25th May 2010, 01:38 PM
Ahar,
now the debate seems to be starting
Of course that is always the case with democratic organisations. However I have doubts whether a union would or could force an increase in pay and conditions......unless it was a union of just archaeologists.
As for the small-scale effect on pay and conditions that I have had, I've always campaigned in my own way. But I admit this is only on a small scale. Sorting accommodation problems, lifts to train stations and pushing people or encouraging them for advancement, promotion etc.
But I guess this isn't the same thing as broader improvements.
I disagree about your short comment on making sure diggers pay and conditions are sorted out in the planning stage of a project. It is essential to sort out overtime rates, accomodation, transport etc before you start a project.
However...
I agree heartily about your comments on what a union is and what it does. It isn't (of course) just about strikes. A union is there to offer support and their expertise to a member in a wide range of situations. I've actually seen a union effect a pay-rise for archaeologists......it was in a large company though and the union was an archaeology one (I think)
But I still (being dense I guess) don't see how being a member of a union can cause country wide change in archaeology.
Your argument about short term pay for long term gain doesn't hold water....as its not a one off payment. That being my point a fiver (or so) a week soon racks up. I need those savings to pay for staying alive, keeping a roof over my head and keeping my car running and a pension!.
Oh and an argument like millions do it so you should is weak at best.......at one time most of the population of the planet thought it was flat, did it make it so?
:face-stir:
now the debate seems to be starting
BAJR Wrote:again... thats the point... if everyone says.. my joining will have negligible effect it won't.. if more people said I will join... then it has more effect.. shimples
Of course that is always the case with democratic organisations. However I have doubts whether a union would or could force an increase in pay and conditions......unless it was a union of just archaeologists.
As for the small-scale effect on pay and conditions that I have had, I've always campaigned in my own way. But I admit this is only on a small scale. Sorting accommodation problems, lifts to train stations and pushing people or encouraging them for advancement, promotion etc.
But I guess this isn't the same thing as broader improvements.
I disagree about your short comment on making sure diggers pay and conditions are sorted out in the planning stage of a project. It is essential to sort out overtime rates, accomodation, transport etc before you start a project.
However...
I agree heartily about your comments on what a union is and what it does. It isn't (of course) just about strikes. A union is there to offer support and their expertise to a member in a wide range of situations. I've actually seen a union effect a pay-rise for archaeologists......it was in a large company though and the union was an archaeology one (I think)
But I still (being dense I guess) don't see how being a member of a union can cause country wide change in archaeology.
Your argument about short term pay for long term gain doesn't hold water....as its not a one off payment. That being my point a fiver (or so) a week soon racks up. I need those savings to pay for staying alive, keeping a roof over my head and keeping my car running and a pension!.
Oh and an argument like millions do it so you should is weak at best.......at one time most of the population of the planet thought it was flat, did it make it so?
:face-stir: