The increased rate of economic recovery is, I hope, leading to improved opportunities for our members and for employment within archaeology. As usual we are operating in an environment full of change, and there are many threats to the heritage sector which will undoubtedly impact on us all. (more…)
Author: Doug Rocks-Macqueen
-
Proposed cuts to services in Tyne and Wear
Gateshead Council is consulting on proposals to cut by 50% its funding for the joint Tyne and Wear Specialist Conservation Team. It is not yet known what the impact will be on archaeology, but we have written to the Council to express our concerns at its potential impact on the service and its clients.
The text of the letter is here:
-
Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13
The fourth survey of labour market intelligence for the archaeological profession has been published.
Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13 repeats surveys previously carried out in 1997-98, 2002-3 and 2007-8, to compile a time-series dataset allowing trends to be identified with increasing confidence.
The previous survey was carried out in 2007-8, immediately before the global recession began to affect archaeological employment. The economic transformation since then has significantly affected employment in archaeology, resulting in a considerable reduction in the size of the sector.
The estimated archaeological workforce in 2012-13 was 4,792: a 30% decrease on the estimated 6,865 in 2007-8, and a 16% decrease on the estimated 5.712 in 2002-3. A further estimated 1,148 people worked as support staff, giving an estimated total of 5,940 people directly earning their living from archaeology.
The average age of a working archaeologist in 2012-13 was 42, with female archaeologists on average aged 39, and male archaeologists 44. By comparison, the average age of the whole UK workforce is 40.5.
The survey found that 46% of archaeologists were female and 54% were male. In 2007-08, the proportions were 41:59. 47% of the whole UK workforce in all occupations is female, 53% male.
Archaeology was not an ethnically diverse profession in 2012-13: 99% of working archaeologists were white. This was effectively unchanged since 2002-3, and contrasts with the entire UK workforce, of whom 13% were of black or minority ethnic origin.
The proportion of people with disabilities working in archaeology continued to be very low; 98% of archaeologists were not disabled. This was effectively unchanged over time, while 7% of the entire UK workforce are disabled.
93% of archaeologists working in the UK in 2012-13 were from the UK, 3% were from elsewhere in the EU, less than 1% were from non-EU Europe and 4% were from elsewhere in the world. This represented a relative decrease in the number of archaeologists from non-UK EU countries (5% in 2007-8), and a relative increase in the number of archaeologists from elsewhere in the world (2% in 2007-8). However, as the total number of working archaeologists had fallen considerably, the absolute number of archaeologists from outside the UK has also fallen.
Despite the reducing workforce over the last five years, slightly more employers expected their organisation to grow over the next year than expected it to shrink, with further optimistic forecasts for growth over the next three years. These expectations were noticeably more cautious than the ambitious forecasts in 2007-8.
Of 4,792 archaeologists working in the UK in 2012-13, an estimated 2,684 (56%) worked for organisations providing field investigation and research services, 1,198 (25%) providing historic environment advice, 96 (2%) providing museum and visitor services and 815 (17%) providing education and academic research. These percentages changed relatively little over the five years since 2007-8, although the percentage providing museum and visitor services decreased while that providing education and academic research rose.
545 (11%) worked for national government agencies, 485 (10%) for local government, 690 (14%) for universities, 2,812 (59%) for private sector organisations and 260 (6%) for other types of organisations such as museums or amenity bodies. Overall, there was a relative increase in the percentage of archaeologists working in the private sector since 2007-8, and a decline in those working in the public sector.
More archaeologists worked in London and the South East than in other areas, though this largely reflects the overall UK population distribution. The geographical distribution of archaeologists has not changed significantly since the first survey in 1997-8.
The survey collected detailed information on 888 archaeologists and support staff, working in 389 jobs with 236 different post titles. This represents one post title per 3.8 individuals, compared with one per 5.3 individuals in 2007-8.
On average, full-time archaeologists earned £27,814 per annum. The median archaeological salary was £26,000 (50% earned more than this, 50% less). The average salary for those employed in the private sector was £24,757. The average for all UK full-time workers was £32,700, so the average archaeologist earned 85% of the UK average – as was the case in 2007-8.
Over the five years since 2007-8 the average salary of archaeologists increased by 19% compared with the national average increase for all occupations of 20%. In 2012, 46% of archaeologists worked for organisations reporting that individual salaries had typically either fallen or remained unchanged.
Archaeologists were highly qualified, and their average level of qualification has risen over time. In 2012-13, one in five (20%) of archaeologists held a doctorate or post-doctoral qualification (12% in 2007-8), 47% held a master’s degree or higher (40% in 2007-8) and 93% a bachelor’s degree or higher (90% in 2007-8). 95% of archaeologists aged under 30 for whom qualifications data were available were graduates.
Skills gaps (skills that existing staff need but lack) and shortages (where employers cannot recruit staff with the relevant skills) were identified in both technical, archaeological skills and in generic, professional skills. The severity of these gaps and shortages was categorised as ‘significant’ (where more than 25% of respondents had identified a problem) or ‘serious’ (where more than 50% had identified a problem).
A serious skills shortage was identified in post-fieldwork analysis. Significant skills shortages were identified in fieldwork (invasive or non-invasive), artefact or ecofact conservation and information technology. Significant skills gaps were identified in post-fieldwork analysis, fieldwork (invasive or non-invasive), information technology, people management and project management.
