What should the level of the 2009 pay rise be

[voice of reason]

Bob

can you expand your comment about 'sorting out' charitable trusts?

[drpeterwardle]

I agree with VoR.

I would also make the point more strongly. If you have already implemented the benching pay rise of 13% why should you be expected to give bigger rises.

As for the statement "And we don't see backdoor erosion of pay and conditions such as the increase in sites being nominated as place of work to avoid paying allowances." Get real. paying for people accommodation when they live near to a site is a tax fiddle.

There must be an end to the unilateral setting of pay levels by the workers. Action must also be taken against RAO that donot conform to the IFA pay minima or these should be scrapped.
Peter

[YellowPete]

As already noted, that the new comers to the industry will have to earn at least ?300 a week in order to pay for the cost of living as well to have spare money to broach repaying the student loan at the entry level.

We cannot as an industry allow our selves to become the only professional industry which pays below a finally returning level, required to attain the qualifications to enter the profession and remain for as long is afforable.

With the uyp coming prospects of a diminished work load and a gluttony of skilled staff, this may appear to be an employers market.

But a warning

In the eyes of the governement it is expecting professions and industries to pay their own way, so ultimately and in the long run the pay must be raised in order to account for the cost of employability.

In the short term you camn sort the wheat from the chaff, but this is only going to bouy and float companies survival and in return diminish the industry and professions long term survival.

the entry pay grades must match the pay required to pay back even minimally the student loan, otherwise we as an industry are burdening the country with our presence financially.

No governement is going to provide funding for a heritage bill that is not going to balance it's own sheets.

this is serious.

we must combat the industries mindset of never paying back the student loan in a hobby profession, or we will have to sit out another toothless yapping.

RAO's need to be bearing in mind the work and co-ordination in order to maintain long term prospects.

you could use your own judgement and leave (if a RAO), but on the proviso of not matching, even at the approapriate time, the pay grades will only be a lead weight to the current situation and ongoing outlook.



txt is
Mike

[YellowPete]

This is important, the entry pay must match up, to the average student loan repayment rates.

we are talking about a figure in the region of ?3-15 Billion depending on the way you want to cut it.

Tuition fees on top of the student loan and your talking personal loans taking the figure beyond ?15 Billion.

this is the about industry career ladder opening up financial renumeration for its own existence, beyond being a back current of wider economy.

if we are attached to the development industry, then further co-ordination and access into heritage development must be met in an educational and financially viable format.

we can't just 'not' pay a bill because those who went to university years before, were merely in the right place, at the right time.



txt is
Mike

[chiz]

quote:Originally posted by voice of reason

Bob

can you expand your comment about 'sorting out' charitable trusts?

since you bit on what was intended to be a lighthearted riposte (hence smiley), can you expand your equally inflammatory and judgemental comment about 'sorting out' local authority contracting units:

quote:Harsh as it may seem, it might be the push needed to sort out (ie remove) the disruptive position in the market of these contractors.

Different people have different views about which units are disrupting the market, the same situation appears different depending on which side you lie. Each 'side' has some good arguments, some poor, it is your opinion that council units have an unfair advantage, some would say the same re charitable trusts. That is what I was referring to. I take it you are involved in a charitable trust then?!!
Note I am NOT saying that any charitable trust is not fulfilling their role as defined under relevant legislation etc etc.


To Dr Peter,

quote:If you have already implemented the benching pay rise of 13% why should you be expected to give bigger rises.

Who said you should? Firstly, which units have implemented the benchmarking pay rise of 13%? Have any? I don't know but I doubt it, some may be 13% over minima due to location eg London weighting, but I can't think of any units that have specifically addressed the benchmarking yet. And anyway, its not a simple 13%, its 13-53%, depending on unit and job description. But yes, if a unit had implemented the relevant increases, then they should be applauded, and carry on with inflation proofed pay rises as appropriate.

quote:As for the statement "And we don't see backdoor erosion of pay and conditions such as the increase in sites being nominated as place of work to avoid paying allowances." Get real. paying for people accommodation when they live near to a site is a tax fiddle.

Not if you pay tax on it, and not if none of those people lived near the site, because they had all moved to Salisbury, Oxford or Cirencester to be near to the head office....

quote:There must be an end to the unilateral setting of pay levels by the workers.

HA HA HA, are you for real?*

*unfortunately there isn't a smiley to indicate someone stabbing themselves repeatedly in the eyeballs in disbelief, but you all know what it looks like by now

[BAJR Host]

Fair points...

and here you are..



?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake

[chiz]

quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host

Fair points...

and here you are..

hey, nice one, can that be my avatar please?


Oh, and Dr Wardle, you haven't answered my question about substantiating your statement that

quote:In the last two years there have been huge increases for archaeologists

. Care to get back to us on that one about what exactly you mean?

Or are you too busy calling the yeomanry to put down the upstart workers?

[Oxbeast]

I feel that it would be a mistake to get rid of pay minima while there is no structure to take its place. As for this...

"There must be an end to the unilateral setting of pay levels by the workers. Action must also be taken against RAO that donot conform to the IFA pay minima or these should be scrapped."

I find the characterisation of the IfA Executive (for it is surely an executive decision) as 'the workers' as frankly bizarre. Surely they represent their membership, from all levels of the industry. The IfA have put a lot of effort into the benchmarking scheme, and for them to abandon it on the basis that it is unilateral would be counterproductive to say the least. Both Dr Wardle and VoR seem to be indicating that a 3.2% rise to the bottoms of the three brackets would cause a desertion of ROs...but how many of these pay the bottom of the bracket anyway?

[BAJR Host]

quote:The IfA have put a lot of effort into the benchmarking scheme, and for them to abandon it on the basis that it is unilateral would be counterproductive to say the least.

And this is agreed... BAJR has (or should I say my dictatorial-self) has spent alot of time both on the benchmarking.. and for the past four years now, creating the Grade system, based on responsibility - which seems to be accepted, as it was based on listening to peoples views and also remaining with the bounds of reality... BAJR will stand with this too. so if the IfA and BAJR stand firm.. and the companies see no detriment to their survival.. then there should be no problem (cue the sound of eating my hat in the future of course)


?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake

[drpeterwardle]

I all ready pay over the bench marking amounts. The extent of the pay rises, ie the exact amounts, can be found in the discussion about the IFA system at the time. There is the pay itself, holiday pay, sick leave and pension rights all above legal minimums which themselves have been raiased.

Yes employers can provide acccommodation but the value of this is income.

By definition the majority of IFA members are workers not owners of companies. I also challenge the validity of the benching marking. If other workers in conservation are considered then archaeologists do comparatively well.

I am not saying archaeologist are well paid in absolute terms or should not be paid more. What I am saying is the current system is wrong. In my BAJR 2006 paper I addressed this issue in some detail.

Peter