4th December 2005, 11:22 PM
Hi 1man,
You list two big reasons why wages/conditions/quality went up with the advent of PPG16
-greater demand for archaeologists
-increased expectations of developers for professional staff
I agree with you, but I do not see that the introduction of competitive tendering - and hence the competition between units that keeps wages low and contracts short - was the only possible solution to these issues. It may have been the politically expedient solution at the time, but that is a different matter.
There is no necessary connection between raised wages and professionalism and the free market, they just happen to have happened at the same time.
Don't get me wrong, PPG16 was a change for the better unquestionably, but not because it introduced (or rather formalised) competitive tendering...
You list two big reasons why wages/conditions/quality went up with the advent of PPG16
-greater demand for archaeologists
-increased expectations of developers for professional staff
I agree with you, but I do not see that the introduction of competitive tendering - and hence the competition between units that keeps wages low and contracts short - was the only possible solution to these issues. It may have been the politically expedient solution at the time, but that is a different matter.
There is no necessary connection between raised wages and professionalism and the free market, they just happen to have happened at the same time.
Don't get me wrong, PPG16 was a change for the better unquestionably, but not because it introduced (or rather formalised) competitive tendering...