15th May 2008, 09:20 PM
I would want to send this to Mike Heyworth on Sunday night for him to get on Monday... the meeting is on 20th in London
Here is the text I have banged out...
Please please please go over it... correct it, edit it, sort my grammer... whatever/... make it something susinct that APPAG can hold onto..
It is an indisputable fact that pay and conditions in our sector, although improving gradually, through various measures, is still significantly below the countries average wage, and for most of those employed in Field archaeology, this is further complicated by intermittent work, and short term contracts, were conditions of employment are almost invariably and the basic legal minimum. The question to be considered, is how APPAG can influence the entire profession, while acknowledging that the sector is comprised of a range of employers, from local government through universities and private contractors.
The key seems to be the local government services themselves, accounting for some 20% of all employed archaeologists (Aitcheson, Profiling the Profession 1999) where a regarding exercise in Cornwall, seems to have found what many of us knew already, that professional and skilled workers such as archaeologists were being deeply undervalued in both worth and public benefit. The recent IFA sponsored benchmarking, that BAJR was involved in, clearly shows the same, where JEGs scoring significantly increased the value of any given individual working in the Historic Environment. Pay and conditions can only be improved once the decline in resourcing for local authority archaeological advice is halted, and a common standard for archaeological work actually enforced across the UK. With a strong Curatorial service that is integrated fully into the planning process, with a statutory position, and a stable and funded HER in each county, the process of governing standards allows quality over price to be enforced.
The grading of council archaeologists should also be consistent across the country, where a development control archaeologist in Wales, for example, should be on the same pay grade as a similar job in Surrey or Northumberland. An excavation assistant in Dorset, would be on the same grade as one employed by Tyne and Wear.
This would have the effect of both reinforcing the findings of the IFA benchmarking, and provide a platform for other sector employers to consider their own pay scales.
Local Govt payscale rises of 2% would not be adequate to meet the expected rises, and so I would recommend a suitable phasing of the increase, over perhaps 5 years.
In addition formal, affordable external or inhouse training should be seen as integral to progression both in terms of career and pay scale... this should be seen as investment in all our futures as currently, the drop off in skilled archaeologists is becoming a serious issue. In many cases it is hard to find many staff who have more than a year of experience, and often it is counted in months.
Benefits could be considered to ensure field staff are not 'starting fresh' at each new contract which creates a cycle of poverty and resentment, where your knowledge and experience is not rewarded, but ignored.
APPAGs clear message was a desire to see the archaeological sector act swiftly and with a general consensus. The consensus is there, the understanding of training is there, if difficult to finance, but we need the government to actively guide the councils and other government agencies to accept a national strengthening of the Historic Environment as a whole, and the regarding of positions specifically. An achievable and realistic goal that will underpin the entire future of raising pay and conditions across the whole sector.
BAJR will, as ever, offer any support that would make this possible.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Here is the text I have banged out...
Please please please go over it... correct it, edit it, sort my grammer... whatever/... make it something susinct that APPAG can hold onto..
It is an indisputable fact that pay and conditions in our sector, although improving gradually, through various measures, is still significantly below the countries average wage, and for most of those employed in Field archaeology, this is further complicated by intermittent work, and short term contracts, were conditions of employment are almost invariably and the basic legal minimum. The question to be considered, is how APPAG can influence the entire profession, while acknowledging that the sector is comprised of a range of employers, from local government through universities and private contractors.
The key seems to be the local government services themselves, accounting for some 20% of all employed archaeologists (Aitcheson, Profiling the Profession 1999) where a regarding exercise in Cornwall, seems to have found what many of us knew already, that professional and skilled workers such as archaeologists were being deeply undervalued in both worth and public benefit. The recent IFA sponsored benchmarking, that BAJR was involved in, clearly shows the same, where JEGs scoring significantly increased the value of any given individual working in the Historic Environment. Pay and conditions can only be improved once the decline in resourcing for local authority archaeological advice is halted, and a common standard for archaeological work actually enforced across the UK. With a strong Curatorial service that is integrated fully into the planning process, with a statutory position, and a stable and funded HER in each county, the process of governing standards allows quality over price to be enforced.
The grading of council archaeologists should also be consistent across the country, where a development control archaeologist in Wales, for example, should be on the same pay grade as a similar job in Surrey or Northumberland. An excavation assistant in Dorset, would be on the same grade as one employed by Tyne and Wear.
This would have the effect of both reinforcing the findings of the IFA benchmarking, and provide a platform for other sector employers to consider their own pay scales.
Local Govt payscale rises of 2% would not be adequate to meet the expected rises, and so I would recommend a suitable phasing of the increase, over perhaps 5 years.
In addition formal, affordable external or inhouse training should be seen as integral to progression both in terms of career and pay scale... this should be seen as investment in all our futures as currently, the drop off in skilled archaeologists is becoming a serious issue. In many cases it is hard to find many staff who have more than a year of experience, and often it is counted in months.
Benefits could be considered to ensure field staff are not 'starting fresh' at each new contract which creates a cycle of poverty and resentment, where your knowledge and experience is not rewarded, but ignored.
APPAGs clear message was a desire to see the archaeological sector act swiftly and with a general consensus. The consensus is there, the understanding of training is there, if difficult to finance, but we need the government to actively guide the councils and other government agencies to accept a national strengthening of the Historic Environment as a whole, and the regarding of positions specifically. An achievable and realistic goal that will underpin the entire future of raising pay and conditions across the whole sector.
BAJR will, as ever, offer any support that would make this possible.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Thomas Rainborough 1647
