Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
15th September 2010, 11:06 PM
I personally saw mercenarys problems as their (his/hers) own. I don?t give a monkeys if I am not on somebody?s list ifa-bajr included. Where I take offence is when they put me on one. I take them to task using data protection or by direct insult. Mercenary contrived a problem producing an archaeological record based on company name!
Quote:[SIZE=3]My beef is that I cannot produce reports under my new company name until I actually land some work, which I am unlikely to do if I'm not yet on the contractor lists!
[/SIZE]
oh so last century catch 22. Whats in a company name, whats a report.
What they (he/her) need to do is get up in the morning and say I am an archaeologist.---Anything I say or do is an archaeological report copyright me
bingo wings
Reason: your past is my past
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
16th September 2010, 10:14 AM
Vulpes,
I take my hat off to you as your penultimate post was excellent, informative and helpful. However, I would argue that BAJR's vetted employer list is and was a benchmark towards improving pay and conditions in archaeololgy and its criteria or sorts was adopted by the IfA, but i digress...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
16th September 2010, 04:46 PM
If you read my post again, you'll see I was referring to pay and conditions... :face-topic:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
16th September 2010, 05:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 16th September 2010, 08:56 PM by Sparky.)
Moving back to the thread, why should some curatorial staff be forced to accept only ROs to conduct archaeological work in their area when non-RO units have functioned perfectly well and without cause for complaint? Furthermore, why should ROs who have been the subject of complaint be allowed to swan back into an area where they neither liked or trusted? Future headaches.
Mercenary, Perhaps you need to first find yourself a few clients if the County isn't helping.
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
16th September 2010, 07:07 PM
Quote:Why should some curatorial staff be forced to accept only ROs to conduct archaeological work in their area when non-RO units have functioned perfectly well and without cause for complaint?
And thats the point Vulpes. The IfA are asking for self employment... but then setting the barrier, when at teh moment (and lets be clear I do think that there should be a standard, and fortunately both the IfA and BAJR are involved in this - the IfA are more, shall we say official.. but BAJR does also set trends... 5 years ago, BAJR created a 12 point pay grade based on responsibility now the IfA are mentioning this... BAJR is involved in a skills passport system - where there is a practical accreditation system, that will benefit both contractors and employees - etc... I don't knock the IfA , though it is easy for some to feel that this is the knee jerk reaction..! I do support the IfA , I do support the ideals, I do support many things the IfA stand for... I am in the happy position where I can implement them, without recource to working party groups)
Anyway... I am self employed, I am happy with it, and I am not an RO and would currently be well pissed off if I had to be an RO to get work.... maybe one day, when the system is robust and fully accountable... But I will not be forced. I should be encouraged!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2010
16th September 2010, 07:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 16th September 2010, 07:50 PM by trainedchimp.)
Quote:I am not an RO and would currently be well pissed off if I had to be an RO to get work.... maybe one day, when the system is robust and fully accountable... But I will not be forced. I should be encouraged!
the first third I like, the last third I like, but as for the middle, the domination of the big few (in the RAO system) will only be institutionalised if non-one else plays the game, so the middle needs a bit of give and take. On both sides...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
16th September 2010, 11:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 16th September 2010, 11:15 PM by vulpes.)
Quote:to be an RO and open yourself up to scrutiny...
hmmm...
Quote:with BAJR the criteria is based on ok till I find out different.
With respect, that's purely reactive and hardly an improvement on the Yellow Pages. Fair pay and conditions, although important to employees, do not necessarily equate to good standards of archaeological work.
I know which approach I'd be more comfortable with as someone procuring an archaeological service.
Quote:BAJR's vetted employer list is and was a benchmark towards improving pay and conditions in archaeololgy and its criteria or sorts was adopted by the IfA
Quote:If you read my post again, you'll see I was referring to pay and conditions...
So I'm just supposed to ignore the first bit of that sentence am I? My post was to highlight that the IfA has had a 'vetted employer list' since 1996 it's called the Registered Organisations scheme.
Quote:I am self employed, I am happy with it, and I am not an RO
Aye good for you, I wouldn't expect a sole trader to be an RO. But corporate IfA membership commensurate with the work they're taking on would be a good thing. :face-approve:
Quote:why should some curatorial staff be forced to accept only ROs to conduct archaeological work in their area when non-RO units have functioned perfectly well and without cause for complaint?
I don't know, and having too much time on my hands I've scoured this thread for a reference to curatorial staff being 'forced' to do this, to no avail. Interesting scenario Sparks, but is that actually happening anywhere? :face-huh:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
17th September 2010, 05:10 PM
Its just a scenario, Foxy, of when an over zealous curator decides to lock out those who don't agree to join the old boys' club, as I suspect you might.
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
17th September 2010, 07:22 PM
Foxy.... boom boom....
So far, all I can see is that he will only recommend ROs - but, even then will still have to apply the same rigorous checks on quality as he would to a non-RO... if they are lucky enough to be chosen... So the difference is?
Second... BAJR prefers a innocent until proven guilty approach (call it the Bristish way) and also 99% of people are not trying to be bad... often they just need some 'help' when it happens. I was talking to some RO people recently... they love the RO checks and vetting... nothing is out of place for the visit.
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
17th September 2010, 09:17 PM
Quote:if someone asks me where they can find information on archaeological contractors etc I would direct them to the RO list.
Sounds like a recommendation to me 
however, thanks for the non sarcastic recognition... it is welcome -- its because we are all here that it can happen... and I know you love BAJR deep down 
Statements are quite good, however... as DF will admit... actions are better.. :face-stir:
|
