Irish archaeology: a few money issues

Marchandire

From the finfacts website:

"Land acquisition accounts for 23% of the cost of roads projects in Ireland, but just 12% in England, 10% in Denmark, 9.4% in Greece and 1% in Iceland. A further 2% of the €18.5bn provided in the Government's Transport 21 for road building over the next decade will go to archaeologists." (my italics)
(www.finfacts.ie/finfactsblog/2007/02/irish-general-election-2007-low-tax.html)

This equals an average 37 million yearly expenditure, or a colossal 370 million between 2007 and 2017.

In the light of these numbers, archaeology in Ireland can no longer be considered a minority vocation, but is instead a major business with substantial revenues. What I'd like to ask where this money is going, and if anyone has any thoughts on how archaeology is run as a business concern? Do the methodologies used and the conditions on sites reflect the growth in archaeology as a business?

Another issue that feeds directly into this is one of salaries and conditions for excavating archaeologists. I've been a field archaeologist for five years so its an issue that's close to my heart

According to the CSO, the average industrial wage in 2006 was 624.45 Euro per week for males and 451.12 Euro per week for females. These numbers are for the manufacturing industries and are significantly lower than those of the public sector, which average 882 Euro across the various public sectors. It seems to be generally agreed that the average industrial wage in ireland is 32,000 Euro per annum.
(See: www.cso.ie/statistics/indearnings.htm and www.cso.ie/statistics/public_sector_earnings.htm, www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=41278)

In contrast, the top wage for an excavating archaeologist one year ago was 460 Euro per week (according to my last wage slip), or around 24,000 Euro per annum. This was for a senior site assistant post, requiring substantial experience. Weekly wages drop significantly for the lower grades and are even lower for general operatives. According to the CSO table, senior site assistants were being paid in 2007 the average industrial wage from eight years before, in 1999.

Again, I'd like to ask what people think of this situation. Is the lack of an archaeologists' union to blame? Or does the yearly influx of recent graduates keep wages down? Or are the employers at fault?

I personally feel that the privatisation of archaeological excavation has turned site assistants into civil servants by proxy - we work on public projects and are funded by the tax-payer, but are paid as employees of private companies. This arrangement places an additional layer of private management between the excavator and his/her actual employer (in most cases the NRA) and means an archaeologist is paid far less than a civil servant would for the same job.

Anyway, thanks for listening and I'd love to know what everyone here thinks.

kowloon

I got paid almost that much as a site assistant a few years ago, the slow down hasn't been kind!
A licensed archaeologist gets a hell of a lot more though.

Saabdub

Marchandire wrote: »

In the light of these numbers, archaeology in Ireland can no longer be considered a minority vocation, but is instead a major business with substantial revenues. What I'd like to ask where this money is going, and if anyone has any thoughts on how archaeology is run as a business concern? Do the methodologies used and the conditions on sites reflect the growth in archaeology as a business?

Some of the money has gone into property. For example, one prominent archaeological company was able to buy a building on Merrion Square.

Saabdub

Nutlog!!!

I personally think that the career is one of the few that has been almost completely left in the dark ages, specifically with regard to the emphasis on employee personal well-being and health & safety, pay (basic and the absence of a sick-leave system), and employee rights. Compare it to the construction sector for example, of which modern commercial archaeology is undeniably a part, but is stubborn to accept.

The creation of any sort of union is severely hampered by the temporary / contractual nature of each job, but that is not to say a different format of organisation representing worker's rights cannot be set up. This has been attempted in the past in this country but failed, I'll go find out more about it and come back.

Personally I feel that the job often feeds off employees inate passion for the work itself, but this is not or seldom backed up by an efficient management structure and suitable ethos.

Nutlog!!!

I should, however, balance those criticisms out by saying that I have had many many positive experiences working for a number of companies also, I would have or else I wouldn't be continuing on in the line of work! And some companies' management structures and personnel are nothing but supportive of your needs. I still think much can be improved upon though.

Like Iarnrod Eireann, not there yet but we're getting there!

Enough ranting! More beer wheeeeyyy!!!

Sealrock

Nutlog

Does anyone know if the Siptu branch for archaeologists is still running?

Sealrock

Nutlog!!!

As far as I know the structure still exists in SIPTU, but as for members that I couldn't say...

Aelfric

The Archaeology branch of SIPTU was being run out of Galway, but it required 250 members to be fully supported. Membership of SIPTU is still open to archaeologists, but the Archaeology branch, as far as I know, is in itself defunct due to lack of interest.

Nutlog!!!

Therein lies the problem methinks - actual interest!

I think a large part of the problem is the mindset of a lot of professional diggers. Though I'm sure structural difficulties / inadequacies within the union (or its archaeological section) also contribute.

Nutlog!!!

A mate of mine, who is also an archaeologist, had the idea of a worker injury fund agreement between companies and staff. Pretty much like health insurance for archaeologists.

Loads of operational (and ideological) problems with it but a good idea nonetheless.

As a matter of interest, how many of you would join a union and pay dues? (Providing, of course, it was run effectively and simply) Be honest!

Irjudge1

Nutlog!!! wrote: »

A mate of mine, who is also an archaeologist, had the idea of a worker injury fund agreement between companies and staff. Pretty much like health insurance for archaeologists.

Loads of operational (and ideological) problems with it but a good idea nonetheless.

As a matter of interest, how many of you would join a union and pay dues? (Providing, of course, it was run effectively and simply) Be honest!

Archaeologists are essentially part of the construction sector or at least the construction services sector. Surely ye should be have a scheme similar to the CIF Pension scheme and health insurance.

boneless

Nutlog!!! wrote: »

A mate of mine, who is also an archaeologist, had the idea of a worker injury fund agreement between companies and staff. Pretty much like health insurance for archaeologists.

Loads of operational (and ideological) problems with it but a good idea nonetheless.

As a matter of interest, how many of you would join a union and pay dues? (Providing, of course, it was run effectively and simply) Be honest!

I would have no problem joining a union but I think it should be made clear to members that a union is only as good as the members make it. Active participation is a must. However, most archaeologists I worked with were not willing in case of being blacklisted/harassed.