7th March 2006, 07:59 AM
I was under the impression that this thread started as a general accusation that there were a number of faked reports out there. I think there is a clue in the title.
You have made it clear that you feel so strongly about the current situation in archaeology that you you will go to any lengths short of actual action. That does not stop you continuing an incessent stream of snide commenst on any organisation which is actually doing anything!
I was pointing out that a conference does not neccessarily constitute action, but can be useful, but everyone agreeing the same things about how bad things are and repeating the APPAG conclusions does not necessarily bring us forward.
You are asking what positive things I can contribute? Well I was asking on another thread about what others definitions of field skills were as part of the debate on validation - as a good processialist I like to debate using definitions and facts. That thread got drowned in a load of invective based on unsubstantiated claims about the competence of members of the IFA.
Another thing I have been flagging up is the threat to local curatorial services . Without these there is no monitering, and indeed no archaeological condition on a planning application in the first place. I cannot think of any bigger threat to the professional asperations of archaeologists - no archaeological condition, no archaeological work.
My own solutions are pretty clear- I can lobby my representatives as a constituent, and can engage within the political party of which I am an occasional activist. I also choose to support collectibve action through a union which has managed to get positive results in the past, and I hope will start communicating better in the near future. My main work is with the IFA -again I feel a strong professional asociation is a good way of lobbying the government and organisations to show that we are not just wanting to dig holes and get paid for out hobby, but a serious profession with asperations of career developemnt and with a very strong case for being paid more.
Making the case for being paid more includes demonstrating what therequired skills are for differnt parts of the profession ( see kates post) but also providing the structures so that pay can be raised signifiacantly above infaltion to get us in line with comparible professions - which is something which needs to be based on a common baseline for employment to begin with, and has to take place over the long term, something which I think could be speeded up by union and iFA membership.
As a finds specialist I am prioritising my own long term aspirations of pay and development by concentrating on what needs to be improoved for finds people - something which I would be more than happy detail if you think it relevent?
You have made it clear that you feel so strongly about the current situation in archaeology that you you will go to any lengths short of actual action. That does not stop you continuing an incessent stream of snide commenst on any organisation which is actually doing anything!
I was pointing out that a conference does not neccessarily constitute action, but can be useful, but everyone agreeing the same things about how bad things are and repeating the APPAG conclusions does not necessarily bring us forward.
You are asking what positive things I can contribute? Well I was asking on another thread about what others definitions of field skills were as part of the debate on validation - as a good processialist I like to debate using definitions and facts. That thread got drowned in a load of invective based on unsubstantiated claims about the competence of members of the IFA.
Another thing I have been flagging up is the threat to local curatorial services . Without these there is no monitering, and indeed no archaeological condition on a planning application in the first place. I cannot think of any bigger threat to the professional asperations of archaeologists - no archaeological condition, no archaeological work.
My own solutions are pretty clear- I can lobby my representatives as a constituent, and can engage within the political party of which I am an occasional activist. I also choose to support collectibve action through a union which has managed to get positive results in the past, and I hope will start communicating better in the near future. My main work is with the IFA -again I feel a strong professional asociation is a good way of lobbying the government and organisations to show that we are not just wanting to dig holes and get paid for out hobby, but a serious profession with asperations of career developemnt and with a very strong case for being paid more.
Making the case for being paid more includes demonstrating what therequired skills are for differnt parts of the profession ( see kates post) but also providing the structures so that pay can be raised signifiacantly above infaltion to get us in line with comparible professions - which is something which needs to be based on a common baseline for employment to begin with, and has to take place over the long term, something which I think could be speeded up by union and iFA membership.
As a finds specialist I am prioritising my own long term aspirations of pay and development by concentrating on what needs to be improoved for finds people - something which I would be more than happy detail if you think it relevent?
