Trainee - Anyone with less than 6months experience

[kevin wooldridge]

Thought I might interject here...

Trowelfodder asks "Is it just me or are there an increasingly large number of units now using the trainee grade?"

I have checked back on BAJR ads posted since April 2005 (collated on the Outwage database). In that time I have recorded 12 UK and one Irish company offering posts at a 'trainee' grade. (I will ignore the Irish instance because, I am not too sure of the difference between a 'trainee' and a 'General Operative')

Of the 12 UK examples, 9 are IFA RAOS, 3 are not. Interestingly the 'trainee wage' offered by 3 of the RAOs exceeds the BAJR/IFA minimum for 'experienced' archaeological staff, as does the wage offered by 2 of the 3 non-RAOs.

During the review period a number of companies have offered 'ínternships', in the main sponsored by English Heritage and the IFA. The wage offered for the advertised 'ínternships' has always been at or above the IFA/BAJR minima for 'experienced' staff.

Despite the inference made on this thread, one well known archaeological contractor (well known for their interest in 'linear infrastructure projects') has not advertised for 'trainees' during this period (at least not on BAJR).

I am not sure that 'trainee' posts are a big problem at the moment, but recognise Trowelfodders çoncern and promise that Outwage will keep an eye on the situation, as I am sure our Host will as well.

What happens in the 'unregulated' archaeological job market is another problem. Outwage has heard tales of universities being one of the biggest culprits here, in particular offering students/former students/post graduates some pretty dodgy employment deals on an open-ended, 'It will be good for your future career' basis.

My advice: 'When buying a career, always use a respected career dealer'.

[Dave-Bonner]

If its the well known 'linear infrastructure specialist' I think you're talking about, they've certainly employed trainees on lower wages over your analysis period. At £260 pw if my maths and memory serve me correctly.

[Dave-Bonner]

...not that I'm suggesting speculation of this kind gets anyone anywhere, but just thought it worth pointing out.

[kevin wooldridge]

quote:Originally posted by Dave-Bonner

If its the well known 'linear infrastructure specialist' I think you're talking about, they've certainly employed trainees on lower wages over your analysis period. At £260 pw if my maths and memory serve me correctly.

I have checked back BAJR adverts for this company back to June 2005. The lowest rate advertised on BAJR for 'Project Assistants' in that period has been £280pw, albeit for a 40 hour week. I believe our Host checked with the company regarding the 40 hours and confirmed that the '40 hr week' included a paid lunch break.

I am not disputing with DB whether the company has employed trainees and at the lower pay rate. All I originally said was that they hadn't advertised 'trainee' posts on BAJR (which was the subject of Trowelfodder's initial posting). I guess if an employer can get staff without advertising on BAJR, they aren't obliged to stick to BAJR minimum wage levels.

[BAJR Host]

Thats true...

And I can't enforce that... (perhaps if other avenues of advertising were as strict .... cough cough) but if people continue to work for sub-wages then that undermines it.

However there is a clause in BAJR where you must agree to abide

"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. "

So only advertising posts that meet the minimum IFA/BAJR rates is not allowed.

ps.. yes I did check and now a new statement can be found on the ADD job section.
http://www.bajr.org/Employment/UKEmploymentAdd.asp


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

[Dave-Bonner]

quote:Originally posted by kevin wooldridge

All I originally said was that they hadn't advertised 'trainee' posts on BAJR (which was the subject of Trowelfodder's initial posting). I guess if an employer can get staff without advertising on BAJR, they aren't obliged to stick to BAJR minimum wage levels.

Hi Kevin. Sorry, I wasn't suggesting you had made a mistake, just trying to add that extra dimension.

Out of interest Mr Hosty, do you think its possible to enforce removal from the ads list if companies are slipping trainees round the back, so to speak, without advertising their low pay? It would rely on a whistle-blower system, right?

D x

[the invisible man]

Is the argument here one of terminology? If a new graduate (or indeed new non-graduate) with less than 6 months experience was simply described as Grade G1 No Experience, would that be ok?

On the job training, learning with and from more experienced colleagues, is pretty common on other walks of life in my experience and is probably the best way of learning. I have found that is is helpful to the mentors as well. Obviously it only works with reasonable contract periods, if everyone is rushed off their feet with very tight deadlines it's not much good for anyone. This, I suspect, may be the real problem.

To describe a new worker under appropriate conditions as a trainee seems to me to be eminently reasonable. How else are they to be trained, I wonder?



We owe the dead nothing but the truth.

[BAJR Host]

Thats it Invis

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

[troll]

Have just received a job application form where it states that a part of my job responsibilities is to train junior staff.The position I applied for is site asistant.The application form did not ask for qualifications that define me as a "trainer" and it seems that agreeing to train is a prerequisite for employment.

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[trowelfodder]

Sorry if it appeared i was questioning trainee grades as posted on bajr - these are not nessessarily advertised but when those with less exp apply they are offered less money!

Very hard for bajr to regulate but a whistle blower system should help police this.

And dont have a problem with the term trainee - its fine - its what people with no experience are. It is important that this isnt a way to lower the starting wage. Maybe it should be explicitly clear that the lowest wage for a digger starting out with no exp is a site assistant grade 1. Or a trainee but with the wages brought inlione with ifa rates?