One Minima to Rule them All

[Dinosaur]

Although there is a 'market bubble', that hasn't raised the money that clients are prepared to pay, since there's always one of PP's 'satellite offices with depressed wages' outfits waiting to undercut those who try to pay better wages. Until they stop doing that no client is going to be prepared to pay more for our (archaeologists in general) services.

[BAJR]

and whether the pay matched the recommended CIfa minimum for the required MCIfa grade.

Please read my post above yours..

My contention is that poor pay is not the responsibility of employees.

So the idea is that people wait for the employer to suddenly have an epiphany and pay 20k for a digger... not be able to compete with anyone else who can now undercut em... and they go out of business toot sweet...
OR The employees are unionised in order to have a collective bargaining power that can discuss with FAME the main employers organisation, in order to create a framework for change. I actually hoped that unions would be the effective power to do this ( hence an earlier unsupported BAJR initiative to Unionise the Fieldworkers... to underwhelming support.
The idea that the employee is a powerless victim of circumstance is to dis-empower them... people do have the power to change things if they collectivise .. the trouble is that they don't. site hut grumble is as far as it goes.

Again I plead I beg... tell me what you would do to alter the situation... Anything... I know you feel it is only your opinion, but I really want to hear what your solution is. I may be able to work with it. I will perhaps not have thought of this solution... I am even willing to give less traditional methods a go at least. This is your chance.. honestly...

I take it you agree with my precious post regarding "Lets accept for the moment that all jobs in archaeology from Top to bottom are "poorly paid" Once we have that concept parked, we can accept that actually it was a lot worse and so could be actually more poorly paid than. " SO I am not advertising poorly paid jobs... I am advertising jobs that in your opinion are poorly paid in general and so in your opinion, all the jobs bar a few... are poorly paid to start with. Ergo - the ones that I refuse to advertise ( of course you don't see them as I don't advertise them) are even more poorly paid than teh poorly paid adverts that you feel are what people are provided with.

:face-approve:


Anyways... Give me a sign that you have thought about a way to deal with this situation.

[BAJR]

Although there is a 'market bubble', that hasn't raised the money that clients are prepared to pay, since there's always one of PP's 'satellite offices with depressed wages' outfits waiting to undercut those who try to pay better wages. Until they stop doing that no client is going to be prepared to pay more for our (archaeologists in general) services.

Sad but true... sad but true... add to that people who will take the posts... no matter what... and we end up with an unsustainable spiral. I would love to pay the top rates to all... get all the best staff... and then lose every contract because everyone else can undercut staff costs and maybe even skimp on accommodation The money is there to pay us ... but the fear is there to do it... and fortunately teh new blood is there to fill the ranks of the fallen

[Crocodile]

Please read my post above yours.

.
I did, I was emphasising that the discussion was about the job, no mention was made to whether you should have advertised it. Even if I had criticised your choice to advertise the job this could in no way be extrapolated as a critisism of what you or anyone else have done in the past. I haven't suggesyed any of this.

So the idea is that people wait for the employer to suddenly have an epiphany and pay 20k for a digger

. Who has suggested that?

Will not demand and the free market sort it out?

The idea that the employee is a powerless victim of circumstance is to dis-empower them

. I don't think they are powerless. They are still not responsible for low pay.

What action could a unionised workforce take? How would it work with the idea of free market lead pay increases?

I am not sure why you are asking what I would do. I take your tone as defensive, as if I have said that what you are doing is wrong. I have not. I have

Questioned whether dropping minima grades is a good idea. Which is inquisitive not critical or conclusive.

And I have suggested

That an assesment, road map of where pay should be and how long it will take to get there would be useful.

I have also, questioned whether pay increases are real or just in line with average increases.

My comments on advertising low pay, was in the context of where the responsibility lies, it's not a critisism. As you no longer maintain the different pay grades this suggests that you will take adverts that pay less, are poorer than what you think is a reasonable rate. I would rather BAJR accept all jobs regardless but allow free, open, and specific discussion on the pay and responsibility.

