charitable status and units -are they really?

[Unitof1]

I agree noddy, that has been a lot of peoples concern in the private sector for a long time. The private sector for reasons which are becoming more and more mysterious to me, normally based on standards and being dragged into arguments about professionalism, have not tried the exploiting paying and volunteer work forces in ppg situations or subsidising it. The biggest problem is insurance or indemnities. A lot of the charity units are able to get away with volunteers paying because they are protected under huge indemnities polices of their universities and councils.

[1man1desk]

Posted by RedEarth:

quote:It does strike me as a bit pointless evening having the IFA and attempting to improve the lot of archaeologists if organisations can use volunteers on commercial projects. There is no hope of anything changing if that carries on. I can't recall what the IFA policy on volunteers is but I'm sure someone out there will know. I am sick of being undercut by organisations that I know make use of volunteers in some way - I can't be certain they are use on commercial projects, but how difficult would it be for this to happen, especially with something like finds washing - 'While you're here you could just wash those other bags too'

The IFA policy on volunteers can be found via the following link: http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ic...ements.pdf
Too big to give in full here, but the following extracts may be pertinent:

quote:3.4 It is normally inappropriate for organisations to bid for commercial work if there is the expectation that they will use staff who will not be paid a proper wage or be appropriately contacted.
3.5 Employers will not use volunteers and students in place of employed staff when funding is agreed for the latter, as this would be tantamount to exploitation.
3.6 There may be occasions when timescales are more relaxed and the required professional standard of work can be achieved outside normal commercial pressures. Subject to agreement by the site owner, developer and curator, such situations may provide suitable opportunities for the participation of volunteers or for the training of students.
Similarly, there maybe opportunities for such participation or training aspects of a site’s archaeology which are outside the scope of the controlling authority’s requirements, but which could enhance the overall results of the project.

I don't know which unit is being referred to in this thread. However, if you think that the IFA policy is being breached, and the unit is an RAO, or the relevant managers are members of the IFA, then you could consider making a complaint. Of course, if the volunteers are not being used on commercial contracts - and RedEarth admits he doesn't know - then there may be no grounds for complaint.


1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[RedEarth]

quote:

I don't know which unit is being referred to in this thread. However, if you think that the IFA policy is being breached, and the unit is an RAO, or the relevant managers are members of the IFA, then you could consider making a complaint. Of course, if the volunteers are not being used on commercial contracts - and RedEarth admits he doesn't know - then there may be no grounds for complaint.

There's the nub of the problem: such an organisation is unlikely to be an RAO, and, short of industrial espionage, it is a bit difficult to be certain how volunteers are being used. As mentioned before, if you worked for a company that you knew was doing this would you complain if you thought it might cost you your job, one way or another?

I think I understand where The Unit was coming from now, but it still doesn't help very much.

As for volunteers paying (surely 'customers' is a better word than volunteers in that case) to work on commercial projects; if that is actually happening it is truly unforgivable.

I would also say that a bigger issue, in reference to the notes for RAOs quoted by 1Man is the common occurance of unpaid overtime and excessive travelling - explotation indeed!

[Oxbeast]

I was on a site a couple of years ago for a charity RAO. They had just taken on a young lad, and rather than start him on trainee wages, they told him to sign on and volunteer to dig. I think this entailed the director of the unit writing off to the DSS saying that he was a volunteer-trainee. This did go on for a couple of months (as far as I recall). This lad had loads of trouble with the DSS, who couldn't understand how he was volunteering to do a job that other people were being paid for. The unit took him on after he complained the he was going to lose his dole. he's still ana rchaeologist, as far as I know.
i didn't report them to the IFA at the time because I was still a bit green. I would now.

[RedEarth]

quote:Originally posted by Oxbeast

I was on a site a couple of years ago for a charity RAO. They had just taken on a young lad, and rather than start him on trainee wages, they told him to sign on and volunteer to dig. I think this entailed the director of the unit writing off to the DSS saying that he was a volunteer-trainee. This did go on for a couple of months (as far as I recall). This lad had loads of trouble with the DSS, who couldn't understand how he was volunteering to do a job that other people were being paid for. The unit took him on after he complained the he was going to lose his dole. he's still ana rchaeologist, as far as I know.
i didn't report them to the IFA at the time because I was still a bit green. I would now.

I am certainly aware of people doing 'work experience' at an organisation, an RAO, for some length of time before being taken on as staff. At what point does useful work experience become exploitation? Even if such as person isn't really doing anything particularly essential it still adds something of a competative advantage on commmercial projects and is potentially in breach of the IFA guidelines. Clearly, work experience happens in all types of professions, but not necessarily for several weeks or months on the trot and usually only doing non-important dogsbody style work that no-one else wants to do anyway - a bit like being a site assistant!

