Launch of MetroMOLA

[Unitof1]

To get your attention yes it’s a government conspiracy but by government I would read civil servants. I should take no notice that a so called different political power appears to be in charge every few years except it causes the civil servants to undertake yet another strategic policy review (although they don’t do that until that have sorted out an agenda and reviewed it).

Currently at the top of the bajr web site page the goggle advert say

?
MetroMOLA CentralCost-effective local archaeology and built-heritage services. www.metromola.com


It’s the word local that gets your attention (how much did that sentance in google cost them?). Lets start with what would they know about local. Does anybody who works for Mola live and pay local taxes in the City of London. No, those pension grabbers and they are pension grabbers, probably working under a huge government public liability insurance, are in fact very not local but that does not stop them stuffing the word local on to the top of the bajr web site

Geodame I am a self employed archaeologist I get up in the mornings and look for work based on my own self assessment that I am an archaeologist. That in its self requires levels of self deprecation and deception that I suspect you think are only catered for in membership of the cba. I am a bit cursed because I like to dig. I don’t want to be someones project officer or fly a desk in a unit or be part of the hive. I am currently grinding down a 5inch trowel to use on a trench evaluation which I have got to get done in the next week or so. God knows how I got the job but she to busy to let me know. In the main I work a local patch and mostly am left alone because it costs a lot to get into this remote area and survive. I have children in the local school and vote in the local whatsits. Just on these attributes alone mola are a million miles away from what I understand or want anywhere near me. That’s also something that I can say for units (subsidised) closer to home. If you think molas “fair” why don’t you set up on your own.

As for

[SIZE=4]The fact is, businesses will utilise standard/accepted commercial measures and actions in order to make themselves more viable. There's nothing tricky about it - if they are a business
[/SIZE]

Mola is not a business, what is really strange is why it should constantly pretend that it is. Surely Mola should be saying we are one of a very few class II charities that exist, created out of two acts of parliament with trustees appointed by the PM and the Lord mayor and the Mayor of London. Why would a developer want to employ anybody else?

[GPStone]

I'm don't think that MoLA or anyone else are fair as such, why should they be? My question isn't specifically about MoLA though, its about the perception of large units and how the market is developing and the direction it has been moving in for the last few years.

As for business or not - MetoMoLA is a business whether it has charitable status or not, just like Oxford, Wessex, Cotswold, Headland, AOC and everyone else are businesses. Whatever status they claim otherwise, they still work in this market, they still work to business models and they are still reliant on the economic factors that most of their competitors are subject to. Whether they market themselves as local or not amounts to symantics to many of their clients who are interested primarily in cost.

I wonder if that's what whoever put the wording of the MoLA add together was thinking - they do provide services (or at least intend to) at a local level as opposed to a national or large infrastructure level. I suppose its all marketting at the end of the day, though. Incidentally, the company may not be local, but it doesn't mean the person who turns up for the watching brief or does the DBA, or the PM who oversees the costing, fieldwork and PX isn't local or doesn't have the knowledge base to understand the archaeology they are digging. It may well be that they aren't, but it isn't necessarily the case and it doesn't have to be that way. As I said, with Wessex, Cotswold, Headland et al adopting a localised/regional office structure and employing within a region rather than shipping staff in (thus saving themselves a wad of cash), the result is exactly that local service you're talking about, isn't it?

[Unitof1]

no. I am a for profit business

--------------------no. I am a for profit business
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb no. I am a for profit business

qqqqqqqno. I am a for profit business

[GPStone]

Right? So are they in effect. The not for profit aspect allows them to establish financial surplusses and ultimately reinvest in the company (pay staff more, buy new kit etc) or invest in their charitable aims (although why they don't do that routinely and aren't made to is beyond me). It doesn't enable them to make a loss on jobs and they're overheads prevent them from undercutting at a low level - if they made enough of a loss they'd be technically insolvent and have to cease trading or, in the case of the charitable trusts, the trustees would have to accept financial liablility for the 'charities' debts which is unlikely to go down with them to well.

