What would happen if..

[Penfold]

On the job I just finished we had a young guy, early 20's who was on site as a labourer, no qualifications and earning £400+ a week, really nice bloke, and Im not knocking his right to his his money, in fact good luck to the guy. But the rest of us as archaeological "site assistants" were on average earning £260 a week, certainly makes you wonder dont it?

Vive La Revolution

Penfold

[Paul Belford]

Hate to say it chaps but if m300572's son and all his colleagues stopped collecting our bins then considerable more chaos would ensue than if 3,000 archaeologists stopped work. Dustbin men are (rightly) valued more highly than archaeologists by society at large.

[Gilraen]

That's because we only deal with the human rubbish left behind under the ground that no one can see [8D][u]</u>

[Steve Walsh]

I would second what Paul says. This is a key issue - the general public are not that interested despite our best efforts. Council tax payers in a certan shire voted for the most pointless service their council offered and archaeology won or lost depending upon your point of view - or maybe Gypsie (sp) liaison - but regardless of the detail arch didnt do very well.


A trowel is a thing to lust for!

[mesolithic viking]

I saw a documentary the other night on MS13, the most dangerous street gang in the world. Now I am thinking of forming MS80 (Minimum Salary £80). Reading the above it looks like diggers are being exploited for their interest in archaeology. But what would be more effective? To refuse to do a job for less than £400, or do it for a week and then threaten to walk? But, (to be my own devil's advocate) if it comes down to the archaeology getting ****ed, or you getting paid, which one do you choose?

[stripeykelly]

I think that the public are interested in archaeology, but yes they will view their public services as being more vital (as I might do too). But often I think it is down to the fact that they really don't know what is going on in the commercial sector. I am sure that is some members of the public found out how their heritage was really being treated they would be very upset by it (and I hope that this is putting it mildly). There is a certain level of awareness by the public, but some in our field of work are quite happy to keep people ignorant.

A very large part of me would be up for the downing tools idea, but as mesolithic viking points out, when it comes down to the archaeology getting trashed, or me getting paid a better wage, unfortunately my passion out weighs my pocket - darn it!!

the future's bright; the future's trowel shaped

[Mna]

"If it comes down to archaeology getting ****ed, or you getting paid, which would you choose?"

Getting paid every time. I mean the nature of excavation means most sites arent ever fully investigated anyway.

Oh and heres a good one. The directors of a fairly large archaeological company, who shall remain nameless,awarded themselves £75K one year to go into their individual pension pots (and this was in a "bad year"). Now theres nothing wrong with that, all company owners/directors do it, but lets consider how much they paid their site fodder. Assuming after tax they're taking home 12K a year it would take a little over 6 years to earn the amount paid into that pension pot in one foul swoop in one year. Certainly by the time they turn 65 they will have a tidy little private pension and the people they work for will be living on a princely state pension. Companies do make money and its about time that workers at Gate Gourmet and Archaeological Excavators were paid more than 14K before tax. True were not essential to the smooth running of the UK infrastructure, but that charge could be levelled at millions of workers in numerous sectors of the UK economy. Is a living wage, really too much to ask for?

[Gizmo]

which is more important, the archaeology or how much we get paid? well i think inspite of all our moaning (of which i do on a regular basis) we would not be in this job if we did not love it enough that we were willing to take a battering on the financial front. i was informed recantly by a manager at lare supermarket chain that if i so wished i could walk into a deputy manager role on 18k and after 4 months training that would jump straight to 20k and then the sky was the limit. was i tempted with the offer? well of course i was when standing in selfridges drooling over the most beautiful Gucci hand bag i had ever seen. but the i realised that no ammount of money could tempt me to don a polyester suit and check that there were the right number of cans of beans on the shelf for a living.
problem is i enjoy my job and i dont actually know many other who could say the same.
however i do still question my loyalty when my LITTLE sister left shool at 16, bummed around for a bit, trained as a hair dresser and now earns around 25k, thats 9k more than me....how depressing!