Pushing too Hard?

[BAJR Host]

In a way Gary you are right and wrong.

First I should state that I as BAJR cannot agree with a 'break the company' stance... it does nobody any good.... lets talk!

and GAry, you are right in that the wages are known before starting, and it is here that BAJR has been 'growing' in influence over the years... If you advertise on BAJR you MUST pay the levels stated, or you do not get to advertise.. (which makes BAJR a bit different from other advertising sites - I take the view that if you want to advertise elsewhere- thats fine.. just not here. Its really the only rule.. and one that is 'accepted' by most who advertise. ) However, it is clear that over the past 2 or 3 years, the way round the this is to only advertise the posts that pass muster.. while keeping other posts at the same level... a kind of two teir system that I have no real way of knowing about... unless I am told. It does state however in the conditions of inclusion on BAJR

"As an Archaeological Contractor within the UK and Ireland, I intend to uphold the Code of Conduct set down by the IFA, and also will ensure that Pay and Conditions are above the recognised standards. I understand that inclusion on this list is dependant on the above requirement, failure to do so will result in removal if no resolution can be reached. "

The real problem, which is being wrestled with jsut now is that the pay scales are - lets be frank - sillY [:o)]. The difference between the lowest grade and the highest are only around 15k.. so its not much to move between. The 'middle grades' such as supervisor or Project Officer, when a person is showing ability, commitment and a real need to haev a secure job (as much as it can be) are the worst affected.. with pay at around 16k (starting) with not much extra to look forward to, even after further years of work and training.. plus the additional responsibilities.

Jobs are hard to come by where you know you have more than a few months... you take what you can get.. and sometimes become trapped in a job with little money, but it is better than going back out into the cold.

It is tricky, and I do sympathise with smaller contractors.. but or shoudl I say BUT... it does not have to be that way. I would rather see a company prosper than go under... and there are ways.

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[tom wilson]

quote:Originally posted by garybrun
Do you all have a job to go to so you can break the company???...

This thread reminds me of the Maggie Thatcher and Arthur Scargill...

You accepted the payment the day you took on the job and then complain that its not enough...

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Gary you are wrong, on several counts.
First off, there isn't a shortage of jobs, and permanent staff at any company could probably move on without too much difficulty as long as they are prepared to move to another part of the country. However, that may be a lot to ask.
Secondly, in the recent past, pay at certain unit(s) has been frozen for several years at a time. Temporary workers may only accept a wage they find acceptable (as you describe) however, some longer term staff have seen their wages effectively cut as a reward for their loyalty. That's not quite the same as the Thatcherite viewpoint you put forward.
Another very important way in which this is nothing like the miners' strike is that it is about individuals in a single company. There isn't any hint of group action by those staff, let alone industry-wide pressure. The ideas put forward by HB, KC and I (that they should find employment elsewhere) are from a basically capitalist/individualist perspective not unlike yours (your total lack of sympathy notwithstanding).

Finally, I disagree entirely with Dr. Pete's request for facts (if not balance). As you point out Pete, this is pure hearsay. I think it would be better to stick to Gizmo's central point, and not his cited example. All points made in both my posts are general comments.

'Have a good plan, execute it violently, do it today'.
General MacArthur

[drpeterwardle]

I have to respond to this:

First the quote:
"Finally, I disagree entirely with Dr. Pete's request for facts".

Why on earth?

Gary Brun says "Please correct me if I'm wrong." Gary have you read Zola's Germanal? If you are starving any job is better than nothing. Things may be that bad that you commit a crime in order to be imprisoned and get fed every day.


As for David Connolly's comment:

"As an Archaeological Contractor within the UK and Ireland, I intend to uphold the Code of Conduct set down by the IFA, and also will ensure that Pay and Conditions are above the recognised standards. I understand that inclusion on this list is dependant on the above requirement, failure to do so will result in removal if no resolution can be reached."

I simply say WHERE. Equally if I am not an archaeological contractor am I bound by this?

Dr Peter

(David and myself are discussing the precise wording off list of the terms and conditions of placing an advert! but it is better if some of those discussions happen on list so there is a degree of transparency)

[garybrun]

Two things in response.
My original reaction ( I know I'm not an archaeologist so what do I know???) was too "breaking" a company comment. Also my alleged "total lack of sympathy" was un called for.
I personally was thinking about the company who also needs to put food on his plate, has a family to feed and also has the responsibility to find work for those whom he employs.
Have you ever been an employer... or have you always been employed??
I once had 25 people working for me... the stress and responsibility for making sure each one was happy, and did his work to a satisfactory standard would be more than some of you know if you haven't been in this situation... I was looking at both sides of the coin and as an "outsider" that is a good perspective and maybe you should look at it this way yourself sometime... you may find it a little helpful.

Dr Peter. I don't understand your parallel with Zola's Germanal (but I'm a metal detectorists and wouldn't ever read that stuff and especially cause its in French and I'm illiterate and stupid) :-)
I still make my point that to "break" any company as is being discussed here is not correct. I also stand by my "Thatcherite" parallel. She tried to break the Unions and succeeded. In my opinion she was wrong and I had many friends who went through that time (miners in St Helens) and they didn't work because they needed food on their plate... they were starving and relied on hand outs from other people.

