: 1996 - see http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/1/aitch.html
...and it hasn't changed much over time. Just take this description from http://www.prospects.ac.uk (2007/:face-thinks:
⢠Starting salary for a digger as a site assistant is £13,700 â £15,500 (salary data July 07).
⢠Salary at more senior levels with experience (e.g. after 10-15 years in the role) depends upon the post held and the employer. University academics and archaeologists working for national bodies such as English Heritage tend to command the highest pay, with contractors and consultants earning less.
⢠Working conditions, including salary, vary widely depending on the post.
⢠Posts in local authorities are generally better paid than those in the private sector, but salaries are generally below the average for equivalent level roles in other fields.
⢠There is a large variation in workplace-related benefits, such as pensions, holiday entitlement and sick leave, depending on the type of employer.
⢠Both the British Archaeological Jobs Resource (BAJR) and the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA) have pay scale guidelines which indicate salaries staggered according to the role and the level of responsibility assigned to the archaeologist.
⢠Low staff turnover means that only a limited number of paid posts are available.
⢠Average working hours are 37 per week, though this may vary and overtime is common, especially in excavations working to very tight timeframes, such as excavations prior to development.
⢠Working conditions may vary from an office to a muddy windswept hillside in December.
⢠Part-time work is possible on-site. Career breaks are rare as there may be no job to return to.
⢠Temporary contracts are common, with the length dependent on the excavation or project.
⢠There are equal starting opportunities for men and women. However, there are currently more men in senior positions, reflecting the length of time they have spent in the job.
⢠Generally, archaeologists have a relaxed dress code and predominantly operate in a low-stress environment. A flexible approach to work and a willingness to travel will increase job prospects.
⢠There are occasional opportunities for working overseas.
Cynically, I'd add to that...
⢠Although entry without a degree is possible, it's damn difficult to get anywhere without one.
⢠If you can't drive, don't bother. Seems the best qualification you can have is not a BA, it's the ability to get from A to B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by gorilla
Surely if we wanted to profit from archaeology... we should have become the tombraiders we abhor, and not had bothered with all that education and mud-buddy stuff to become the archaeologists aspire to be (or already are).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree with this I'm afraid. Working profitably isn't automatically about expliotation of anyone or about not undertaking our work in a professional way.
I'm glad you disagree... because I wanted someone to disagree! Because at the root of it all we, as archaeologists, are responsible for ourselves and the archaeology we record. We should [u]all</u> aim (strive?) to work profitably and undertake any work in a professional way. Don't get me wrong... I love profit! I'd like some right this minute (show me the moneY). It's just I think most (not all) of us should be fully recompensed for the hard work we put in, the hours of education we undertake and the conditions we often endure. Staff (particularly the lower eschelons) should be treated fairly and given due reward. This doesn't necessarily involve financial reward... sometimes it would have been good enough to receive a "thanks and really well done for all your hard work". Often, I have found that companies have been quick to criticise and slow to praise. "If things go wrong, its not our (managerial) fault, 'tis our lay-about.. and expendible... workforce". (yep, heard that one... many years ago I admit). I have worked for companies where thay value their staff, provide training, benefits and even gave out bonuses. How many of them are there compared to those that take the p*ss? 50/50? 60/40? Whatever... it should be across the board, 100% or what's the point?
Also whatever financial profit there is should be spread across the board and ,possibly, invested wisely (not just in times of boom). If the company is doing well, then it's great if everyone gets a cut. But what about those times (ie now) when it ain't so great? Staff being laid off while the directors get a bonus isn't limited to the world of high finance (seen that one).
Field archaeology can be an immensely satisfying and challenging job, and many put up with the poor situation that they find themselves in because of their love for the work. But this proves intolerable for some, who leave archaeology, disillusioned and disappointed, before they feel it is too late to begin to forge a new career outside the field. The profession is then only able to survive because there is a constant 'crop' of enthusiastic young diggers replacing them, who will, in their turn, be frustrated by the lack of opportunities and poor financial rewards and ultimately be forced to abandon their career in archaeology.
We need change. We deserve a regulatory body that is responsible and answerable to us all and actually has our best interests at heart, from the bottom up. We deserve a regulatory body that isn't afraid to rightly castigate wrong-doers and mavericks (and stick to it). If they can't follow the rules, they don't get the work. We deserve a regulatory body that actually acts, available and affordable for all levels of archaeologist. The fees are just ridculous, particularly for those lower grades. The IFA is top-heavy and is only truly representative of senior levels.
Suggestions of equitable scales of pay to comparable industries is fine... but that is all they are... suggestions. Suggestions that have been bandied around for years and years: 1996 - see http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/1/aitch.html
...and it hasn't changed much over time. Just take this description from http://www.prospects.ac.uk (2007/:face-thinks:
⢠Starting salary for a digger as a site assistant is £13,700 â £15,500 (salary data July 07).
⢠Salary at more senior levels with experience (e.g. after 10-15 years in the role) depends upon the post held and the employer. University academics and archaeologists working for national bodies such as English Heritage tend to command the highest pay, with contractors and consultants earning less.
⢠Working conditions, including salary, vary widely depending on the post.
⢠Posts in local authorities are generally better paid than those in the private sector, but salaries are generally below the average for equivalent level roles in other fields.
⢠There is a large variation in workplace-related benefits, such as pensions, holiday entitlement and sick leave, depending on the type of employer.
⢠Both the British Archaeological Jobs Resource (BAJR) and the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA) have pay scale guidelines which indicate salaries staggered according to the role and the level of responsibility assigned to the archaeologist.
⢠Low staff turnover means that only a limited number of paid posts are available.
⢠Average working hours are 37 per week, though this may vary and overtime is common, especially in excavations working to very tight timeframes, such as excavations prior to development.
⢠Working conditions may vary from an office to a muddy windswept hillside in December.
⢠Part-time work is possible on-site. Career breaks are rare as there may be no job to return to.
⢠Temporary contracts are common, with the length dependent on the excavation or project.
⢠There are equal starting opportunities for men and women. However, there are currently more men in senior positions, reflecting the length of time they have spent in the job.
⢠Generally, archaeologists have a relaxed dress code and predominantly operate in a low-stress environment. A flexible approach to work and a willingness to travel will increase job prospects.
⢠There are occasional opportunities for working overseas.
Cynically, I'd add to that...
⢠Although entry without a degree is possible, it's damn difficult to get anywhere without one.
⢠If you can't drive, don't bother. Seems the best qualification you can have is not a BA, it's the ability to get from A to B.