[1man1desk]

Posted by RedEarth:

quote:work experience happens in all types of professions

That is true, but usually unpaid and as a short fixed-term secondment from an educational institution, or paid on longer secondments. If someone is taken on to do a job on but is very inexperienced, it would be much fairer for the unit to employ them on a 'trainee' grade rather than to make them work for free to get trained.
As soon as someone is part of the workforce, if they are not being paid they are being exploited.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[shovelnomore]

I'm not sure I'm thinking about the same RAO as redearth, but it happens that there are some people who work on trainee placements at an RAO of my experience who were repeatedly accused of systematically using trainees to drive their prices down, and I'm glad to say (at least in the time I was there) that that accusation was completely untrue, less glad to say that it was basically malicious. In my experience it wasn't a cynical ploy to get free labour, but a genuine attempt to offer relevant training, and a lot of the trainees went on to get work, either with the unmentioned RAO or elsewhere. It often happens that the cash just isn't there to take someone on at the end of a placement and they decide to volunteer as they know that they'll be better placed to be offered work if it does come up- this is pretty much how I started working. If there was money I got paid, if not I didn't. Yes this left me potentially open to exploitation, but to be fair to the unit in question (also now an RAO but not then), they were straight up about it and I got paid on average 3 days a week for 4 months before I got on full time. Volunteering got me the chance to do finds drawing, inking in (yes I am that old...) and learn lots about Roman pottery that I've since forgotten. Beats the dole for cash and experience, and I don't regret it.

This causes a bit of a problem as to where to use this kind of volunteer- I think that everyone would agree that using them on commercial jobs is ethically dubious at best, but it's where they'd get more useful experience, and a lot ask to work on this kind of project, knowing that they'll put it down on the CV as professional experience and it'll be easier to get a job next time with a couple of extra months on the CV and a non-academic referee who could testify to their ability to dig properly. You'd have to ask them whether they felt they were being exploited. I suppose it comes down how systematically you're doing it and whether you're bidding on the basis that you can use free labour. These, by the way would be BAD.

A few less scrupulous PMs might 'let' them on these jobs to help their project budgets, and I fell out with them over it. I've just realised how off topic this is and don't want to delete my thoughts. New thread anyone?

As for the charities, I worked in Borsetshire (or somewhere similar) for a while (9 months all told). Never knew they were a charity till a couple of years after I left. Still, I was pretty green at the time. I think there needs to be some sort of reiew give the changing circumstances, but as someone pointed out, there are several charities that have since gone private, so there have to be some disadvantages. I can gues what the cynical would say here though...

(edited to avoid appearing to condoning exploitation of trainees. This is WRONG)

[tmsarch]

Interesting to cross read between this thread and those in the Starting Out in Archaeology section. One of the problems that is often covered in the Starting Out threads is 'how do I get the six month commercial experience that is asked for in most job adverts?' and often given advice is to 'contact your local unit and get some experience by volunteering'... But by a unit taking on a volunteer (or trainee) to gain experience by working on a commercial excavation they could be accused of gaining commercial advantage?

At what stage does a volunteer become exploited and can we reconcile 'our' own advice in given other threads with 'our' complaints above.

Having worked for companies who have used volunteers and/or trainees on commercial sites I'd argue that if proper and structured on-site training is being given to volunteers or trainees then this actually results in a commercial disadvantage in terms of man-hours and resources.

As usual this thread seems to have migrated away from the original subject... time for a new thread?

[Austin Ainsworth]

quote:Originally posted by tmsarch

Interesting to cross read between this thread and those in the Starting Out in Archaeology section. One of the problems that is often covered in the Starting Out threads is 'how do I get the six month commercial experience that is asked for in most job adverts?' and often given advice is to 'contact your local unit and get some experience by volunteering'... But by a unit taking on a volunteer (or trainee) to gain experience by working on a commercial excavation they could be accused of gaining commercial advantage?

At what stage does a volunteer become exploited and can we reconcile 'our' own advice in given other threads with 'our' complaints above.

Having worked for companies who have used volunteers and/or trainees on commercial sites I'd argue that if proper and structured on-site training is being given to volunteers or trainees then this actually results in a commercial disadvantage in terms of man-hours and resources.

As usual this thread seems to have migrated away from the original subject... time for a new thread?

My first response to that would be that those job applicants with less than the required on-site experience time/site skills should be considered for a post as a trainee excavator. It was to my constant annoyance, (a few years ago), while operating as the deployment/recruitment officer in one of the super units that fresh graduates were given the same pay grade as site staff who had 1 to 2 years on-site experience but who had not yet progressed to Assistant Supervisor level. When applying for corporate membership the IFA does not consider Uni digging experience as relevant, any RAO should in IMHO also discount such; not good news for fresh graduates but I would hope a recognition of the skills acquired post-graduation by site staff who have demonstrated proven ability within the commercial sector.

Edit: for sp. (really shouldn't post after several bottles of wine).

[the invisible man]

As it seems to be the thing to compare archaeology with other trades and professions, being a hoary old lag from another field I cannot immediately think of another occupation where anyone is expected (let alone would) work for free, even in the hope of gaining basic experience. I do not include 'year out' or university placements, sandwich courses and the like - although many of those are actually paid, I believe.

One exception might be film and TV perhaps.