Meeting a need

[YellowPete]

In relation to the trtaining, at this stage it would be more productive to break the territry and build the contacts and then see where it goes from there.

you need local political support, local university interest and an acrediation process maybe backed by one of a few home universities through staff partisipation.


in relation to hotly contested tenders i think the issue is more about why it is hotly contested rather than who wins it.

is it an opportunity to expose a great deal of complex deep strat in your local area, where you have the greatest amount of experience and local knowledge, in conjunction with being the only way you can assist in the career development of people is to train people in this manner as a result of a dead (wo)man's shoes jobed industry.

i think this is an ideal case study where an organisation is highly skilled, highly experienced and have an established home territory.

You don't expand your team, you expand your impact.

community and training emphasised excavation projects allow for the breaking of new ground.

lets face it the AMAA Act 1979 test areas included, by no accident, YORK, where there was no guarantee on funding for any works undertaken.

deep strat archaeology in one of the most important locations in britain as an urban district. with legislative backing to the hilt, but no money to pay for it.

so the question is.......wait for it.......


What do we want?

do we want integrated heritage protection, engagement, utilization and access to be our goal?

OR
do we wish to maintain the DOGMAS of professional heritage and industrious optimal capitalisation?


lets face it we need to keep our eyes on the ball on this one.

we need to focus on how we musgt be willing to give up what we want to make sure that it makes it into the future.

this is going to be one hell one a trade off.

the onlyy thing is we will not be able to claw this one back in our working lifetime.

when the die is cast, we will either have a national heritage engagement (exploitable for nationalistic goals), or a no holes bard proof for being a self interested profiteering group (the big sell out).

one will be hard to swallow, the other a dangerous road where we wont be able to keep a tab on where it goes.

we will in effect be subject to the populus demand for tresure, gold and maybe some occult like influences......

need i write on

i don't think that in the imediacy there will be a problem, but as the issues of the BNP, immigraton, identity cards and the new definitions of what our HUMAN RIGHTS should be , then we could have alot to worry about.

This is especially the case if as the situation unfolds, we are unable to maintain our DOGMAS long enough to ensure the future is provided with the best chance that we can provide for it.

conversely
if we swallow the bitter pill, then we will ensure a profession and commercial recognition.

However, where we will fail here will be principally based upon the fact that we will not have faith in the rest of the nation to maturly work out that they do not want to be members of a society based upon marginalisation and political exploitative manipulation.

but where they will not get that chance to find out about intellectual exploitation, we will find out if we wish to commercially exploit the situation to maximise our monetry quedos.

who do we have faith in and how much confidence do you have in your leaders, the leaders of tommorrow and more importantly.........what leadership can we as archaeologists bring to our nation in Europe, as our story unfolds so far........?

we can do this from here in a special place called archaeology.....or we can assail the walls, of what we can bring to any work place and hometown and show people who they are and what they are all capable of......

anyways

i guess just meeting a need.


txt is
Mike

[Austin Ainsworth]

quote:Originally posted by YellowPete

we can do this from here in a special place called archaeology.....or we can assail the walls, of what we can bring to any work place and hometown and show people who they are and what they are all capable of......

I'm part of Rat's team on the Croatia project, a project which has pan-European community heritage engagement as an integral part.

What is your programme for heritage engagement?

This where I'm coming from http://publications.pasthorizons.tv/?id=...izonsmay09, check pages 26-27 for my project with the Homeless community of Gloucester.

Archaeology is only one small part of heritage; talk to me about equalities, diversity and marginalised and excluded communities.

[mercenary]

David wrote:

quote:YAT has been little affected by the credit crunch? I wonder why? YAT does not expand beyond its borders too much..? YAT.. strangely works mainly in... you guesssed it... York...

The staff there now... I remmber from my time there in the 80s and 90s... now... I wonder why that is?

I support this one..120% and hope others follow this model, rather than look at the commercial bottom line?

I didn't want to be drawn into this any more, but there is much in your post that is just not true. During my time in York in this decade the Trust hardly worked in the city, and certainly no more so than the other York units. They were losing out to non-York companies in the same way my own company was. Like us they had expanded to the farthest flung corners of the county and beyond, and were doing a job in Peterborough at one point. Unsurprisingly, landing the long running Hungate project greatly improved their prospects in the city, to the detriment of the other York units who lost out. All of which is fair enough in the rough and tumble world of commercial archaeology.

To suggest however that they are doing well because they stick close to home, do what they know best, etc is just plain untrue. They landed two big projects which saw them through the beginning of the recession. Incidentally, they are also particularly prone to high staff turnover. Almost all of the archs from the 2 projects mentioned were let go last autumn, and the old hands you probably remember David, have been leaving in a steady trickle for years.

Knowing a little about the organization beyond the "local charity that does worthy public archaeology" spin, I am filled with horor at the idea of many other organizations following their "model".

[BAJR Host]

I stand corrected on factual innaccuracies... I can't however accept the statement "to the detriment of the other York units who lost out" first on grounds of AUP... but the YAT are big enough to step in if they wish, the second on the grounds of... what other Units are these?



Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi

[mercenary]

David wrote

quote:I can't however accept the statement "to the detriment of the other York units who lost out" first on grounds of AUP... but the YAT are big enough to step in if they wish, the second on the grounds of... what other Units are these?

No,no,no. That comment isn't a criticism by any stretch of the imagination. Simply if say 3 units tender for a big bit of work (and Hungate is big) and build up the infrastructure to be able to take on the work if appointed then there will be a detrimental effect if they lose out to a competitor. ( As I understand it the Hungate tender process was particularly "competitive", but that's ancient history.)

The two other York based units, as I'm sure you know David are On-Site Archaeology and Field Archaeology Specialists. Both of which did extensive evaluation phases on the site as did the Trust. Every York company had a big investment in the Hungate site over a 10+ year lead up to the excavation.

Oh, and a consultancy that does fieldwork, MGA.

[YellowPete]

I seem to have stired up a hornets nest here so.....

to Austin:

I am not currently involved in any such work, but may i add that in my stage of career, it would be difficult to start such a thing.

that excuse aside, I have been busy working and trying to do what i can, which is more than i would have liked, but i am not complaining about that.

I wish you all the best on this venture and hope that it does indeed take off nationally, if that is fitting to the region and its heritage.

as for a personal comment within AUP:

bloody good show



txt is
Mike

[YellowPete]

I would like to add tho that the kinds of individuals your working with are very difficult to predict, misunderstood, but equally very knowledgeable about their situations.

not for everyone i would suggest, before people find themselves way out west on that.



txt is
Mike

[BAJR Host]

Apologies merc.. was not suggesting such.. only that YATs tender was fair (and to my view.. from what i saw.. was good) I am sure the others were good... but I am used to the words.. Sorry but no

@yellow pete

is fitting to the region and its heritage.

you betcha... otherwise we would not be doing it.. (same with Oz in Gloucester) it is relevant becasue it is what they want.. not what 'we want' and more so, because instead of being led by ego.. it is being led by involvement.. and has real benefits. The Croatia project has grown with people wanting to get invovled and contribute as part of the whole.. and no one person's motives drive it.. rather the place itself determines what happens.

Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi

[YellowPete]

sounds like anarchy?!?



txt is
Mike

[Paul Belford]

The CBA has just launched a "Community Archaeology Heritage Toolkit"

http://is.gd/1iq7t/