13th November 2008, 12:43 PM
collecting stats is fine, but obviously there's a split between short term contract workers, and actual 'redundancies' of permanent staff. I know of several real (and really stupid) redundancies in London, where there is also a decline in site work. A major SE unit had to lay off nearly all its diggers a while ago, which seems like armageddon, but it was as two large sites both finished at the same time. They also experienced a real drop in enquiries about doing fieldwork at the same time which is more worrying as it indicates a longer term drop in work, rather than the short term ups and downs.
The lack of site adverts in BAJR/IFA indicates a lack of large new sites outside of existing unit capabilities, but units do subcontract from neighbouring units to avoid layoffs, so it doesn't necessarily mean less work, just that its in the same places. Also most units will just phone around to re-recruit staff rather than advertise....
So yes, keeping some kind of tabs on layoffs/redundancies and recruitment would be good, but we need the longer term stats to understand what those figures mean. Charting lay-offs without charting where those diggers go to would always make it seem like the world is ending. It is also winter as well...
The lack of site adverts in BAJR/IFA indicates a lack of large new sites outside of existing unit capabilities, but units do subcontract from neighbouring units to avoid layoffs, so it doesn't necessarily mean less work, just that its in the same places. Also most units will just phone around to re-recruit staff rather than advertise....
So yes, keeping some kind of tabs on layoffs/redundancies and recruitment would be good, but we need the longer term stats to understand what those figures mean. Charting lay-offs without charting where those diggers go to would always make it seem like the world is ending. It is also winter as well...