Movement on the living wage?

[hurting-back]

Beamo, 1man,

Thanks for your comments! I don't really disagree with either of you, but if I may comment on a few things:

"The brief then forms part of the contract for the works - if the work is not up to the standard in the brief, then the contractor is in breach of contract and action can be taken (legal or otherwise) by the client or consultant - this is totally separate to the issue of enforcement (or lack thereof) by planning officers advised by curators. The consultant can monitor compliance with standards, as well as the curator."

I might add that I don't really see legal action occurring unless precipitated by the dissatisfaction of the curator/council. If a contractor doesn't really comply with the brief, but the consent is granted regardless, would the client or the consultant really waste time and money trying to sue the contractor into doing more?

"However, none of this has any real effect on the matter under debate -pay levels within the contracting part of the profession - I would welcome suggestions on how consultants can assist in this."

Ok, I would have to disagree here beamo, I obviously think these things are indeed interrelated, otherwise I would have started a new thread on curatorial enforcement or whatever. But I don't want to because I am not saying that anyone is doing a bad job (well some individuals do, but this is not as widespread as people seem to think) as everyone is doing the best they can within the existing framework. What I am saying is that defining a detailed scope of works which allows contractors to cost to the same level of work is actually quite difficult and time consuming. Obviously is this because you can get several archaeologists to look at a site even after it is stripped, and they can still disagree about how to achieve the same set of objectives in terms of methodology and resourcing. This makes things variable enough without adding overworked curators to the mix. I have gone over why I think these issues are linked at great length (I am sure everyone will agree about that!!) so if I have not convinced you I am sorry but I am out of arguments, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

1man - I don't have any issue with what you say...in theory. In my experience consultants are under considerable market pressures of their own. For example once a contractor is appointed for a cheap price, and say the excavation is finished, while the consultants heart may be wanting to push the contractor to the full letter of the brief, their head has to consider that if the curator will let the site go, it is in their own (and their client's) interest to let that happen as this will be the cheaper option. And as much as beamo has pointed out that clients really care about deadlines rather than costs, most contractors can mobilise relatively quickly (within four weeks) and will tell you they can achieve the deadlines, so things will quickly go to costs.

We are now truly getting away from the topic however, as in bringing this up I was trying to put forward the notion that limited resources for curators would restrict movement on the living wage, but we can discuss this elsewhere if you'd like!

don't panic!