Launch of MetroMOLA

[GPStone]

Virtually all the charities were set up as the big fish in their ponds.

The whole lot came out of a piecemeal privatised county council system with entities like Network for instance partially originating from post-privatised (previously state-owned) 'consultancies' and other private start-ups and amalgamations slotting in as they started to take advantage of the expanding market. It was a mess which is why there was little consensus and the precedent was set for the same mess we're in now.

That said, I think the larger entities may well have contributed significantly to that at the time, as you say.....

"They set the so called market price which it never was."

....however.....

At the same time they gave the major impression that archaeologists are charity workers and possibly worst of all attracted people who wanted to work in such an environment. (lets call them the legacy).

I don't think that's what happened. Yes, people have traditionally wanted to work in this sector but usually because they thought it would change and because they were attracted by something other than the ability to accrue personal wealth. Many have got out, many are regretting it but I don't think any though of themselves as working in a charity-based industry (however you want to define the term industry) and I don't know anyone who would define archaeologists as appearing like charity workers or anything close.

Unfortunately the charity units were the most outrageous in their exploitation of archaeologists and archaeology and set the standard which private units can only have undercut for work.

It works both ways, charity and private. There is no way anyone could suggest charities effected a lowering of prices more than private. The argument for that applies mostly to subsidised units such as county council or university backed businesses. Undoubtedly some charities will fall in with that category but blaming the whole lot doesn't add up.

If it was a level playing field an archaeologist would surely work for a charity unit because as it is not a profit making organisation all that lovely profit should have gone to the archaeologist because it would be a charity for the archaeologist but they didn’t. Who knows what it was wasted on. The great fat controllers pet projects or meetings with fellow service providers to discuss council business or national policy. Must be 15 years since I was at Exeter. [/FONT]

[/SIZE]

And in the past the difference in treatment has been visible amongst some charitable companies as it has amongst some private. That reinvestment has occurred in a number of places I can think of. In many instances it hasn't though. As for pet projects, if you mean consistent research that has subsequently been fully funded, comprehensively undertaken and fully published to a high standard, then I can't see to much of an issue. If its something else then there's an issue. And if charities aren't allocating profit into their charitable aims, there's another issue (if they're making profits).

Charities for archaeologists? I doubt it. Charities with educational and community aims - sure. But if you want to be an archaeologist you've got to accept the state of the industry as it is and has been, and I personally hope that is accompanied by the aim of changing and improving it for all of us.