[Noddy]

Staff benefits = the adoption of spinal point pay scales

As a digger I'm not sure this is a benefit (although the other things you mention are). These are usually attached to local government SCP which the IfA also uses as its benchmark but between 2004-2010 the rise was below inflation in 5 of the 7 years (and was frozen last year). For the next two years there are also going to be pay freezes for all grades (despite Osbournes promise (lie) of ?250 for those earning below ?21K). That means no pay rises till 2013 at least.....

Sadie can correct me if I'm wrong but it wasn't that long ago (2007-8ish?) that MOLA(S) staff were a full year behind on their pay negotiations....

[GPStone]

As a digger I'm not sure this is a benefit (although the other things you mention are). These are usually attached to local government SCP which the IfA also uses as its benchmark but between 2004-2010 the rise was below inflation in 5 of the 7 years (and was frozen last year). For the next two years there are also going to be pay freezes for all grades (despite Osbournes promise (lie) of ?250 for those earning below ?21K). That means no pay rises till 2013 at least.....

Sadie can correct me if I'm wrong but it wasn't that long ago (2007-8ish?) that MOLA(S) staff were a full year behind on their pay negotiations....

That's are a fair point. Scratch that one then, but you see what I was getting at in general, right?

[monty]

I'd be very interested to know what percentage of those employed in the archaeology industry are currently working for those companies that can be defined as large.[/QUOTE]

Good point !...............probably most of us soon...............Cotsex merger apparently on again now :0...................

[geodan]

Geodame I am a self employed archaeologist I get up in the mornings and look for work based on my own self assessment that I am an archaeologist.

Am I missing something or is my name being corrupted and taken in vain???

[troll]

I think the industry has been moving towards larger organised units for years now and in any commercial environment, one could argue that this is a form of natural selection. In a sense- from corner shop to Tesco. A "one-stop shop" approach to archaeology and built heritage is surely to be an attractive hook for existing and potential clients. Having worked for a range of units over the years-I have only worked for large organisations in the commercial world on three occasions. In general, the `in-house` approach to methodologies allowed for a greater scope of investigative practise and in my view, a large organised unit with plenty of built-in specialisms meant that we could do far more justice to the archaeology on site. The final publications resulting from the fieldwork were also of a far higher standard. If we are (to stick to the thread) to question or assess the validity or justification of the launch of MetroMola........ here`s my penny`worth:
There is plenty of room in the marketplace for another large and organised unit and frankly-I`m surprised that Molas didn`t do this a long time ago. With years of experience up to their dangly bits in complex and deeply stratified single-context sites, MetroMola are a welcome newcomer to an industry where single context excavation systems are either largely misunderstood or exist in mythological legend. Whilst a goodly few units can have a good crack at single context excavation and do a good job at it, there are plenty of units out there where the mere mention of the system has directors in tears. If we are to be honest, a good proportion of units and archaeologists rarely (if ever) employ single context systems and arguably-such systems are the bread and butter of Mola staff. There`s a USP worth having if ever I`ve seen one. I`ve been on many a site that desperately needed a single context approach and on some where the brief actually demanded it-only to be confronted with a director who thought that he/she could circumvent that by employing evauation techniques. Site gets trashed but hey ho.....time and money was saved. Ended up pulling my own face off in frustration. Regardless of whether rampant capitalism or conspiratorial reptilian overlords are involved-the bottom line for me is this........I`ve been sat on my arse unemployed for 13 hideous weeks now and any new enterprise on the market is more than welcome.

[RedEarth]

It doesn't enable them to make a loss on jobs and they're overheads prevent them from undercutting at a low level - if they made enough of a loss they'd be technically insolvent and have to cease trading or, in the case of the charitable trusts, the trustees would have to accept financial liablility for the 'charities' debts which is unlikely to go down with them to well.

You'd think that was the case wouldn't you but one looking at one particular charity unit's accounts (all online at the charity commission) seem to be suggesting that they have been making a loss every year for the past three or possible four years. A private commercial company couldn't do that without either the director's sticking their own money in to keep it going or managing to get a loan to cover it, so how do they do it? Are their trustees making up the not inconsiderable shortfall out of their own pockets? That to me seems like an unfair advantage.