31st January 2013, 05:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 31st January 2013, 06:16 PM by GnomeKing.)
FAIL.
eg; why should paying the minima or recommended rates ensure staff are suitably skilled/trained/motivated(!) ?, never-mind those payed below those rates ..............
since these 'standards' are rather hard to define, do not relate specifically to technical standards, and already are poorly applied, one wonders what criteria will actually be used to judge whether companies paying below-rate are worthy of the JIS ?
(does KA seek to make reality match data?)
will this be another tick-box exercise, or is there some meat yet to come?
The only criteria i can think of is the individual experience of the 'underpaid' archaeologist...BUT this obviously wont work!
An audit of the CVs of employed/self-employed staff at a Suspect Company will only highlight any under-skilled staff (and of course only those at the bottom most likely) However; Many highly skilled/experienced people are ALREADY working in-grades/at-rates well below the minima, let alone the recommended rates.
Presumably the view will be that these people (rightly or wrongly) have willingly chosen to work at the lower rate - eg by way of contract. What then the purpose of the exercise? >>> this decision has allowed mechanisms to be created which very firmly cements the already powerful position of the largest ROs.
It takes a large step towards allowing these RO's to effectively regulate themselves, whilst potentially suppressing their competition.
Since an RO can already effectively argue the toss over skill-sets etc at will (eg redundancy proceedings...), it will be very easy for them to designate 'skills' and 'roles' however they want. Thus, it will be fairly simple to demonstrate why its perfectly fine for them to pay whatever they deem 'reasonable' for any of the 'roles' they designate.
(not to mention the Invisible Hand of the recession. weep, weep. boo, hoo.)
-When the overskilled/underpaid employee is found, what exactly will the IFA do, if that person has signed an employment contract?
-When underskilled/underpaid staff are located, presumably the employer will argue that they are protecting the wages of more experienced staff, and providing valuable 'training' (at reduced wages). Presumably the IFA, with its commitment to CPD, will heartily applaud this, and hand out gold stars.
-What, i wonder, will the procedure be when underskilled/over-paid individuals are located?
No, this is not good. Empty words about a commitment to standards are not the same as monitoring your existing members properly. This is the root of many problems.
Also, it might take some time for the effects to be really noticed, as am am sure the big ROs' are playing a long game here....
POSTSCRIPT:
perhapes no surprise at poorly thought position of self-employed...after all KA has no data on that...
Which reminds me of a customer satisfaction survey technique, where the question 'are you dissatisfied' is specifically not asked. Then, with a straight face, one can truthfully assert 'no customer indicated they were dissatisfied'....
eg; why should paying the minima or recommended rates ensure staff are suitably skilled/trained/motivated(!) ?, never-mind those payed below those rates ..............
since these 'standards' are rather hard to define, do not relate specifically to technical standards, and already are poorly applied, one wonders what criteria will actually be used to judge whether companies paying below-rate are worthy of the JIS ?
(does KA seek to make reality match data?)
will this be another tick-box exercise, or is there some meat yet to come?
The only criteria i can think of is the individual experience of the 'underpaid' archaeologist...BUT this obviously wont work!
An audit of the CVs of employed/self-employed staff at a Suspect Company will only highlight any under-skilled staff (and of course only those at the bottom most likely) However; Many highly skilled/experienced people are ALREADY working in-grades/at-rates well below the minima, let alone the recommended rates.
Presumably the view will be that these people (rightly or wrongly) have willingly chosen to work at the lower rate - eg by way of contract. What then the purpose of the exercise? >>> this decision has allowed mechanisms to be created which very firmly cements the already powerful position of the largest ROs.
It takes a large step towards allowing these RO's to effectively regulate themselves, whilst potentially suppressing their competition.
Since an RO can already effectively argue the toss over skill-sets etc at will (eg redundancy proceedings...), it will be very easy for them to designate 'skills' and 'roles' however they want. Thus, it will be fairly simple to demonstrate why its perfectly fine for them to pay whatever they deem 'reasonable' for any of the 'roles' they designate.
(not to mention the Invisible Hand of the recession. weep, weep. boo, hoo.)
-When the overskilled/underpaid employee is found, what exactly will the IFA do, if that person has signed an employment contract?
-When underskilled/underpaid staff are located, presumably the employer will argue that they are protecting the wages of more experienced staff, and providing valuable 'training' (at reduced wages). Presumably the IFA, with its commitment to CPD, will heartily applaud this, and hand out gold stars.
-What, i wonder, will the procedure be when underskilled/over-paid individuals are located?
No, this is not good. Empty words about a commitment to standards are not the same as monitoring your existing members properly. This is the root of many problems.
Also, it might take some time for the effects to be really noticed, as am am sure the big ROs' are playing a long game here....
POSTSCRIPT:
perhapes no surprise at poorly thought position of self-employed...after all KA has no data on that...
Which reminds me of a customer satisfaction survey technique, where the question 'are you dissatisfied' is specifically not asked. Then, with a straight face, one can truthfully assert 'no customer indicated they were dissatisfied'....