20th February 2015, 05:23 PM
Having been in archaeology since 1996 I have seen the proffesion ebb and flow with the various humps and bumps in the economy. I started during the channel tunnel days then on to T5 and then usually somewhere in Kent. The terms and conditions were generally awful, no sick or holiday pay and you were called field technicians not archaeologists, and we were very much like cannon fodder and the most competitive element to any tender. Most of the time we had to find employment elsewhere before the contract finished, as the "oh there will be more work" was largely focused at keeping us happy to the end of the contract or job.
To those in charge the Digger magazine read like Marxist propaganda in the mud socked and slippery site hut and tales of heads of units tearing it up and throwing it in the bin abounded. Since the crunch of 2008 so many well experienced and dedicated archaeologists left the profession to seek work elsewhere.
With the advent of massive tuition fees most sensible people thought is it wise to make a career in archaeology based on the historic treatment of archaeologists and now us with a huge debt! Are any but the wealthiest parents going to say, "Yup thatâs the best career choice you can make, based on the research I have undertaken into the profession"?
This is why there are loads of vacancies for field staff, supervisors, project officers, project managers, consultants, and osteoarchaeologists etc. The profession had an abundance of them keen and ready to go but they let them down, which is so sad and such a waste. We had a Union called Prospect but I think that ended up being a contradiction in terms.
To those in charge the Digger magazine read like Marxist propaganda in the mud socked and slippery site hut and tales of heads of units tearing it up and throwing it in the bin abounded. Since the crunch of 2008 so many well experienced and dedicated archaeologists left the profession to seek work elsewhere.
With the advent of massive tuition fees most sensible people thought is it wise to make a career in archaeology based on the historic treatment of archaeologists and now us with a huge debt! Are any but the wealthiest parents going to say, "Yup thatâs the best career choice you can make, based on the research I have undertaken into the profession"?
This is why there are loads of vacancies for field staff, supervisors, project officers, project managers, consultants, and osteoarchaeologists etc. The profession had an abundance of them keen and ready to go but they let them down, which is so sad and such a waste. We had a Union called Prospect but I think that ended up being a contradiction in terms.
What do you mean lost on price again!