Archive
Employment: Multidisiplinary firms vs. heritage-only firms
In a recent HBJ post (17 February 2012), Christopher Dore reported that it appears that heritage-only consulting firms are losing market share to full-service firms. To add a different set of numbers to his data, I took a look at the number of job postings for field technicians on the job websites Shovelbums and ArchaeologyFieldwork.com for 2011. Eliminating duplicate posts both between and within the websites, I looked at companies offering jobs for field technicians: a total of 330 separate posts. Jobs were considered separate if the project was different even if the company was the same, six or more months had passed, or it was an emergency hire for a previous job (assumed to be a separate hiring event). If single ads were for multiple positions, the number of positions offered was not counted as most job postings did not give those details. Surprisingly, not every job listing had the company’s details or even the firm’s name on it. Thus, of the 330 unique postings, 295 were used for analysis. Here is the break down of job hiring events between CRM only firms, multi-service firms, and other firms.
In 2011, multi-service firms posted more than twice the number of job ads for field technicians than did cultural-only firms. These employment data seem to support Dore’s observation that heritage-only firms are losing market share to multidisciplinary environmental and engineering companies.
There are limits to what can and should be inferred by these results. There are many small CRM firms that do not advertise for field technician positions as their projects are too small to require a full crew. Though it does say something that the majority of job adverts for lower level positions are being done by multi-service firms. The full data can be accessed here.
UK report on labor issues in commercial archaeology
A report has been issued by the Diggers Forum at the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA) in the UK on away work and travel. The report is authored by Chiz Harward, Mary Neale, and Sadie Watson and can be downloaded here. The Diggers Forum requests that you “Please read through the report, discuss it with your colleagues and let us know what your comments and views are, particularly on the recommendations on advertising archaeological jobs, and on travel and away work.” The results of the survey show great disparities in travel and away work conditions and the report makes recommendations to solve these problems. For example, the principal recommendations on transparent advertising are:
- Details of the starting salary available to a new starter, avoiding use of incremental pay ranges that may make salaries appear greater than they could be for a new starter.
- State what level of experience is required for the post.
- Any probationary period.
- Details of sick pay, holiday entitlement and pension provision including any qualification
- periods.
- The length of the working week and whether any compulsory overtime may be required.
- Where the job will be based and whether away work is envisaged.
- Whether a driving licence or specific skills card is required.
- Indicate whether accommodation will be provided if the contract is a short term appointment and whether there is any charge for this.
- Indicate whether there are any subsistence allowances for away work and how much these are and when they are paid.
- Give details of pay for travelling time for both drivers and passengers, clearly stating that travel time is not paid if that is the case.
It is great report and I recommend that everyone reads it. The Diggers Forum asks that you consider the following:
“The ultimate question must be asked, what kind of profession do we want to leave to future generations of archaeologists? Do we want to maintain the current system of disposable, deskilled workers living often hand-to-mouth and travelling across the country in the hope of just keeping going? Do we want to maintain a kind of two-tier system between those that have permanent jobs and those that are on short contracts; between those working as Site Assistants and those who have climbed the ladder to Supervisor and beyond?”
Heritage Business Journal 