Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
14th October 2010, 07:59 AM
Members of the forum may or may not be aware of the plans to remove the effectiveness of the Nottinghamshire Archaeology Service. This includes the removal of the right to public access for the HER.
http://www3.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/theco...mmunities/
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
14th October 2010, 01:16 PM
Can anyone point me to which pdf relates to HERs and or archaeological curators?
Reason: your past is my past
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2009
14th October 2010, 02:29 PM
The relevent PDF is quite a long way down the page
Catagory B
Conservation: Restructure of Services
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2010
14th October 2010, 02:46 PM
strikes me as really really bad news, basic advice within the council on heritage issues and reduced access to HER? and I assume the 6 remaining jobs won't even be heritage advisory? they'll have to cover all the eco stuff? so what maybe 1 post left to run HER and advise? wonder how many sites will slip through the net now? and the negative impact that will have not only on the archaeology but on commercial units trying to work in the area........ and there I was starting to think things were getting better (by things I mean levels of upcoming work for commercial units)!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
14th October 2010, 03:18 PM
Cant say that the figures make much sense to me. It’s a pretty micky mouse statement. Whats the budget spent on? Infrastructure., heating leases? It appears that they are proposing to reduce staffing numbers from 33.8 by 27.8. leaving 5 which is an 82% reduction in numbers but they only come out with a 75% saving although 381000 does not look like, a 75% saving on a net budget of 1013000 although 763000 does but that is for two years. Why haven’t they broken it down to HER officers and curatorial levels (maybe they don’t know). I would have thought that redundancy costs would also affect the initial saving rate. Why have they opted for 75% rather than 25%?
Maybe the commercial/private are going to have to take over the HERs and the curation. Thing is that when you take a business over you like to see a record of the accounts. Have the “archaeologists” who work(ed) in this environment considered taking their accounts and showing them to the commercial sector to see if other management could be preferable/cheaper than just having one body left pretending that they are trying to keep up.
Reason: your past is my past
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2009
14th October 2010, 10:15 PM
northerner Wrote:strikes me as really really bad news, basic advice within the council on heritage issues and reduced access to HER? and I assume the 6 remaining jobs won't even be heritage advisory? they'll have to cover all the eco stuff? so what maybe 1 post left to run HER and advise? wonder how many sites will slip through the net now? and the negative impact that will have not only on the archaeology but on commercial units trying to work in the area........ and there I was starting to think things were getting better (by things I mean levels of upcoming work for commercial units)!
It was pretty bad up there anyway. The county arch I dealt with a few times had to trawl the council's website for applications as they never bothered consulting the individual in the first place.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2010
15th October 2010, 08:40 AM
This is terrible news, and I find it particularly galling that half of the council's motto, appearing on all of it's webpages, is the line 'Proud of Our Past'. What a hollow, meaningless statement given the intended course of action.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2010
15th October 2010, 04:06 PM
hmmm "proud of our past (as long as it doesn't get in the way of really important stuff, like paying to have a 'beach' in he city centre all summer!)"
Proposed Slashing of Nottinghamshire Archaeology Section
