Pay rates - going where?

[vulpes]

Time to join the IfA kids!!!

[Oxbeast]

I don't think I will, Vulpes.

Why should I have to take responsibility for what I publish when they won't take responsibility for what they publish? Why should I have to hold myself to a higher standard (not breaking the rules) than they hold themselves?

This 'we don't control it' argument is specious buck passing.

[vulpes]

To be fair. I've taken the IfA bulletin to task previously myself over publishing an advert which contravened the ageism legislation. They were quite responsive - However, many of the ads are culled from other sources unlike on BAJR and I believe it is these ads that they refer to here. As regards ads placed with them they are, I believe, pretty scrupulous. It wouldn't hurt if they were to screen the culled ads more closely though.

As such, I fear this thread is in danger of degenerating into another 'Kick the IfA' thread.

Enjoy yourselves! 8D

[chiz]

I imagine the IFA's disclaimer is just that, to cover themselves as they cannot investigate every advert placed with them. How are the IFA going to know in advance whether XXXXXX Archaeology are going to renege on what they have said in their advert about paying people Pifa wages if they are Pifa level??


There is nothing 'wrong' with paying people sub-Pifa wages if they are not at Pifa level or taking Pifa level responsibilities, BAJR also has a level (G1) which is below Pifa level, its for people starting out/trainees, lets hope those trainees/new entrants quickly pick up the skills, and pick up more wages. Until there is evidence that the unit in question is under-paying staff who are doing Pifa jobs, who have Pifa equivalence skills, experience and responsibilities, I personally don't see the problem. Just as I don't see why some people got their knickers in a twist saying 'one wage for Ifa members, a lower wage for non-members', its quite clearly not the case. I also know that when people have complained about job adverts, action has been taken.

However I do most certainly agree that there is a real downward pressure on wages for new staff to the bottom of wage bands at the moment, and a larger downward pressure on conditions, accomodation and subs.

Can I get back to kicking the ifA now?

[BAJR Host]

CAn't se an IfA kicking here... more like premonition defensiveness

but seriously The Pifa level responsibilities - could someone explain how this is defined for a fieldworker.. I can't find anything.

I have G1 which is quite clear about being a training position...

No previous experience required, you will be supervised and trained though you will be
expected to carry out tasks under supervision.

Suitable for students ? it is expected that after a suitable period of training the individual will progress to the relevant full position.

Professional knowledge
Basic


Decision making and influence
None

Freedom to act
None ? Full Guidance

Communication
Ability to work as part of a team.
Ability to learn

Qualifications
None required

Previous experience
Minimal or no relevant experience.

So we continue to return to what exactly is a PiFa field worker expected to be or do?

I would (and did when I was in it) suggest that the IfA would be better with a Member grade - full stop.

You either are or are not.

The 3 grades fit clumsily with the shades of employment - and can't hope to recognise the variations.

Even with my 11 grades, it still could do with more. (a thanks to Headland for giving me the crossover grades... brilliant idea )

Bash the IfA if you wish or leap to pre-emptive defence... I would prefer dialogue and discussion... and am grateful for the past few chats I have had with them. Always very good, if frustrating (which is my personal opinion) I am aware that several IfA members have emailed about this - perhaps a clarification from IfA would help, about how PiFa is defined and how adverts are vetted.

[chiz]

David, really don't want to get drawn into this....but.

You have defined your G1 and G2 grades, but there is a clear gap between the two:
G1: trainee, nicely defined, but your G2 specifically states that it is 'for a person with from 6 months-1 years work at this [G2] level'. So what happens between your student/trainee grade, and the G2 basic digger grade that demands 6 months experience at that grade before you can be on that very grade?? Catch 22 no? How do you get 6 months work at a level that takes 6 months work to get to? Absurd isn't it!

It is all a confused area at the portals to an archaeological career, acknowledged by your 11 grades, the IfA have taken a different aproach of three grades, (that for field staff do basically fit to Pifa digger, Aifa supervisor/junior PO and Mifa PO/manager)which have to fit all members of the profession. Its two different takes on the same problem.

You say that the IFA system is a mess, fine, they have apparently recently tried to get away from definition of time served, to one based on responsibility, knowledge and skills. They have published a skills matrix defining what you should be expected to do at what grade, and back this up by asking for statement of competance. The applicants handbook defines Pifa as :
PRACTITIONER (blue form) (see section 3)
This is our first level of corporate grade membership, open to those who have
undertaken skilled tasks within the historic environment sector under the guidance of
others, and carried out responsible work under a level of supervision.
Practitioners (PIfAs) also
? have a good working knowledge of key aspects of historic environment practice
? are able to achieve tasks using their own judgment, whilst working under general
supervision
? appreciate complex situations and are able to achieve a partial resolution alone
? see actions as a series of steps and recognise the importance of each role in the
team

so it is demonstrably higher than your G1 grade, and appears pretty similar to your G2 grade. It expects that you don't just walk into Pifa, but have to show some ability/knowledge/experience etc. It is what we would all recognise as 'digger grade'. We have to acknowledge that there are some new archaeologists who are not yet G2/Pifa level.

