Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 1,153
» Latest member: BAJR
» Forum threads: 4,063
» Forum posts: 4,429

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 40 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 40 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Genetic analysis of old b...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: Marc Berger
14th August 2017, 08:40 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 144
What would eh know about ...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: Marc Berger
15th July 2017, 01:37 PM
» Replies: 15
» Views: 3,512
How can adequate developm...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: Dinosaur
10th July 2017, 12:20 PM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 1,064
Three Dead Chasing Treasu...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: Dinosaur
10th July 2017, 12:10 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 1,531
300,000 years ...Wow!
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: GnomeKing
7th June 2017, 09:52 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 921
Is it an Arched trench or...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: GnomeKing
25th May 2017, 05:44 PM
» Replies: 43
» Views: 13,891
Three Word Days
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: BAJR
25th May 2017, 01:06 PM
» Replies: 598
» Views: 86,889
Automonous Surveying
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: BAJR
25th May 2017, 01:05 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 1,481
Logic bending and poor an...
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: BAJR
25th May 2017, 01:03 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 535
Forum: The Site Hut
Last Post: Marc Berger
12th April 2017, 09:52 PM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 2,300

  Assistant ...
Posted by: Leon Capon - 14th July 2004, 12:02 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (4)

Ok, so bajr has recommended pay rates attached to levels of responsibility for job adverts. But what about when employers advertise for assistant supervisors, or assistant project officers etc? To my mind either you have that responsibility or you don't, and if you have it you should be paid properly for it. If you advertise say for a L3 but ask for 'assistant supervisor' you are implying a level of responsibility which is not reflected in the stated level or stated pay.

I think that if the word supervisor appears in a job title, then it should be a L4 and if the words Project officer appears then it should be a L5.

Employers should not be allowed to underpay by using disingenuous job titles.

Print this item

  Repetative Strain Injury
Posted by: Emjem - 27th June 2004, 01:19 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (15)

After spending weeks trowelling i am finding it difficult to move my hands and wrists first thing in the morning. Does anyone else suffer from this? I have been digging for about five years now and i am worried if this will be permanent. Is anyone aware of an employers resposibility for avoiding trowelling RSI injuries or how or even if RSI is recognised. It is not a complaint, just worried about my future. Thanks in advance.

Print this item

  Archaeology - Commercial or State Run?
Posted by: BAJR Host - 18th June 2004, 05:55 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (4)

As posed by theInvisible Man - is archaeology best served by developer led, developer funded commercial units or would it be better returning to the old goverment funded Rescue Units and University departments?

Over to you........

Print this item

  What makes a good manager?
Posted by: Boris the Cat - 14th June 2004, 01:54 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (3)

So far the new BAJR baiting seems to be mostly consultants and managers discussing issues from a managerial perspective. I want to know what people think actually makes a good manager? Obviously keeping to budgets and timescales, but more importantly how they treat their staff. What do you respect in a project manager or project officer?

Print this item

  The value of a watching brief
Posted by: Post-Med Potterer - 31st May 2004, 05:51 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (52)

What is the value of a watching brief? To the developer it is often an open-ended and potentially costly expense; to the archaeologist it frequently provides a frustrating glimpse of something to which more time should be given. Is there another way?

Normally a watching brief is adopted following earlier forms of evaluation, such as a desk-based assessment and trial trenching. If the trial trenching has not found anything then fair enough (providing the trenches were properly located in the first place). However, I have known watching briefs to be required as the [u]only</u> means of recovering archaeological information, and substantial archaeological features have been poorly recorded.

Would a larger-scale fixed-price excavation at an earlier stage prove a better response? It would enable archaeological features to be properly defined and recorded, and would also provide the developer with a fixed cost.

Possibly controversial - and I am not leaning towards any particular viewpoint - I am just curious to see what people think...

Print this item

  Heritage Lottery Grants
Posted by: BAJR Host - 26th May 2004, 01:32 AM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (2)

You may have noticed my britarch query struggling to get through the horses head and metal detectors. unsurprisinglyy i received zero helpful replies. So i thought of you! would you have any leads for articles/publications/mentions of approximately how much of the Heritage Lottery is allocated to archaeological projects? I know it is miniscule (at least prior to 2000 when the 'Heritage Incentives' and 'Awards for All' grants were established) because i read that in something that i have since (frustratingly) misplaced.
any ideas?

Print this item

  World War One trenches
Posted by: Emjem - 25th May 2004, 11:56 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (2)

I was wondering if anyone knows of any groups that work in france/belgium/holland on the WW1 trench sites. My partner and i would love any opportunity to carry out some work in this field and any information that anyone could give would be greatly appreciated, thankyou.

Print this item

  The digger
Posted by: BoltonSquanderer - 24th May 2004, 12:19 AM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (4)

Is it me or has The Digger, since the change in editor, become far too po-faced and serious? What happened to the Fantasy Unit League and why does blatantly left-wing polemic now dominate? I don't think the readership of The Digger have a problem with discussing serious issues but does it have to be presented as though it was written by a particularly humourless member of the SWP.

Print this item

  Pay Scales
Posted by: BoltonSquanderer - 17th May 2004, 11:00 PM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (26)

4HB, I share your concerns about archaeologists working for minimum wage but increasing the trainee rate substantially above current levels would force an increase to all pay scales, something that commercial archaeology companies won't agree to. It was only in 2000 that a company in the SE was paying trainees ?150 pw so ?200 pw does represent real progress.

I don't entirely buy the idea that archaeologists should expect parity with other graduate professions, who should new entrants into field archaeology claim parity with? If graduates are intelligent enough to obtain a degree then surely they should have had the sense to check out pay scales and career progression before they got into the job.

I'm all in favour of increased pay and better conditions but trying to claim too much will only set back the progress which has been made in recent years.

Print this item

  Polluter Pays
Posted by: BAJR Host - 15th May 2004, 02:38 AM - Forum: The Site Hut - Replies (23)

In a recent discussion with a... 'natioanl archaeology insitution' shall we say that the concept of the developer being liable for all expences was seen as the norm... this seems to completely forget the fact that the developer can then only see archaeology as a trap and a tax....

Should there be more financial help for

a. the small developer that finds a significant site (I kno... define significant!!)

b. a large developer who is shelling out 6 figure sums to jump through another planning hoop with little material benefit to them?

Nobody should take moral high ground here... but perhaps a debate is i order.

Print this item