8th June 2007, 02:53 PM
I think it is important that bodies such as SCAUM, Prospect and the IFA start to draw lines in the sand regarding the archaeological remuneration package (I agree with previous posters that it can't all be put down to pay). From here there really is no going back.
Henceforth when archaeological remuneration fails to keep up with the aspirations of its receivers, we can all reference the day that such bodies agreed a 'minimum' (and ask with righteous indignation why they have failed to increase the minima to take account of inflation etc).
That said I am also of the belief that the organisations that pay relatively well in archaeology and are able to keep their business on a steady footing (some making significant profits I understand) will eventually get tired of being tarred with the same brush as the 'crap payers' in archaeology and will seek to create clearwater between the two extremes of archaeological employment. I believe that this will be reflected in a campaign calling for 'higher' standards for organisations that wish to be registered with the IFA and as members of SCAUM, and inevitably will mean exclusion of those bodies unwilling to improve the remuneration of its workforce. Of course I am assuming this will not happen overnight....
One of the interesting developments of this year's 'Profiling the Profession' survey by the IFA is that they are going to include a parallel survey of the remuneration packages available to archaeologists in 10 other European countries. So we will see where we all stand on a pan-Euro basis....just hope they include Norway!!
Henceforth when archaeological remuneration fails to keep up with the aspirations of its receivers, we can all reference the day that such bodies agreed a 'minimum' (and ask with righteous indignation why they have failed to increase the minima to take account of inflation etc).
That said I am also of the belief that the organisations that pay relatively well in archaeology and are able to keep their business on a steady footing (some making significant profits I understand) will eventually get tired of being tarred with the same brush as the 'crap payers' in archaeology and will seek to create clearwater between the two extremes of archaeological employment. I believe that this will be reflected in a campaign calling for 'higher' standards for organisations that wish to be registered with the IFA and as members of SCAUM, and inevitably will mean exclusion of those bodies unwilling to improve the remuneration of its workforce. Of course I am assuming this will not happen overnight....
One of the interesting developments of this year's 'Profiling the Profession' survey by the IFA is that they are going to include a parallel survey of the remuneration packages available to archaeologists in 10 other European countries. So we will see where we all stand on a pan-Euro basis....just hope they include Norway!!