Lots of Work in Australia

[Arthus]

I'm from the UK but did my basic degree at the University of West Australia. I then worked in Yorkshire before returning to WA to complete my honours year which is needed to work here.

Australia is in economic boom and there is a shortage of archaeologists. The pay is very good here. Most of the work is walking the route of new mine roads etc looking for lithics and art etc.

It is not rocket science.

The most important attribute for working in Australia is anti-racism and respect and knowledge of current Aboriginal people.

Some of the people I went to Uni with were quiet racist and were only interested in colonial stuff, however many of them now work in Indigenous archaeology, some may have changed their minds some are just doing it for the money.

Many white Australian archaeologists believe that as Australian only they can work with Aboriginal people. In fact this is rubbish, outsiders who wish to learn have just a good chance of geting on with Aboriginal people.

Australians are trying to protect 'Aussie jobs'.

But if you are younger enough to get a working holiday visa and act fast you can get a $90000 a year job and then will be able to get citizenship.

And sensitive companies who wish to work FOR Aboriginal corporations and communities should think about coming over.

Anyone can contact me if you need info tips etc.

And if a company you can pay me money to make links!

Unfortunately, I don't think this boom will last forever. US/world credit crises plus worker uprising in China will see to that (50% of Australian trade with China). So I estimate two years of boom left

Arthus

[BAJR Host]

Any chance of more info.. links, requirements, etc...

http://www.australianarchaeologicalassociation.com.au/

http://www.australianarchaeologicalassoc...dy_options

http://www.australianarchaeologicalassoc...e/register



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Digger]

MMMMMM! Haven't heard of anybody earning that kind of money in OZ. I also thought it was still standard to have 'knowledge and experience' of Native title legislation, working with indigenous peoples, etc, etc, etc. Also thought that as an archaeologist one can choose your specialist area. That is if you want to be a historical archaeologist, you can. If you want to work as a pre-historian, you can. Would be very, very surprised to meet a student studying anthropology in OZ to be latent racist, and it is quite offensive to imply that if one studies the 'colonial' period they are therefore somehow racist. Quite surprised that someone on this much money also seems to be touting for more money. Or maybe I am just being a bit harsh...........

[uncle andy]

Agree entirely digger. And given the amount of overseas archaeologists who come here backpacking and get arch work I dont think we can be accused of being exclusionist.

[Arthus]

Course I'm a digger too, only I chose the status.
Not suggesting that all white Australians are racist any more than anywhere else.

In the UK I spent all my life in the Anti-Nazis league and know that racism exists everywhere. But you fight where you are, 'the enemy begins at home'.

White Australia policy, Native title amendment, Tampa, Nauru, Refugees, Howards drink policy, deaths in custody, beach riots etc, etc,

Now I bet you Aussies wouldn't defend any of these measures its just that you can't stand a pom criticising. Well I've got a passport eat vegimate and have been here years, regarded as an Aussie until joining in a conversation at a BBQ I say I think the Government should apologise...

Then I'm a pom and don't understand the situation. Of course, the people telling me this have never met an Aboriginal person and have never been outside Subiaco but they are 'real Aussies' and the fact that I have spent my whole time in Oz working with and having friends who are Aboriginal doesn't mean a thing.

This country is structurally a very racist place (Its like UK in the 1970s and the TV reflects this, try the Footy show, ie all polls found that the majority of Australians aggreed with Howard that there was nothing wrong in locking up unaccompanied refugee kids as young as five in desert concentration camps.

There is a 20 year difference between indigenous mortality and white mortality.

I'm very surprised that its found surprising that archaeologists might be racist. Have you ever been to WA?

But of course all the soft racists in Perth don't think they are racist.

Then of course noone in Perth thinks its strange to have a holiday resort built on the site of a concentration camp (Rottnest Island)for Aboriginal people (Expensive hotel has guests in the condemned cells near where the prisioners were executed).

A student from WA got a job straight from uni on $90000 a year with BHP.

No experience at all.

The money is huge here.

I know the student who I studied with who now works for the DIA and I remember when she asked my Aboriginal archaeoloist friend "Why his community couldn't sort things out" (perhaps she changed).

People spend their entire degree doing historical archaeology with no anthropological input and no indigenous experience and can get a job anywhere in WA or Queensland.

Before working as an archaeologist I have spent many years working as a community psychiatric nurse and a nurse in LongBay gaol.

And during that time I have met many proffessional people who are racist.

Don't you think its strange that out of 60 students in my undergad year at UWA only a handful of students were interested in Aboriginal archaeology?

WA with Devils Lair, Riwi with 30000 year old beads and even older clearly dated art from carpenters gap at 40000 years and they are not interested.

And all the white students just love the Romans and Egypt and digging up some crappy colonial farm from the 1930s (colonial bit designed to enrage the easily enraged).

