What makes a good employer in fieldwork?

[Illuminated]

Having worked for a number of units, I've seen a variety of terms and conditions, and would like to see what priority people place on which parts of the employment package.

For me, in order of importance, I would choose:

1.Working with capable, intelligent, enthusiastic (and preferably experienced) people. This creates a good working atmosphere, and the archaeology usually gets dug and recorded well.

2.Parity (or better!) in sick leave and holiday with those on similar grades in the organisation not in the field or who have gained permanent status through having stuck with a single employer long enough. I find it very demoralising being in a lower tier of benefits to people doing the same or lesser jobs than myself.

3. More than legal minimum sick leave and paid leave, short as possible weekly hours and as many tea breaks as possible! (I'm not really lazy...)

4. A 'good' wage (and pension?). No one in archaeology is overpaid, though there is a huge difference in being on the comfort threshold on around £18k, and struggling to pay for essentials on £14k. I would like to see my ability and experience rewarded rather than starting at the bottom of the pile if I switch employers.

5. Employer flexibility. I'd like to be able to take my holiday when I want, or maybe do a few days in the office here and there if my back niggles, or I need to pop to the doctor/dentist/bank etc..

6. Competent, trustworthy, management that communicates transparently with staff. I like to feel trusted to get on with my job, but also know there is someone I can go to for support when I do encounter problems.

7. Job security. Not so important for me, if I have an employer with all the points above, I'll stick around for them.

8. Training. Again not so important for me as I feel comfortable doing most things required in the field, though I would like the opportunity available if I ever want to move sideways or upwards.

I've generally found smaller units associated with Universities and Councils tend to have more of the things I want, though through the nature of their size they often have the downside of shorter contracts and worse job security and flexibility than larger units.

[the invisible man]

To be fair, that list will pretty much universal and will apply to most people in most jobs, and is not peculiar to archaeology.

Can we conclude therefore that archaeologists are actually normal people?

You don't know what you've got till it's gone.

[Oxbeast]

Fair enough point, invisible man, but I don't think that most people would agree with illuminated's point 7.
Most folk I know out side archaeology might rate job security the highest.

[Illuminated]

Yes, I'm more interested in how people rate things depending on their individual needs / wants. I'm interested to see if there's one particular issue archaeologists are crying out for from their employers. Job security is not important for me as I know I can get at least a digging job anytime if I'm prepared to travel or stay away, and I'm not adverse to getting some of my tax and national insurance back by having the odd 'holiday' on benefits if I know there's work coming up. That's probably a bit unusual though. My list is by no means exhaustive either, but they're the things most important to me when choosing an employer.

Forgot to add location as being quite important to me too, never mind.