Cross-posted from your FB page:
Saw that earlier. Not a very good argument in my opinion. Sorry for the length of the following, but it seems apposite to post it here now, it will appear in full in the forthcoming Diggers’ Forum (http://www.facebook.com/DiggersForum) newsletter. The opinions are my own....:
Firstly that as a professional institute the IfA has no role in setting wages? Well, in my opinion low wages are the partial cause and symptom of lowered professional standards across the industry and are therefore directly in the IfA's sphere of interest as a professional body involved in setting professional standards. Secondly low wages directly or indirectly affect nearly all members of the IfA, and as the IfA should represent the interests of its members it should therefore intervene until acceptable wage levels are reached. This is required in order to allow the fulfilment of member’s professional aspirations and development, a situation that low pay (and the associated low standards) effectively prevents.
The argument that ROs/employers cannot afford an increase is also a fallacy: most ROs already pay BAJR rates which are still above IfA minima. This is the first year that the IfA minima will have impacted on wages (is this a good thing?), ROs have signed up to the increases, they knew about them, and should have planned for them. Why should those that have planned for their responsibilities be at a disadvantage to those that gambled on no increase?
Should the employee’s wages be kept low so that employers can survive? In my opinionagain, no. It is not the IfA’s remit to protect failed business models, or to sacrifice its members so that organisations survive. The same amount of actual work will need doing, some argue that there are already too many companies for the amount of work out there. There are apparently mechanisms for increasing pay for local authority employees (according to Prospect), and in my view the whole profession shouldn’t be held back by the few remaining local authority employers, however good they are.
Responsible Post Holders of ROs were asked to give their views to the working party, most didn’t bother. Of those that did engage some called for no increase, whilst others called for increases. Its not as simple as employers versus employees. There are many employers who want increased wages for staff. Archaeology can’t function with ?30K Diggers, but a reasonable wage is possible and would improve standards and careers.
Finally there is always the old chestnut that ‘cowboy’ units are undercutting the ‘respectable’ units and driving down prices. The DF challenged FAME to provide evidence for this but FAME could not furnish any evidence. How many one man bands put in for Crossrail or T5? In my experience it is established units, mostly ROs, who are driving down prices, often bidding at a price which will lose money if anything is found. Where are these units that pay less than IfA minima? The DF have repeatedly asked Diggers to let us know so we can try and put in complaints, so far apart from repeated tip offs about one unit that is totally outside the IfA, we have had no verifiable evidence.
And finally, and perhaps not so popular here, why should the effective wage levels be set by an advertising company (BAJR!) which is effectively one man, rather than a democratically elected professional institute?
Saw that earlier. Not a very good argument in my opinion. Sorry for the length of the following, but it seems apposite to post it here now, it will appear in full in the forthcoming Diggers’ Forum (http://www.facebook.com/DiggersForum) newsletter. The opinions are my own....:
Firstly that as a professional institute the IfA has no role in setting wages? Well, in my opinion low wages are the partial cause and symptom of lowered professional standards across the industry and are therefore directly in the IfA's sphere of interest as a professional body involved in setting professional standards. Secondly low wages directly or indirectly affect nearly all members of the IfA, and as the IfA should represent the interests of its members it should therefore intervene until acceptable wage levels are reached. This is required in order to allow the fulfilment of member’s professional aspirations and development, a situation that low pay (and the associated low standards) effectively prevents.
The argument that ROs/employers cannot afford an increase is also a fallacy: most ROs already pay BAJR rates which are still above IfA minima. This is the first year that the IfA minima will have impacted on wages (is this a good thing?), ROs have signed up to the increases, they knew about them, and should have planned for them. Why should those that have planned for their responsibilities be at a disadvantage to those that gambled on no increase?
Should the employee’s wages be kept low so that employers can survive? In my opinionagain, no. It is not the IfA’s remit to protect failed business models, or to sacrifice its members so that organisations survive. The same amount of actual work will need doing, some argue that there are already too many companies for the amount of work out there. There are apparently mechanisms for increasing pay for local authority employees (according to Prospect), and in my view the whole profession shouldn’t be held back by the few remaining local authority employers, however good they are.
Responsible Post Holders of ROs were asked to give their views to the working party, most didn’t bother. Of those that did engage some called for no increase, whilst others called for increases. Its not as simple as employers versus employees. There are many employers who want increased wages for staff. Archaeology can’t function with ?30K Diggers, but a reasonable wage is possible and would improve standards and careers.
Finally there is always the old chestnut that ‘cowboy’ units are undercutting the ‘respectable’ units and driving down prices. The DF challenged FAME to provide evidence for this but FAME could not furnish any evidence. How many one man bands put in for Crossrail or T5? In my experience it is established units, mostly ROs, who are driving down prices, often bidding at a price which will lose money if anything is found. Where are these units that pay less than IfA minima? The DF have repeatedly asked Diggers to let us know so we can try and put in complaints, so far apart from repeated tip offs about one unit that is totally outside the IfA, we have had no verifiable evidence.
And finally, and perhaps not so popular here, why should the effective wage levels be set by an advertising company (BAJR!) which is effectively one man, rather than a democratically elected professional institute?