What pay is like for Archaeologists in the United States

[Doug]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spK0yBjQ94g

Hope this works.

Here is a video on field tech pay in the USA. Its in dollars but the exchange rate is around 1.55 dollars to pounds to just divided everything by 1.55 to get pounds.

Most depressing part :face-crying:, in my opinion, is wages vs. inflation over the last ten years.

any thoughts or comments on improving the video would be much appreciated . thanks

[BAJR]

Thanks for that Doug... we all seem to be in the same boat...

THe question is how it is resolved, given the ...ahem... differing ideas... Unionisation, I have seen, is like asking US diggers to sell their soul to the devil.

[Doug]

Yeah unionism has a interesting, to say the least, history and interaction in the states. Though even here it hasn't worked at all, of all places, so I am not sure it is even possible in the states.

I am thinking of two possible solutions:

1. this one is very specific to the US and I am not sure it would work at all in the UK- Its in my long term plans I just need to find a website to host it or raise some money of my own to create a website.

In the states you can see a huge divide between pay east(worst)-west(better but not great)but this doesn't even capture how much those costs relate to cost of living.

I would like to use cost of living markers (there are websites that provide this on a city to city bases) and using the ACRA list and archeologyfieldwork list of companies to create a map of wages for each company. Cause lets face it, if your working more then a week for a organization then, even if the project is located 100's of miles away, you usually come back to their home base for the weekend or whatever so you have to "live"/stay were the home base is, at least for weekends.

I think a real problem is that people are willing to be under cut by a dollar or two because its hard to estimate costs and make the comparison to other jobs. Its really hard to even guess what your wage is suppose to be because there are not enough postings of jobs in each state to really get a grasp of what you should be paid.

This is were I think the map can help by capturing 300, likely the majority of companies, and showing everyone what they should be making, adjusted for local cost of living compared to the national average. People will realize "wow I am getting screwed". Hopefully driving people away from that company so they have to raise wages to attract workers or we demand that we get paid more but with evidence that they are under-paying by the national average.

For this to work though requires massive emailing and bombardment of archaeologists currently working. Also, and most important, contacting every Uni, community college, etc. and making sure every new arch knows what they should be paid.

Do I think this will change things eh, I see some wages going up or at least the outliers getting lots of pressure. It will probably help even out the divides across some states. At most it will help wages a little. Unless everyone decides to not compromise and only work for what the average is (adjusted for local cost of living) then you could see a sort of un-official union effect. That is I think the best case scenario from working within the system.

2. This I think is the best option but one that requires a lot of work.

Make a law for higher wages- while this sounds really hard its because archaeologists tend to be good at digging in the dirt and not much else especially gov.

In the US you could go state by state- easier to get a law passed. Its not really hard you need a to get a senator and rep. on board (except Nebraska that has only one leg.) and get it attached as an amendment to a bigger bill. presto it gets passed along. one or two states do this and the archaeologists in other states will jump in and follow. Same here get like Scotland to pass a bill and all of a sudden everyone else will be on board.

The trick is to present the bill as requiring qualifications(BA to be an archaeologists is the unofficial one anyways) because heritage needs people who know what they are doing. Name the bill something like heritage and tourism development initiative.

Now of course all the developers are going to throw a fit. this is were the hard research comes in an a strategic payment
1. do not set the wage to high just enough to live with a few comforts BUT have it adjusted for inflation. you can also come back in a few years and raise it more
2. in the committee meetings show a video of what we do(work) vs. what construction workers do(stand) and our wages
3. show up to committee meetings in our field gear- say we just came from the field and have to go back after the meeting- chances are it will be true. Make it seem like the construction companies who will be in suits are beating up on the poor working man. it will play well for the press
4. research numbers- this is why the wages need to be reasonable- how much the extra wage will cost lets say a 1 acre survey- extra 5 quid maybe etc.
5. research the waste of construction companies- there are tons- so when they say it will raise costs you can or have your friendly rep./mp say well why dont you do this to cut waste- so they look like idiots complaining about 5 quid when they are wasting 000's.
6. put it in easy to understand terms like this will raise costs .01% if it stays under less then 1% no one will question it. it probably will be under 1% anyways
7. when tackling why it is important shy away from fluffy stuff like it teachs us about the past etc. focus on the money heritage brings in e.g. we gained x amount of money from this discovery BUT if archaeologists had not been there we would have lost out on all that money

Basically- make a bill that says- poor working class people want fair wage against big rich wasteful construction (which will cost pennies) so that we can make millions upon millions of dollars for our nation/state.

it will take some media savy but if it is done right archaeologists will look like Jesus facing down pilot.