Its possible to live in Sydney and think that Australia is an anti-racist place but if you know Aboriginal people in the bush you can think again.

Working in the 'justice' [sic] system one knows that shoot to kill still operates in the bush.

So if you are Australian and you don't attack the racism of your own governments then you are as bad as a UK subject who thinks Blaire was right on Iraq

Arthus

[Andy A]

Don't you think its strange that out of 60 students in my undergad year at UWA only a handful of students were interested in Aboriginal archaeology?

WA with Devils Lair, Riwi with 30000 year old beads and even older clearly dated art from carpenters gap at 40000 years and they are not interested.

And all the white students just love the Romans and Egypt and digging up some crappy colonial farm from the 1930s (colonial bit designed to enrage the easily enraged).

Just a thought, but couldn't white Australian archaeologists seeming reluctance to engage with Aboriginal archaeology actually reflect the fact that they are being quite thoughtful about race issues? It must feel quite uncomfortably ‘colonialist’ at times to a white archaeologist working on aboriginal sites. Sticking with the more recent past allows white Australians to be actively involved in a heritage which they feel is their own. Avoiding work on Aboriginal sites may simply reflect a desire not to be seen as condescending outsiders pretending to know more about Aboriginal culture than the Aboriginal people themselves.

Furthermore I find the idea of encouraging British people to travel to Australia to work on archaeology there a bit weird. If good money is available surely it would be far better to increase the number of aboriginal archaeologists involved? They would have a greater background understanding of the issues involved and an actual cultural stake in the archaeology itself. This is similar to the debate about museums, if archaeological finds should be curated and displayed in, or near to, their point of discovery, then surely actual archaeologists working in an area should, where possible, be local people with an in depth knowledge and a stake in that heritage?

[BAJR Host]

Just so people know... I am reading and watching this discussion... it is interesting and well presented...

One could also broaden it to UK archaeology and the 'large' numbers of non-white (oh I hate that term) archaeologists to be seen?

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Andy A]

I’m not sure BAJR, there’s a different dynamic at play in Britain. In the case of Australia we are looking at the archaeology of a people who have been on the receiving end of a fair bit of colonial activity, from both Britain and white Australia. My concern was in part that the idea of importing (predominantly white) Britons to work on Aboriginal archaeological sites seemed, well, slightly colonial, and a little arrogant (although I hasten to say I sure none of the Brits working out there perceive it that way – I really mean no offence, this is difficult stuff to write about).
I think what I mean is this;
If I was an Australian Aboriginal, and a bunch of people whose ancestors had essentially conquered and dispossessed my ancestors turned up, and started to claim an in depth knowledge of my culture and heritage, I think I’d be mildly vexed.

In mainland Britain on the other hand, there is no colonial legacy to worry about, and the majority of the archaeology does not originate with what is currently a disenfranchised minority.

What both countries may have in common is a need to engage more recent arrivals with the archaeology and heritage of their homes. In Britain I feel this involves actively encouraging minority groups to get involved in archaeology of whatever period (and I believe this is starting to happen).
I can’t really speak for Australia, Arthus’s call for more engagement in Aboriginal archaeology seems admirable. I just think that, given the particular circumstances and history perhaps importing archaeologists from Britain isn’t the way to go.
I do however concede that, in the face of development, the need for archaeologists may override my rather squeamish post-colonial guilt complex.

[the invisible man]

Call me a simple old soul if you will, but personally I am opposed to "reserving" any archaeological period, location, percieved group, race, religion or nationality for any particular group, race, religion or nationality etc. of present day archaeologists, or indeed denying any such archaeology to any defined group of archaeologists. While I appreciate the concerns, this tends to smack of racism in itself, however well intentioned.

Last time I looked we were all people, and I would prefer to lossen the divisions rather than reinforce them.

[Andy A]

Fair point Invisible Man, universal human bother/sister hood is indeed a worthy cause. I’m not suggesting totally reserving particular archaeology for any particular group. I just think we should be a bit thoughtful before heading out to work in Australia (or indeed anywhere) that’s all. Archaeology has modern social, cultural and ethnic context whether we like it or not, and it beholds us to stop and consider that before acting. It’s interesting that most British Archaeologists (and indeed British people generally) assume that it is perfectly okay for them to travel and work wherever they like in the world. This may indeed be the case, but the onus is still on us to consider whether our involvement in certain areas is appropriate, tactful or necessary.

I don’t think it is necessarily racist to be aware of these modern day concerns when approaching archaeology. Recent history being what it is, certain archaeological sites are going have value to certain ethnic and social groups and perhaps they should take the lead in investigating them? I think respecting peoples concerns about ‘their’ heritage is an excellent way to promote understanding and thus lessen the divisions between us.