14th July 2014, 11:49 AM
Do we need another thread on this?
However, if that's your feeling then you need to make the product better, so that people buy into it. Why are the folk who carry out other site investigations get paid more than us?
Do we fail to highlight that archaeology can be everywhere and we still don't know it all. That once it's gone, it's gone and we're not getting it back. That we lose knowledge of the past, which in cases where we've recovered the knowledge, is contributing to a changing in the understanding of the past. How do we do this though? Should the IfA produces documents to be circulated to all developers/builders/planners etc.? Will that have any impact at all.
One of the biggest contributions to low pay is the undercutting carried out by arch. units on each other when tendering. If we can get a proper baseline figure in play and everyone sticks to it, then those contracting units have no choice but to pay better. Will that happen though?
However, if that's your feeling then you need to make the product better, so that people buy into it. Why are the folk who carry out other site investigations get paid more than us?
Do we fail to highlight that archaeology can be everywhere and we still don't know it all. That once it's gone, it's gone and we're not getting it back. That we lose knowledge of the past, which in cases where we've recovered the knowledge, is contributing to a changing in the understanding of the past. How do we do this though? Should the IfA produces documents to be circulated to all developers/builders/planners etc.? Will that have any impact at all.
One of the biggest contributions to low pay is the undercutting carried out by arch. units on each other when tendering. If we can get a proper baseline figure in play and everyone sticks to it, then those contracting units have no choice but to pay better. Will that happen though?