Yes stand up for what you believe in.
The greatest change can come from those within... who stay and fight for what is right. "Rats leave a sinking ship".

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[BAJR Host]

Peter, when you filled in the "Contractors Form" for inclusion on BAJR you agreed to the above. Whether a COntractor or not, you agreed to these fairly reasonable conditions.

i would not see anything to extreme in asking that people work to a standard and pay people a wage that is not exactly excessive )


I do agree though that Peter saw this suggestion first....

"please get in touch and we can try to negotiate an amicable solution." ! That is the best way forward.. Perhaps we have already tried that? Perhaps it can still happen...

SO perhaps some positive movement may be useful on this... either a direct contact or constructive suggestions..



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Gizmo]

Well what a can of worms I have opened and I do find the responses very telling of the general attitude towards our profession. I tried to open a discussion about smaller units surviving under pressure and the initial responses were simply negative towards the unit in the example (yes David you know who it is). I would like to respond to a few of the replies.
Firstly, the suggestion that all the staff should leave on mass seems a little strange. I did not know that full time jobs in archaeology were that easy to come by that 9 full time staff with mortgages and families could find another position LOCALLY so easily!
Also the fact that we knew the wages when we took the job bears no relevance to what we should be expected to be paid today. The time served by staff ranges from 5 to over 10 years, well before BAJR rates were introduced. All staff started at the bottom and have worked their way up and to suggest that they should not expect their pay to be in line with their piers is the same as saying that someone who started with a supermarket before minimum wage was introduced should be happy with their £2.50 an hour.
I find the extreme revolutionary attitude very sad. Yes we want to earn more, yes we deserve to earn more but just because we have been told that for the foreseeable future we wont does not mean we are going to throw our dummy out of the pram and cause the unit major problems. We all like working for a small unit where we have good friends, work with extremely talented colleagues and where we do right by the archaeology.
I for one find the idea that if a smaller unit cant keep up it should give way to a larger one very depressing. I say again, what if it is simply the case that a small unit (rightly or wrongly) cant up the wages of all its full time staff over night? The general attitude seems to be that the unit should no longer exist or be punished in some way. Well I do not agree with this and I think that a world with only 2 or 3 large competing units is a sad one.

[vulpes]

Look, the bottom line here is that smaller units can and do pay BAJR minima and more - and can and do compete and survive. I personally am not going to shed a tear if individuals and companies who simply do not value their staff - permanent or temporary in line with these rates - go to the wall. Remember these rates are minima. As much as archaeology is subject to market forces so are the staff of bad payers - and they should and no doubt will, in time, vote with their feet. As I said in my first post and as Gizmo indicated the company management in this case seem happy to pay themselves well, in addition to short term staff employed through BAJR, while their loyal middle ranks suffer. Hmmm, I've experienced a situation similar to this myself - with pay rises followed by pay freezes and glass ceilings. My way around such a dead end job was to leave and go and work for someone who was willing to pay me closer to what I'm worth. Better to leave, as I imagine morale in such a situation to be rock bottom. Good luck and happy job hunting.

[Cautionary Tale]

To add to previous posts comments about small units being unable to pay higher rates ‘overnight’, I would add that I used to work for a relatively small unit. When I joined it as a temp staff member, I and the other ‘temps’ were paid more than the existing staff (no exceptions) because the business simply couldn’t support a good wage across the board. A frankly odd situation which did eventually resolve itself (years timescale), but it wasn’t easy. Small units can be great to work for as Gizmo says because of the atmosphere, and I’m sure that Gizmo and colleagues are more willing to put up with certain things because of that.

Quanto legno potrebbe un mandrino della marmotta nordamericana se una marmotta nordamericana potesse bloccare il legno nel mandrino.?

[garybrun]

quote:Originally posted by Gizmo


Also the fact that we knew the wages when we took the job bears no relevance to what we should be expected to be paid today. The time served by staff ranges from 5 to over 10 years, well before BAJR rates were introduced. All staff started at the bottom and have worked their way up and to suggest that they should not expect their pay to be in line with their piers is the same as saying that someone who started with a supermarket before minimum wage was introduced should be happy with their £2.50 an hour.
I find the extreme revolutionary attitude very sad.

First of all my apologies if I have come across as revolutionary as it was not my intention. I did not know that the staff had served there for 5-10 years and worked their way up... it didn't come across in the original post.
The whole point of my posting was "the revolutionary attitude" that was taken regarding the firm being forced to close. That's cutting your nose of to spite your face.

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[tom wilson]

Hello all,
I haven't time to respond in full except two quick points.
First, Gary, I didn't intend to make you out to be a heartless git. I didn't use the word 'Thatcherite' as an insult either, more an accurate description of the advice given by you and most posters (myself included). Call it rats leaving the ship, ultra-liberalism, or worker empowerment: it's all the same effect. Ironic really.

Second, Dr P, I suggested we move away from 'facts' because none of us has any, or if we do we are rightly keeping them quiet in accordance with the AUP.

Vulpes, well said.

T


'Have a good plan, execute it violently, do it today'.
General MacArthur