Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
9th November 2009, 04:44 PM
This is a debate and poll.
Please take the time to answer.
The discussion hinges on whether you feel that pay for junior staff should be frozen or cut - in order to allow companies to continue to be competitive? In principal it is the question... Is it better to have a job for less than no job?
This is a tough call.... and I urge anyone who can, to ask field staff especially to vote. (the poll is open to all) What would you do?
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
9th November 2009, 07:23 PM
But why just cut the pay for junior staff, why not for the managers as well. In fact why not the managers alone.....Just a thought.
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
9th November 2009, 07:45 PM
So would you vote for (if required) a pay cut for all staff.. from top to bottom)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2008
9th November 2009, 08:19 PM
I would noramly say no pay cuts but as i have bills to pay money coming in regularly more important, i did do a job that was over hour each way to work with no petrol money i basicly broke even after bills, it was horrible i had to stop putting anything aside and couldn't got out, but it kept the roof over my head which in the long term was what mattered.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
9th November 2009, 08:31 PM
'Cos there's alot more Techs than Managers? (as you know, I'm thinking..)I detect a bit of stirring Kevin? but seriously, isn't being "competitive" a major factor in salaries being so low already? and, across the board, would it make a difference? Surely units would still be competing for the same quantity of work. I'm no economist/accountant but isn't the issue a lack of work to do, not how much we charge to do it? I don't see anyone but the client benefitting(sp?) from archaeologists charging less.. I dunno, not much of a head for business me, ignore me if I'm talking rubbish.
\"...Ok, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking...\" Z.B
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
9th November 2009, 09:07 PM
Leg... the problem would be....
Contractor B pays ?xxx to field staff Contractor B pays ?xxx (-2 quid a week) so they can shave a few extra quid off the tender.. developer looks at the cost and chooses Contractor B because they are cheaper. Of course the job is done... but the fieldstaff would be worse off so the company can win the job.
and Drunky... that is the sad sad sad thing ... just so you can pay the bills, the company don't care that you are not even able to save a penny... they know you have to live and can take you to the limit, knowing tou have little choice but to accept it.
Lets just pray this does not happen. Imagine if units had to keep shaving costs just to win a job... then the surrounding contractors would have to, just to compete, so the first contractor cuts it further... then the others...etc.... how low would you go? Would you accept 200 quid a week? ?150? :0 (this may be the next poll)
Still this is interesting to look at the views and feeling, to see what direction the majority would want BAJR to go if such a thing were ever to happen. :p
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
9th November 2009, 09:57 PM
Hi David, That's exactly what I meant! sorry, obviously didn't put it very well. Kev
\"...Ok, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking...\" Z.B
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2006
9th November 2009, 10:01 PM
Phew - I see the poll results look pretty conclusive to me!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2008
9th November 2009, 10:06 PM
Apart from the money issue, it was i good company and learnt a lot, but it was a horriable feeling watching my savings disappear it's taken me two years to level out again.
If companies did keep dropping wages how would that work with there IFA membership or would they just leave it making the IFA powerless
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
9th November 2009, 10:07 PM
Competitive tender is basically killing archaeology in this country!!! Not only wages are threatened here. Many firms are now declining to provided accommodation, which has traditionally been one of the perks working the circuit!! Many people have to keep on flats, rooms or houses which they hardly see and having to pay for accommodation on top, on away jobs would for many be impossible to sustain.
Lets not mince words here those in ownership and management are doing ok but we the general work force get paid and treated like crap. On a major road scheme I'm working on we are the lowest paid workers. Even the guys who go around cleaning the cabins get more than "self employed" archaeologists! The principle contractor pays their staff ?210 a week subsistence - is there a similar amount being paid to the archaeological contractor to provide accommodation for us and if so why don't we see any of it?!!
Stupidity, greed and competitive tender will be the death of any meaningful commercial archaeology.
!