[Crocodile]

Ok, apologies, my emphasis sounded negative. I should have said it is your responsibility as to whether you advertise poorly paid jobs "or not". My point was that this choice is your responsibility but you are not responsible for low pay. I did not mean that all your advertised jobs are poorly paid. Most are above the average or just below. I do note one PO job that I would say is paying a good grand or more below average for the grade but this is not out of line with your current policy on minimum pay and job adverts.

Beyond this I can't see anythng else that could be interpreted as a critisism and I am sorry that you have inferred my comments in such a way, I don't believe I have implied such..

[BAJR]

Um Thanks for that. My main concern was comments against a particular identifiable person/company regarding a specific advert.

My second was ... more regarding, it is easy to critique.. and people feel free. but not so easy to actually have positive and constructive solutions.

My responsibility is not to advertise poorly paid jobs. Nor to support that stance, but to move it all forward.

The Generic questions you suggest are more relevant.

and here... correct me if I misunderstand..

1. How has the 1 minima worked over the past year... ( I can look into this... looking at relevant jobs and comparing the rate rises)
2. Do I have responsibility for job adverts. - in a nutshell yes.. but will explain why when I get a moment. ( am currently flying to London to talk to students about skills and training - and no... I don't get paid to do this... I do it because I am BAJR)
3. Is there a roadmap that can be created to look at ways of increasing rates over time... ( and here again I can have an opinion, as much as you... nobody else has managed more than a wish-list - I can cite several groups I supported that failed to produce anything other than a "that would that be good" document) SO Any constructive advice and suggestions are welcome... this is the thing about shared responsibility... We are all in it together so need to hear all suggestions for change, rather than reasons why everything is shit... we know that already...

So there we are... back on Sunday.. hope to reply more then.

ps.. I reiterate. People have opinions.. and want to discuss.. That is why this place is here.. However there are Rules. - I have highlighted a relevant one in Section 3 Content. - Read the Terms and Conditions section of the Forum.
:face-approve:

[Crocodile]

Um Thanks for that. My main concern was comments against a particular identifiable person/company regarding a specific advert.

.

Ok but I do think that this is limiting, shame there isn't any forum where we can say, "I don't think this company is paying the going rate". Maybe there is, but fair enough.

My second was ... more regarding, it is easy to critique.. and people feel free. but not so easy to actually have positive and constructive solutions.

.

I understand but my point was that I hadn't critisised anything BAJR has done and you have implied that i had.

The Generic questions you suggest are more relevant.

and here... correct me if I misunderstand..

1. How has the 1 minima worked over the past year... ( I can look into this... looking at relevant jobs and comparing the rate rises)

.

Yes, I'm interested in how the policy is working.

2. Do I have responsibility for job adverts. - in a nutshell yes.. but will explain why when I get a moment.

.

Not really one of my questions. I know who is responsible for posting job adverts, you. My point was that, whatever choices you make about adverts, that is, do you restrict adverts by a policy of minimum grades, or instead choose a more market led policy, whilst these may have positive or negative outcomes for pay, this does not change who is responsible for poor pay. Employers are responsible for poor pay, any suggestion otherwise is to dis-empower them.

3. Is there a roadmap that can be created to look at ways of increasing rates over time.

I don't think this is something that is BAJR's responsibility. The CIfA has recommended rates of pay. What increases would have to take place to get wages to this level in 5 years, say? How long would it take to get there at the current rates of annual uncrease? Are we actually standing still in real terms?

[P Prentice]

Although there is a 'market bubble', that hasn't raised the money that clients are prepared to pay, since there's always one of PP's 'satellite offices with depressed wages' outfits waiting to undercut those who try to pay better wages. Until they stop doing that no client is going to be prepared to pay more for our (archaeologists in general) services.

i dont know why you keep going on about what clients are prepared to pay? they will pay for what they need to get the planning condition removed. it is not clients it is archaeologists who keep pay rates deflated

[BAJR]

Sad but true... But we are back to the responsibility again. Everyone fears everyone else... nobody willing to make that first move, because someone will come in cheaper.

[Sikelgaita]

i dont know why you keep going on about what clients are prepared to pay? they will pay for what they need to get the planning condition removed. it is not clients it is archaeologists who keep pay rates deflated

So archaeological consultants are blameless in the 'keep em cheap' scenario?