+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: site tech role (/showthread.php?tid=3953)
site tech role - Sith - 9th June 2011
Well if we want to wait another 20 years until Son of IfA gains enough members and garners enough professional respect in the appropriate political circles to stand a change of aiming for chartered status for its mermbership, crack on!
Alternatively, join the body we've got, and apply some pressure to make it do something about it.
site tech role - P Prentice - 9th June 2011
Dinosaur Wrote:Most practitioners of the archaeological profession already seem to have voted by not joining IFA? - hence their inability in the direction of charterdom. I know a lot more ex-members than current members. But let the remaining minority dream on....:face-stir:
it might well suit you sir to have an unending supply of poorly paid and downtrodden labourers but some people enter the profession with a view to having a chance of a career that will take them to retirement - at 80 probably. your ex member chums might well regret their inaction when they find themselves in the ConDem poor house
site tech role - Jack - 9th June 2011
Time to be controversial...........
Where are these downtrodden masses, huddling under the shadow of the grey mill-like unit headquarters? Forced to stay on the breadline with no hope of promotion?
I worked my way up from student to pot-washer to underpaid digger.....then after years of hard work to assistant supervisor, then supervisor, then project officer, now senior project officer.
It is true that diggers are underpaid, (I'm still underpaid when compared to other industries) but the opportunities to advance, diversify, specialise or move on are all still there.......
Its just not a ladder like in other industries, there is no set routes to blindly follow, its more of a rock face with many routes, some un-traversed, some more well trod.
Personally, having started out in electronics engineering, I prefer the rock-face to a ladder anyday.
Obviously with the recession and wotnot people have had to adapt, some of my friends who were diggers now work in offices or IT (etc). But thats they way to survive in such an 'industry' as archaeology - adapt, step sideways, and take full advantage of the opportunities that are offered.
In the past I have seen promising diggers choose a life of freedom over opportunities to be trained up for promotion....but it was their choice, and thats what I've always liked about archaeology, there is always a wide scope of choice in finding your own path.
Personally I made mistakes too (who hasn't) not following up opportunities to publish papers, choosing to have a few weeks off rather than stick at a long job and buggering off from a site when things didn't suit me (on occasion). But through perseverance, actually listening to people sometimes I forged a path upwards.
Its not all doom and gloom, work here is picking up steadily now.
But I feel that archaeology isn't like being an architect or a production engineer or a firefighter........ I imagine its more like being a marine biologist or ecologist. In the near future there will still be problems with pay and conditions and career structure.......because ours is barely an industry, and an industry that relies of other peoples whims. The trick is to find your own niche. I talked to many old (some bitter) archaeologists to get advice and find out how others coped.
Some did archaeology as a part-time job, supplemented by a winter money-making job. Others taught evening classes, for some archaeology was their life being involved in many different levels from digging, volunteering, doing talks, writing papers etc. and some just ploughed on, heads down, ignoring the changes happening around them. Many left, came back, left again. A few apprenticed with the hallowed finds specialists. I've seen some move into local planning authorities or organistations like EH or the portable antiquities. Some sold their souls and got jobs with construction companies and others used the skills gained to change careers.....
site tech role - P Prentice - 9th June 2011
Jack Wrote:It is true that diggers are underpaid, (I'm still underpaid when compared to other industries)
Its just not a ladder like in other industries, there is no set routes to blindly follow,
In the near future there will still be problems with pay and conditions and career structure.......because ours is barely an industry,
...
lovely empassioned retort Jack - as ever. but your words in my edit
there is i think a prevailing sense from many in the profession that 'we managed it (read suffered) so why shouldn't you - 'still sorting the men from the boys'
its crap though really isnt it?
site tech role - Dinosaur - 9th June 2011
P Prentice Wrote:lovely empassioned retort Jack - as ever. but your words in my edit
there is i think a prevailing sense from many in the profession that 'we managed it (read suffered) so why shouldn't you - 'still sorting the men from the boys'
its crap though really isnt it?
Speaking as someone who's dug under the old DoE regime, MSC (happy days, unlimited supply of year-long contracts), PPG16, PPS5 and doubtless will still be doing so under whatever comes next, and have never been short of a job when I've wanted one (past a certain point people phone up to see if you're free to work for them, and a good worker could always find work outside archaeology when there were no decent sites up and running - being able to use a shovel seems to be becoming a strangely rare skill even in the construction industry), no, you're completely and utterly wrong, its the men who seem still to be here having stayed the course, and as Jack has pointed out, cos they want to be :face-stir:
....oh, mention of MSC again brings up the safety issue, a lot of the oiks sent along from the job-centre did NOT make safe site material, too many gory accidents to mention.....:0
site tech role - moreno - 9th June 2011
Jack Wrote:Time to be controversial...........
