Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Marc Berger Wrote:presumably if you report the issue you will be done for not using the approved kit?
Nah, just be forced to use the sweaty ones instead, at least I'm scoring a (slight) cheap victory as things are, and I can actually pick up coins and the like when I find 'em :face-approve:
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
...guessing soil textures and the like's a lot easier too }
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
I prefer to put a pinch on my tongue and crunch it between my remaining two front teeth. Allows not only texture but taste. Obviously I spit after but make sure hSE don't see that bit. I oncely worked 500 metres from an oil refineray and they made us ware plastic googles. When I asked why I was told that it was in case of an explosion! I can't say that my body being identified because my eyes might be saved by my plastic googles was in anyway reassuring and when I asked for danger money in proportion to the threat I was told that the proportion was about the cost of a pair of googles. That particular miserable supervisor is still joint top of my scum list.
Can't you get AECOM to tell you, I notice that they are awash with mifas or what about that clerk of works. Just out of interest who is he contracted to?
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2008
The decision on what PPE has to be worn by staff isn't made by Archaeological supervisors though, so no point in getting pissed off with them.
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
no the decisions are made by non transparent multinational global consultancies looking to manage government infrastructure funding for a percentage. The supervisors are merely their lackeys. Apologies to all you supervisors but the diggers have to be told.
Quote:so no point in getting pissed off with them.
getting pissed off with them was about the only point I ever felt about them.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Marc Berger Wrote:...what about that clerk of works. Just out of interest who is he contracted to?
Do pay attention, that man! That was the only reason the environmental guys were mentioned in the first place
We're assuming that the big construction companies all have major share-holdings in PPE manufacturing, since they've invented all these rules themselves
On the up-side, at least not out doing a new gas-pipeline route in flame-retardant overalls in this weather...is it commonly known outside the energy industry that gas explosions can travel back in time? }
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
I am still none the wiser as to who the archaeological Clark of works is clerking for.
I don't think that it is shares in ppe factors more it is a visible sign that archaeologists have been contracted by the "construction industry" rather than by the landowner. I speculate that the construction firm will be paid to manage the archaeologists-possibly on a bonus if they get the archaeology in on or under budget.
Obviously you have agreements to excavate with all those who have rights to the land
Quote: ‘clause 25 of the Code of approved practices for the regulation of contractual arrangements in archaeology – a member embarking upon fieldwork will secure the permission of the landowner and tenant as appropriate, and of any others with rights or responsibilities for the land and its safekeeping’.
Does anybody have an example of what one of these permissions look like? The ifa use it as an example of a potential disciplinary issue
http://www.archaeologists.net/regulation/complaints
I dont know why they bother as i can't imagine that anybody could fall foul of it.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
The Archaeological Clerk of Works (in this case supplied by their environmental consultants AECOM) is there to represent the Main Contractor in their dealings with the archaeological subcontractor, in order to ensure that (a) the archaeologists aren't taking the p**s, (b) to ensure liason between the two parties during construction works, and © to present the perception to everyone (rightly or wrongly) that as much archaeological work is being prevented as possible by the main contractor by having 'their man' running the show. Oh, and (d) to give hilariously misquoted interviews to the press }
I'd be guessing in the case of the current example that the landowner is the Highways Agency (ie HM Government) since they acquired all the land via CPOs?
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
And so you have clause 25 agreement with the highways agency? Or the clerk has one?
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
dinosaur: gone away or just(ly) extinct
