28th October 2006, 07:18 PM
I cannot, in any way, see how guide prices are useful. What would be more helpful would be for units to try and be explicit in their quotations for work. A few years ago I was consulting on an evaluation near to an important site in London. The level of trenching was very limited simply open the area of the trench and drop in 50cm or to the top of any archaeology and the construction impact was very limited and could be jacked up above anything. I had in my mind about 7 grand; the majority of the quote settled around that level. At the extremes were 1.5 grand and 30 grand. The 30 grand quote was not even fixed. One quote even included shoring.
What I would suggest would be a standardised format for presenting quotes. This would enable non-archaeologists to establish exactly what they are paying for and would help prevent some of the sharper practices we are all aware of such as obtaining jobs by not mentioning post-excavation works and then claiming 'the county archaeologist is making me do it'. A practice I have encountered far too frequently.
I did hear this morning on the radio through the stella haze that the Today programme is looking for members of the public as guest editors. Possibly it could be worth exploring.
What I would suggest would be a standardised format for presenting quotes. This would enable non-archaeologists to establish exactly what they are paying for and would help prevent some of the sharper practices we are all aware of such as obtaining jobs by not mentioning post-excavation works and then claiming 'the county archaeologist is making me do it'. A practice I have encountered far too frequently.
I did hear this morning on the radio through the stella haze that the Today programme is looking for members of the public as guest editors. Possibly it could be worth exploring.