Cavegirl Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Wow! I didn't realise there was work for that many archaeologists! My brother is an archaeologist (practically retired now) and I remember that during his early years, he was always scratching around trying to raise funds. Sadly there isn't enough work for everyone, even before the economy crashed most archaeology graduates moved into another industry to find work. A lucky few find permanent jobs within the state such as working for the local HER's or English Heritage, but these people often find themselves in a highly competetive environment working way beyond their set amount of hours because they're constantly afraid of losing their jobs. Fieldwork archaeologists find there's plenty of work whenever there's a development or infrastructure boom, but this country's not seen one of those in over 20 years so I, like many others, mostly worked abroad- this means constant 3 month contracts, a lack of pension contributions, paying for healthcare, no sick pay, no travel or housing cost help etc and to top it all off no career structure- you'd make progress in one company just to have to start at the bottom again in the next- as Mick Aston said, archaeology's completely broken, I absolutely loved it throughout my 20's but no way could I have carried on without having to find an office-based job, which I don't want so like so many others I've ended up having to find a real job in construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keen Mustard Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 The budget set aside for archaeological work is almost always absolutely miniscule compared to the overall development budget- most building companies don't mind paying for the work to be done because if something interesting is discovered they get to advertise their part in it. For the few that struggle to pay for works they can apply to English Heritage for a grant if the site is considered interesting enough. There's no legal requirement to carry out archaeological work- it's all done through PPG 16 Guidelines, but still companies willingly pay for the work to be carried out. PPG 16 is not relevant planning guidance anymore having been replaced by PPS 5. Whilst I understand the importance of conserving our past, Archaeologists can be the bane of the construction industry at times. We often need to consult with Archaeologists to have Written Schemes of Investigation prepared as part of a planning condition, which then needs to get approved by the Council's Archaeology department of which can take an age in itself and can delay construction significantly. Moreover if anything is discovered then the whole project gets delayed even further and the costs for these delays and the fees for the Archaeologists have to be paid by the client. Both of which can begin to build up quite quickly taking the project over time and subsequently over budget as Archaeologists never seem to be in any particular sort of hurry Anyway forgive the ramblings, just my two-penneth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 When earth had 100%+ oxygen,millions of yrs ago, It was going well until this bit. Can you explain it for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopT Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 A Man with no history has no future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 PPG 16 is not relevant planning guidance anymore having been replaced by PPS 5. Whilst I understand the importance of conserving our past, Archaeologists can be the bane of the construction industry at times. We often need to consult with Archaeologists to have Written Schemes of Investigation prepared as part of a planning condition, which then needs to get approved by the Council's Archaeology department of which can take an age in itself and can delay construction significantly. Moreover if anything is discovered then the whole project gets delayed even further and the costs for these delays and the fees for the Archaeologists have to be paid by the client. Both of which can begin to build up quite quickly taking the project over time and subsequently over budget as Archaeologists never seem to be in any particular sort of hurry Anyway forgive the ramblings, just my two-penneth. Have you thought about employing a permanent archaeologist who gets involved with your development right from the start? They can often advise company's much better regarding what to expect on a site than an archaeologist who's contracted in late on the project because they have the time to research the area better. (I'm not touting for work here before someone says it lol). A permanent archaeologist would get to know how the council department operates and that might speed things up considerably for you plus they can act as an intermediary if you think work is progressing too slowly- offering you trustworthy explanations as to why or kicking the excavation team up the bottom if they need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gleadly Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Whilst I have no particular interest in history, I can see no reason why others should be prevented from exploring it. As for the developers paying the archaeologists!! How are the developers supposed to know what's underground? Clearly they may need to carry out some form of consultation with local archaeological societies and/or other interested parties but how can they possibly budget for these digs as probably no-one will know the costs involved until at least the exploratory dig has been completed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Wow! I didn't realise there was work for that many archaeologists! My brother is an archaeologist (practically retired now) and I remember that during his early years, he was always scratching around trying to raise funds. I don't think there is work for that many.... missed the second page, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Whilst I have no particular interest in history, I can see no reason why others should be prevented from exploring it. As for the developers paying the archaeologists!! How are the developers supposed to know what's underground? Clearly they may need to carry out some form of consultation with local archaeological societies and/or other interested parties but how can they possibly budget for these digs as probably no-one will know the costs involved until at least the exploratory dig has been completed? The developers get a very good deal when it comes to archaeologists. Despite now having to pay for their degrees most field archaeologists are paid minimum wage for the first three years of work and most archaeologists leave the industry before this time is up. Only when they find work in better paid industries do they start paying back the cost of their education to the taxpayer so developers usually don't contribute anything towards the archaeological skills they are utilising, they only pay for time on site. Still archaeology is a profession and a time-served archaeologist will have often have great insight into what is likely to be found underground long before an excavation commences. They will visit a site and read the landscape, they know how to use HER's, libraries and maps appropriately, they often have access to aerial photographs and can read these well and they might perform a geophysical survey to locate buried features, which is a very cheap method of investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Would 'not knowing what was underground' prevent the developers from hiking the price of whatever it was they were building? Developers rarely seem to make a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolyhead Posted June 28, 2013 Author Share Posted June 28, 2013 Are you talking in general, have you seen something on tv? or do you know of something like this happening yourself which has made you to start this thread? Just in general. Messymum, in what way is history so important? During WW2, when we had more important things on our mind, we didn't even think about archaeology. Today, with the national debt, unemployment, lack of housing, a collapsing NHS, a huge financial black hole and idiots for a government we should concentrate once more on the important things, not what rubbish our forebears left behind in the ground, especially when it delays more important work. It isn't just the three months quoted for the maximum amount of delay per site but the total delay across the entire nation, ie the sum of delays for every damned site. I watched Tony Robinson present Time Team on several occasions and I enjoyed it, but that doesn't mean we should delay building work all over the place. I also said that the trouble with UK is that we seem to like living in our glorious past rathet than our inglorious present. It's the attitude of mind I object to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.