27th September 2013, 10:39 AM
(This post was last modified: 27th September 2013, 11:18 PM by Unitof1.)
may I assure kev that everything was done to the lowest standard that I could make up but that it was a standard based on me an archaeologist (definition based on having spent 4 years in a student bar and ten plus years being ripped off in a charity unit) having been there on the ground (and no contract). Where kev might be on to something ad hominem about my sword play is that in some of the cases I did not bill the people. Fally down timber frame for instance. I just couldn't be bothered possibly the archaeology was very boring and I had not the slightest sense of this is what the people want on the mantel piece, but also I basically think that the report is for a bunch of pension grabbers and if they want the report they should pay for it or go and find the money for me.
The fact that they don't pay for the report to me means that they have absolutely no way of valuing these reports or my efforts as an archaeologist. And don't give me all this is for the public, its for some of the public and its for some of the public through treaties and conventions some statutory legal stuff and then buried in regulations in all manor of democratic systems whos authority change daily. But the out come of it all is that it is these authorities that have to get archaeology done. Not me- they have to.*
Whats happened is that once upon a time these reports were produced in-house by people who supped of the public purse and presumably were paid for from taxes by the public. Because they were producing the reports as part of their jobs the reports belonged to the public. Then the standing around having to comunicat with the building trade was apparently privatised and an attempt was made to ground the whole cost on the individual along with the cost of public ownership of the report. but Two individuals were compounded by this action, the developer and the archaeologist. When the archaeology was in-house what the developer gave away was access to the land and payments to the archaeologists to produce the report, but because the archaeologists produced the report it was the archaeologists report and because the archaeologist worked (presumably salaried) for the government the report belonged to the government.
*What we have now is that the developer has to give access and pay for the archaeology to be done and then has to give the report away in effect for free but rather I have to give my report away for free. oh yes I have no contracts but I think that if the curators want these reports they should contact the little old lady who has cancer.
The fact that they don't pay for the report to me means that they have absolutely no way of valuing these reports or my efforts as an archaeologist. And don't give me all this is for the public, its for some of the public and its for some of the public through treaties and conventions some statutory legal stuff and then buried in regulations in all manor of democratic systems whos authority change daily. But the out come of it all is that it is these authorities that have to get archaeology done. Not me- they have to.*
Whats happened is that once upon a time these reports were produced in-house by people who supped of the public purse and presumably were paid for from taxes by the public. Because they were producing the reports as part of their jobs the reports belonged to the public. Then the standing around having to comunicat with the building trade was apparently privatised and an attempt was made to ground the whole cost on the individual along with the cost of public ownership of the report. but Two individuals were compounded by this action, the developer and the archaeologist. When the archaeology was in-house what the developer gave away was access to the land and payments to the archaeologists to produce the report, but because the archaeologists produced the report it was the archaeologists report and because the archaeologist worked (presumably salaried) for the government the report belonged to the government.
*What we have now is that the developer has to give access and pay for the archaeology to be done and then has to give the report away in effect for free but rather I have to give my report away for free. oh yes I have no contracts but I think that if the curators want these reports they should contact the little old lady who has cancer.
Reason: your past is my past