Something other than a piss take. I like it.
Not inclined to support an institution that spends my hard earned dosh in a manner I'm uncomfortable with. I vote with my wallet.
site tech role - kevin wooldridge - 10th June 2011
Interesting post from Jack....I was in conversation with a relatively senior archaeologist this past evening who told me he personally had instigated a policy of only employing recently graduated archaeologists and certainly none with more than 2 years field experience. His arguement to support this policy was that any archaeologist with greater than 2 years experience was overqualified for the posts he was offering (basically field assistant) and by that stage in their career should be motivated more by their career development than their need of a job.
My initial rection was to argue against this, but on reflection I can see both a logic and inherent 'fairness' in his approach. The fact is that it is not the bottom of the archaeological job market where there is stagnation and more bodies than jobs, but the middle and intermediate grades. I believe the correct technical term for the overqualified (either by academic or professional experience) taking lesser jobs to satisfy a need for employment, is 'bumping'.....and is a practice discouraged by most trade unions and in some circumstances (i.e redundancy arrangements) could be deemed as illegal.
I am not entirely clear in my own mind how the role of Site Technician stands in this debate. If they are genuine training/or posts for the inexperienced, then of course they are a welcome addition. If by inference that means that there are less posts for more experienced site assistants so be it. You probably can't have one without the other!! It seems to me that Jack is suggesting if you are good you will get on in archaeology..... and I might be warming a little towards that view and my friends 'new blood' policy. Surely 2 years is long enough to find out whether archaeology is the career for you and/or if you are suited for archaeology and/or whether the economic state of the profession at any one time is strong enough to support your career aspirations.....of course what would also help would be a few of the occupiers of senior posts to shuffle off to that retirement home in Dogpatch by Sea and free-up their posts for the stagnant middle tier of archaeologists....
site tech role - P Prentice - 10th June 2011
Dinosaur Wrote:Speaking as someone who's dug under the old DoE regime, MSC (happy days, unlimited supply of year-long contracts), PPG16, PPS5 and doubtless will still be doing so under whatever comes next, and have never been short of a job when I've wanted one (past a certain point people phone up to see if you're free to work for them, and a good worker could always find work outside archaeology when there were no decent sites up and running - being able to use a shovel seems to be becoming a strangely rare skill even in the construction industry), no, you're completely and utterly wrong, its the men who seem still to be here having stayed the course, and as Jack has pointed out, cos they want to be :face-stir:
0
well whoopy sh*t! so you and a few other men can handle a shovel ..... and stifle the careers of anybody who thinks its about a bit more than handling a shovel
site tech role - Jack - 10th June 2011
P Prentice Wrote:lovely empassioned retort Jack - as ever. but your words in my edit
there is i think a prevailing sense from many in the profession that 'we managed it (read suffered) so why shouldn't you - 'still sorting the men from the boys'
its crap though really isnt it?
Thats not what I meant at all. I was giving advice and stating the realities.
The world doesn't owe anyone a living. You have to fight for it.
Persevere, stick at it, adapt. Take the long-term strategy.....all that stuff.
I've never wanted poorly paid, downtrodden workforce.......I want skilled, entertaining, dedicated, and interested staff willing to learn and from whom I can also learn
In a perfect world everyone would receive a fair days pay for a fair days work,
But this isn't that perfect world, this is a world ruled by competitive tendering and undercutting.
From my little experience those archaeologists that survive seem to be the ones that love archaeology (in whichever form), those that find a way to continue to practice in spite of the obstacles place before them.
Those that fail are the ones who expect an easy ride.
Archaeology is a bare-back ride on an frightened horse........the longer you stay on, the more you can gain a sense of control through learning how the horse moves and letting the horse get used to you. Sometimes you have to get off for a bit of a rest.....but after a while you can always get back on it............but there's always a chance the horse will bolt at any time!
site tech role - P Prentice - 10th June 2011
Jack Wrote:The world doesn't owe anyone a living.
I've never wanted poorly paid, downtrodden workforce.......I want skilled, entertaining, dedicated, and interested staff willing to learn and from whom I can also learn
In a perfect world everyone would receive a fair days pay for a fair days work,
But this isn't that perfect world, this is a world ruled by competitive tendering and undercutting.
your posts are never boring Jack - but some of the stuff you say counters the sway of your argument and could be read as uncertainty. i think you are secretly on the side of light and good. so step away from the dark side - it owes you nothing.... apparently