+- 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 - P Prentice - 14th June 2011
Dinosaur Wrote:Clearly IFA's not fit for purpose then, given their view of diggers ('special interest group' and their retrospective invention of the PIFA grade when they realised grubby people were geting in as AIFA/MIFA) - :face-stir:
i dont know why you keep hiding your ire behind a face-stir when you make comments like that. ifa will be whatever the members make it because the membership can vote, its a bit like one of those new-fangled democracies! your premise that most archaeologists arent interested because it wont work for them is a nonsence, because they could all join and make it work for them the way they want it. you dino advocate the status quo - why? are you afraid that the young folk will leave you behind?
site tech role - Jack - 14th June 2011
Its not a democracy. In a democracy the members vote on issues. As I understand it in the IfA the members vote to elect committee members from a limited choice of candidates. Thus the ruling class keep the 'important decision away from the dirty lower classes whilst producing the illusion of democracy....................
This is the way of any constituted society (unless written otherwise in the constitution), which are often little more than a thinly disguised money-making opportunity for those at the top.
site tech role - Kajemby - 14th June 2011
That makes it a republic, or at worst an oligarchy right? I agree, the IFA is not fit for purpose, as it is not inclusive, but rather exclusive; if you can't afford the fees you cannot join.
To also state that if you join an organisation, it will be what you make it, or. Will work the way you want it to is a nonsense too - I voted in the last elections, but do I get a say in the day to day running of government? Of course I don't!
Oh and I think dino, is stirring, hence the spoon. I think he likes to do that to people who are so certain of their own opinion. A bit like kicking a wasps nest.
site tech role - kevin wooldridge - 14th June 2011
Kajemby Wrote:If some one is employing trainees as site assistants, then this should be investigated by BAJR, as this leads to a nonsense in terms of pay grades; i.e, what on earth is the trainee grade for if they are being employed as site assistants? As experienced site assistants can be paid up to ?17,523.82, is this a way of keeping pay down by paying trainees the minimum site assistant rate of ?15,704.64 and passing them off as fully trained staff, when the reality is very different. :0
My apologies for your apoplexy Kajemby !! I should clarify....I didn't use the term 'site assistant'. I said 'field assistant', which where I am working at present is the description given to a trainee. My friend's concern was raised by the fact that in the recent months he has been overwhelmed by applications from experienced archaeologists for trainee positions. The reason only trainee positions are being advertised is because all of the 'experienced' field staff positions are filled (mainly by staff promoted after having completed a period as a trainee). His dilemma was whether to consider filling trainee posts with experienced staff (which would in effect have been a lowering of the pay scale, exploiting the vulnerability of unemployed staff in the current recession etc etc) or to stick to the letter of the original intention which was to employ genuine trainees in these posts. He chose the latter.....
I feel my point is still valid. Trainee posts should be filled by trainees, despite the possible temptation in the current economic climate to get more experienced staff just because they are available.
(And just for further clarification the feltassistents ('trainees') where I am working, are being paid circa ?27,000 + expenses pa !! so its not really poverty wages....)
site tech role - Kajemby - 14th June 2011
kevin wooldridge; Wrote:(And just for further clarification the feltassistents ('trainees') where I am working, are being paid circa ?27,000 + expenses pa !! so its not really poverty wages....)
Where do I join? :face-approve:
site tech role - P Prentice - 14th June 2011
perhaps you could explain how they have managed to be so lucky Kevin?
site tech role - P Prentice - 14th June 2011
Kajemby Wrote:That makes it a republic, or at worst an oligarchy right? I agree, the IFA is not fit for purpose, as it is not inclusive, but rather exclusive; if you can't afford the fees you cannot join.
To also state that if you join an organisation, it will be what you make it, or. Will work the way you want it to is a nonsense too - I voted in the last elections, but do I get a say in the day to day running of government? Of course I don't!
Oh and I think dino, is stirring, hence the spoon. I think he likes to do that to people who are so certain of their own opinion. A bit like kicking a wasps nest.
are you certain?
site tech role - kevin wooldridge - 14th June 2011
P Prentice Wrote:perhaps you could explain how they have managed to be so lucky Kevin?
Lucky? I don't understand.....am I missing something?
site tech role - Dinosaur - 14th June 2011
Marcus Brody Wrote:So wouldn't making them available online encourage people to think a bit more about what they're writing down and how clearly they're conveying information about the context they excavated? And wouldn't this also be helpful when writing up the site, by ending the scourge of the context sheet that's blank except for its number? If I knew that future employers might be able to assess the standard of my recording and interpretation before hiring me, I'd be tempted to do as complete and comprehensive a job as possible (which I always do anyway, of course
:0they'd spend even more time in the cabin pointlessly tarting up their paperwork than they do now! :0
Some people's recording is rubbish but that doesn't make them bad diggers, just have to keep them away from the cameras, permatrace and paperwork as much as possible....bring back the good old days when the supervisors and site assistants (before everyone mysteriously got promoted to that position!) did all the recording because they'd demonstrated they could, photographers photographed, planning assistants planned and diggers dug - at least there was some consistency and rather less naive s**te written. Thank god (or deity/nature spirit/no-corporeal being or none of the foregoing) for red biros
site tech role - BAJR - 14th June 2011
Quote:Oh and I think dino, is stirring, hence the spoon. I think he likes to do that to people who are so certain of their own opinion. A bit like kicking a wasps nest.
It is why I love Dino. as he does stir the wasps nest and does elicit reaction, and not just from badness but from a real long time knowledge. (like me ) 30 years now and counting! This does not make us right.. more like bitter... but with BAJR I have the opportunity ( and do use it) to make things better - by exerting some sort of gentle control. - I am lucky, as rather than a Republic or Democracy I am more a benighn Dictatorship. Allowed to continue as long as I do what is right. (sometimes I get it wrong, but boy do I hear about it... while the things I get right are never spoken of - which is why it works)
As to investigating the Trainee posts. I am. I have returned from fieldwork again, and am on it. But needless to say, as one man with many friends - there is only so much I can do. An unfunded organisation? :face-confused: I chose that path, so don't grumble, so please be aware that BAJR bite, but finds a gentle prod often works better, and having backing from a majority helps. Returning to trainees. I think it is good... a good thing indeed, IF IF it leads to employment and recognition of skills learned. otherwise, as I found, with 30 years of experience I am paid the same as those with a year or two. Hence the need for the skills passport ( new meetings are arranged) and a recognition that skills - practical competance - means something and is worth paying for. ergo. a trainee get ?xxxx while a 3 year digger with proven skills gets ?xxxx plus ? x and a 10 year digger with proven skills gets ?xxxx plus ? xxxx
Pipe dream or recognition at last of the skills it takes to dig a site.
Take this image. which was taken as a photoshopped photo... nope... just time served field archaeologists who knew how to do it, why, and how best to record - surely worth more than a digger who has to ask what to do next? (though please ignore the farmers kid trying to help! )
[ATTACH=CONFIG]900[/ATTACH]