[ZSilvia]

I haven't had a chance to watch the video yet so bear with me if I am a little off topic.

I know some people who work in the New England area, specifically Boston / Rhode Island / Connecticut, and start pay for entry level is typically around $12 to $15 an hour with accommodation and travel expenses. This is roughly ?8 to ?11 right now I think. The thing is though, being an archaeologist from that area, you can only work from March/April until about October when the ground freezes. US contract archaeologists tend to be uber-migrants and head south for the winter where they can still dig stuff up when the temperature drops.

I had never heard of an archaeology union until I moved to the UK. Americans tend to be ridiculously anti-union unfortunately because my fellow countryfolk are too easily swayed by the whims of the media/corporate/political power structure. I would imagine this to only affect archaeology indirectly because anti-unionism is just part of a more general, broader problem back in the states. I don't see how an archaeology union would work specifically because of how the laws are written for contracted workers vs. those made permanent. Contracted workers tend to be denied even the most basic of rights (such as healthcare, dental, eye coverage) because a signed contract is considered a forfeit of those rights in a way. I've seen it done to construction workers who work as private contractors as a way for companies to circumvent mandatory employer provided health coverage to full time employees. To be honest though I haven't ever asked any of my friends how this specific issue affects them. Whats worse, in my opinion, small businesses in the states tend to be able to get rid of workers easier if they consider unionization than large corporations. Most private archaeology firms I think would be classified as small businesses and it would be very easy for them to just get rid of the undesirables.

I would love to see it happen though but the political climate is only getting worse for any of that talk. The nation is moving too far to the right for union support to become a hot topic again.

[moreno]

I can provide a bit of contrast from working on the west coast of the States. The starting wages are similar. Some companies offer a non taxable (unless this has changed in recent years) per diem on away projects. The per diem is on top of your wages and covers travel expenses, accommodation and food. On some projects, where the company did not provide accommodation, a few of us would maximise our per diem by camping (season dependent) or by sharing a motel room. Often the company provided transport on away projects. The per diem was sufficient to cover petrol if we chose to drive. Unlike working on the East coast, we were able to work year round. I can honestly say that working during winter in the desert is considerably harsh and mentally taxing. Biting icy winds and squalls can test and do affect one’s mental capacity and productivity.

Away projects were attractive for a few reasons 1) the per diem, 2) usually long hours which meant over time, and 3) 4 days on, three off.

As for unions, there are far too many reasons for the union’s success/demise in the US to go into here. One might want to become familiar with the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933, the National Labour Relations Act (Wagner Act) 1935 to have an idea of the historical perception of unions and labour organising. For a perspective from an earlier period of American history check out Wikipedia “The Gilded Age” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age#Labor_unions

Anti Unionisation is rooted in America’s past. Right, wrong or indifferent it is a lingering perspective requiring an intense change of mindset on the right and the left side of our political spectrum. The way recent events in Tuscon are being covered and portrayed by the media, this shift seems highly unlikely.

[Doug]

Beyond the social and history reasons there is also the practical reasons why a union would not work in the states. First we would have to coordinate every (at least 80%) archaeologists in all 50 states. Then reach every student at what 500 some colleges and universities so they don't cross the picket line.

IF, and man thats a big if, a union hasn't worked here were it is 500 x easier to set up- only what 40 schools to contact students and an area the size of PA so its easy to meet and contact every field tech.

IF, that happens it would still fail because companies don't need people with archaeology or related degrees to complete the work.

While its true that for federal and most state permits you need a degree (BA or MA) this requirement usually only applies to the permit holder not the field techs.

The saddest thing I have heard in a long time is that in Virginia some companies are using temps and sending out one permitted archaeologists to supervise. Temps- as in temps from a temp agency, as in the people you usually get to cover the phones if someone is sick.

No laws against it. The archaeology suffers but that hasn't stopped anyone in the past.