The problem here is that the advert appears to want applicants that have abilities, skills and experience that we would all see as clearly fitting the Pifa definition, but offers a pay range that at its lowest end is below the IFA minima for such aplicants. It then qualifies this lowest end pay by stating that anyone who is Pifa level will get Pifa minima.

So unless someone who should be getting Pifa wages is given sub Pifa level wages, whats the problem? Maybe they are one of the students who post on here wanting a foot on the ladder?

[BAJR Host]

Not trying to draw you into anything too contentious here Chiz, only pointing out that currently (and this could be said of BAJR Grades) there is no measurable basis for competence at either G2 or PiFA for a field worker.

Practitioners (PIfAs) also
? have a good working knowledge of key aspects of historic environment practice
? are able to achieve tasks using their own judgment, whilst working under general
supervision
? appreciate complex situations and are able to achieve a partial resolution alone
? see actions as a series of steps and recognise the importance of each role in the
team

Its like my own version.. the G2 .. but non specific.

Here is the BAJR G2

General knowledge of work required, should be able to carry out work with instruction from Supervisor or a senior field worker. This rate would be for a person with perhaps 6 months ? 1 years work at this level. An entry-level role that requires candidates to have more relevant general knowledge of the sector than G1, usually gained through a postgraduate qualification, or hands-on experience and training.

Professional knowledge
General level of knowledge in chosen field.

Decision making and influence
Expected to work on short-term targets through an established procedure

Freedom to act
Only with the advice and guidance of more senior colleagues.

Communication
Ability to work as part of a team.

Ability to learn Qualifications
Likely to have degree and relevant postgraduate qualification (or equivalent qualification/experience/training).

Previous experience
Some relevant experience (perhaps 3-6 months)

this is from the 2009/10 BAJR Pay and Conditions Guidance
http://www.bajr.org/Documents/FinalBAJRP...009-10.pdf

Where are the specifics.. we do have the NOS (National Occupational Standards)
http://www.torc.org.uk/nos/framework.asp

But its not quite a simple system where the employer can see instantly what an individual is capable or... and conversely an individual is able to see what they need to meet recognised requirements.

Here is a simplified version:
What is your level of competance in the following;
Troweling
Levels
Trench Layout
Field Survey
Topographic Survey
Context Records
Finds Handling
Stratigraphic Excavation
Site Photography
Site Planning
Section Drawing
Sampling
Skeleton excavation
Site Safety
First Aid
Map Reading/Cartography
Site Formation Processes
Current Legislation
Field Survey Reporting

Standardisation in training - with real skills learned, real skills gained, real skills recorded and real skills available to contractors. Its a hard start for a simple problem.

For example, can you plan? I have to say I don't know, it does not mean you can't, it just means I have no way of knowing. Can you lay out a grid? I don't know, I think you can, but I have no way of knowing if you can. Etc... How good would it be, if students came out with the skills - and others could fill gaps in knowledge through targeted training.

When I was at the site with you recently, you had no way of knowing whether I was good at planning or not... until I was on the site and drawing..

This is like every other skill far too late if you have already picked your team and are out in the field to find that nobody knows how to use an SLR camera or how to take a sample for C14 dating... etc...

Watch this space. Then we can have a real touchstone for real archaeologists, be good for us and good for companies - IF they recognise that investment in skills is investment in the future. (ps... the costings I have for this sort of activity are modular - and can be gathered over time and if seen as part of university training, then costs to the individual are not in the 1000-1500 of the NVQ (Not saying teh NVQ is bad by the way - just expensive for those who have just landed a big debt after university, and out of reach of 99% of any digger/field archaeologists on the circuit)

Then and only then can an advert ask for field archaeologists with confidence. and get what they pay for.

[chiz]

Aaarg. wrote a long and eloquent reply, but it was lost in cyberspace!

[BAJR Host]

Have to admit I now write it in word or notepad before posting... many forums have that problem... and I can't bear it.. I really hope you can find it in your heart to rewrite! :face-kiss:

[oldgirl]

Going back to the original subject: I've seen this statement in job descriptions before the present downturn. At that point it was there to allow people who did not yet have the skills needed to apply and get trained up. It would seem slightly unfair to pay someone who already has the relevant skills/abilities the same as someone who does not yet have them.

The biggest problem I have with the present climate is that people who are significantly more experienced than (for example) PIfA level are only seeing these lower paid jobs advertised.

Speaking as someone who (for my sins) goes on RO inspection visits, I can honestly say that this sort of thing is something that is raised at the benchmarking stage and also at the visit and registration stages. Along with CPD as well, which (however you get it) is vital to not just attaining a greater level of skill, but to demonstrating that skill.

And finally, the skills matrix that is used for the IfA grades are based on the National Occupational Standards (NOS). And the matrix may be considered to be 'woolly' by some, but it's designed to be applicable to people in all shades of archaeology, not just fieldworkers...