16th January 2011, 08:40 PM
I think a labour law would be the way to go.
Also, I have thought about it over the last couple of days and I am not sure that many developers/construction firms/contractors would actually oppose such a law for a couple of reasons.
For example if you had a 3 field tech crew working a survey for a week thats 120 hrs of work- the difference between paying $12 and $14 is $1440-1680 = $240 dollars. About what a company charges for a days use of one vehicle. If a project lasts a week then that is several hundred acre project meaning millions if not 100's millions of dollar contract. $240 is nothing.
This also assumes that this money is passed on to the construction company/contractor. It could be that only a percentage or none at all is passed along but instead taken out of the profits of arch. companies. Sad times cause then we would have less millionaire bosses:face-crying: . In case that dosnt come through on the post -sarcasm
Also depending on how the contract is set up they might actually want a more expensive archaeology crew if they change a premium above what a sub-contractor changes. I had this happen, I worked for probably the most expensive company in the state (they did top of the line work) and we were subcontracted by a out of state firm to do work. Because that firm could then change an extra 20%? (not sure exactly on the amount my memory is fuzzy) above our price. So they wanted us to charge more so they could make more }
.
Of course the first place to pass a law would have to be watched closely to see who opposes it but it might be that no one is against a law.
Also, I have thought about it over the last couple of days and I am not sure that many developers/construction firms/contractors would actually oppose such a law for a couple of reasons.
For example if you had a 3 field tech crew working a survey for a week thats 120 hrs of work- the difference between paying $12 and $14 is $1440-1680 = $240 dollars. About what a company charges for a days use of one vehicle. If a project lasts a week then that is several hundred acre project meaning millions if not 100's millions of dollar contract. $240 is nothing.
This also assumes that this money is passed on to the construction company/contractor. It could be that only a percentage or none at all is passed along but instead taken out of the profits of arch. companies. Sad times cause then we would have less millionaire bosses:face-crying: . In case that dosnt come through on the post -sarcasm
Also depending on how the contract is set up they might actually want a more expensive archaeology crew if they change a premium above what a sub-contractor changes. I had this happen, I worked for probably the most expensive company in the state (they did top of the line work) and we were subcontracted by a out of state firm to do work. Because that firm could then change an extra 20%? (not sure exactly on the amount my memory is fuzzy) above our price. So they wanted us to charge more so they could make more }
.Of course the first place to pass a law would have to be watched closely to see who opposes it but it might be that no one is against a law.