While most respected companies would never do this if there was a strike going on and push comes to shovel all current field techs. would be replaced in an instant.

[moreno]

It's a massive effort to unionise archaeological labour and an unfortunate situation not to have in place a system of accountablility towards a best pratice for the tech (field) staff. Here in the UK for all intent and purpose the IFA aims to fill the role toward 'business' accountability toward archaeological practise (RAO's, codes, guidelines and standards for example). Generally, it appears that commercial archaeology business aims are not congruent with unionisation.

I haven't come across the example in Virginia, but admittedly I haven't worked in commerical archaeology on the west coast in years. Comparably though, this situation is not unlike those that occur on research projects using local often untrained labour with mixed success.

At the end of the day exploitation of labour (under whatever guise you wish to place it under) is the unfortunate reality. By all means this doesn't mean we can't work towards and set up a fairer and more suitable best practise for field staff. The problem is getting "business" to develop a social conscience to accept it. What end do we as field staff have to go to? Who wants to put their neck out if someone without a job (unskilled, skilled, scabs or temp) is williing to take their place? There simply appears to be no leverage at our end.

[Doug]

I think we do have the leverage we just do not utilize it.

Think about it, the world of commercial archaeology is an artificial creation. It serves no practice need like we need food so a farmer plants crops. All of commercial archaeology is created by rules created by governments which in turn is influenced by people. People like us.

We can change the rules that govern the artificial world of commercial archaeology. We say hey government, commercial archaeology needs to pay a living wage. In the exact same way that archaeologists in the 1970's said hey gov. we need to protect cultural resources.

Of course its not that easy and that is why we dont utilize the leverage we do have. Its easier to :face-crying:then to go and try something hard.

[ZSilvia]

"The saddest thing I have heard in a long time is that in Virginia some companies are using temps and sending out one permitted archaeologists to supervise. Temps- as in temps from a temp agency, as in the people you usually get to cover the phones if someone is sick."

YUCK...goodness gracious me that is the worst thing I've heard in a while.

"At the end of the day exploitation of labour (under whatever guise you wish to place it under) is the unfortunate reality. By all means this doesn't mean we can't work towards and set up a fairer and more suitable best practise for field staff. The problem is getting "business" to develop a social conscience to accept it."

I think our only hope would involve legislation that inadvertently influences business practices in archaeology rather than directly. These would be labor laws that influences a variety of technical industries (esp. construction) where field workers could lobby make a case for protection under a broader law. Of course, these laws would be introduced at the state level rather than federal, which requires a lot of work in what laws are being debated in all 50 states. However, to me this seems more workable than trying to independently organize as it would require less people to get on board with big interests in the construction industry. Then again the construction industry is often at odds with our goals, since, as you say, we are only here because the law requires it - much to the protest of developers.

What about engaging with larger skilled workers unions like the AFL-CIO to see if anything could be worked out?

Writing out all these ideas makes me feel so idealistic and fanciful...its all seems so hopeless.

[Doug]

I think a labour law would be the way to go.

Also, I have thought about it over the last couple of days and I am not sure that many developers/construction firms/contractors would actually oppose such a law for a couple of reasons.

For example if you had a 3 field tech crew working a survey for a week thats 120 hrs of work- the difference between paying $12 and $14 is $1440-1680 = $240 dollars. About what a company charges for a days use of one vehicle. If a project lasts a week then that is several hundred acre project meaning millions if not 100's millions of dollar contract. $240 is nothing.

This also assumes that this money is passed on to the construction company/contractor. It could be that only a percentage or none at all is passed along but instead taken out of the profits of arch. companies. Sad times cause then we would have less millionaire bosses:face-crying: . In case that dosnt come through on the post -sarcasm

Also depending on how the contract is set up they might actually want a more expensive archaeology crew if they change a premium above what a sub-contractor changes. I had this happen, I worked for probably the most expensive company in the state (they did top of the line work) and we were subcontracted by a out of state firm to do work. Because that firm could then change an extra 20%? (not sure exactly on the amount my memory is fuzzy) above our price. So they wanted us to charge more so they could make more }.

Of course the first place to pass a law would have to be watched closely to see who opposes it but it might be that no one is against a law.