Overall, archaeological employers demonstrated a high level of commitment to training their staff, although the level of support shown by several key indicators had declined since 2007-8. 90% of employers identified training needs for individuals and provided training for paid staff (93% in 2007-8), 46% had a formal training plan (52% in 2007-8) and 45% formally evaluated the impact of training on individuals (48% in 2007-8). 26% evaluated the impact of training on the organisation (28% in 2007-8), compared with 75% which identified needs for the organisation as a whole (76% in 2007-8).
Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13 is published by Landward Research Ltd, and funded by English Heritage, Historic Scotland, Cadw, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency: Built Heritage and the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Commission.
The full report may be downloaded here.
-
Archaeological market shows modest growth
The latest State of the Archaeological Market survey shows that the development-led archaeological sector grew modestly in the nine months to December 2012. The survey, carried out by Landward Research on behalf of FAME and the IfA, was undertaken alongside the forthcoming Profiling the Profession survey, which suggests that the overall size of the archaeological sector has been consistently overestimated in previous surveys.
Staff turnover is low, and continues to be lower than previous surveys. Employers continue to report that staff leaving their employment have typically remained in archaeology.
Salaries had typically remained unchanged or risen only by inflation in 2012. However, more organisations reported salaries rising by above inflation than had been the case in April 2012.
Significant numbers of archaeological businesses have established subsidiary offices elsewhere in the UK.
Profitability is low, and average turnover decreased in 2011-12 when compared with the previous year. The majority of revenue in development-led archaeology continues to come from field investigation and post-fieldwork analysis.
Business confidence in the sector, as measured through anticipated growth, market deterioration or businesses failure, is improving. Respondents were more optimistic about retaining staff and the future state of the market than had been the case in April 2012; for the first time since January 2010, more respondents considered that market conditions would improve than thought it would deteriorate. However, the overwhelming majority of respondents expect some archaeological businesses to fail in the next year, and respondents were more negative on this point than they had been in April 2012.
The most commonly reported area of skills loss continues to be fieldwork, which has been the case since surveys began in 2009. More organisations are investing in training than are reporting that they are losing skills, although post-excavation analysis and artefact and ecofact conservation are two areas where skills are more likely to be bought in from external providers than developed through investment in training. In general, respondents were more likely to recognise skills issues affecting the archaeological profession as a whole than within their own organisations.
Since April 2012, support for the NVQ in Archaeological Practice had increased. IfA ROs and FAME members were much more likely than other archaeological organisations to have supported staff undertaking the NVQ, and were significantly more likely than others to consider doing so in the future.
The full report may be viewed here.
-
Merseyside HER – new access fees
Despite representations from FAME and other heritage bodies, Merseyside Archaeological Service was closed in March 2011. National Museums Liverpool has now announced that access to the Merseyside HER is to be made available for public consultation, at a fee of £500 per day, with a minimum fee of £250. FAME members have expressed their concern at the scale of the increase, so we have written to the Executive Director asking her to explain the proposals.
-
FAME News 13: Summer 2013
As incoming Chair my first newsletter must include a big thank you for the contribution Gary Brown has made over the past two years to further developing the activities of FAME.
-
FAME Forum: HSE to consult on CDM exemption for archaeology
The HSE are to consult on exempting pre-construction archaeological investigation from the definition of ‘construction work’ for the purposes of the new CDM Regulations, they have announced at the FAME Forum. Consultation on the new regulations, due to be introduced in October 2014, will start in September this year. The exemption would not apply to archaeological work during construction, for which archaeological contractors would be classed as specialist contractors under the regulations . HSE reiterated their view that it would be inappropriate under normal circumstances for archaeological contractors to be Principal Contractors under the terms of the regulations. FAME’s Health and Safety Working Party will be co-ordinating a response to the consultation, and working with HSE to develop industry-specific guidance.
Merchant Taylors Hall, the magnificent setting for the Forum (photo York Archaeological Trust) Understanding your insurance obligations Tariq Mian, Towergate Insurance
Why do you need adequate insurance cover, and why is it important to understand what insurance you are buying? This paper will examine Public Liability, Employers Liability and Professional indemnity Insurance, and will consider questions such as where they are compulsory, what they cover, and what implications they have in terms of risk management.
It will also discuss risk exposure as a director, officer or trustee of a company or charity: how your decisions can affect you personally, and how you can insure against getting it wrong through directors, officers or charity trustees liability insurance. It will also consider business interruption – insuring your cash flow and what you need to know about it, and insuring your assets and why it is important to keep your broker or insurer informed. It will include some examples of claims, and will provide an opportunity for questions and discussion.
Investing in staff – a risk worth taking? Reviewing the skills and training statistics from Profiling the Profession 2012–13 Kenneth Aitchison, Director, Landward Research Ltd
Profiling the Profession 2012-13 was the UK’s fourth quinquennial archaeology labour market intelligence gathering exercise. The data stretch back to 1997, and the headline figures of the number of archaeologists in employment that rose to a peak in 2007-08 have come crashing downwards since. In a shrinking profession, with an asymmetrical oversupply of untrained would-be entrants, the data on skills and training are particularly interesting, especially when read alongside the (strongly) opinionated comments that some respondents to the survey generously provided.
When we look at our competitors, the archaeological profession thinks there is a widespread problem. Archaeology lacks professional skills – we think the sector as a whole needs better data management, leadership, business skills, education and training – but as individual employers, we rarely recognise these as being areas where we would invest in training our own staff or we would consider buying in outside help. This mismatch, and whether it might represent an opportunity, is the key issue that archaeological employers and managers need to be considering.
John Walker receives his FAME Honorary President award (photo York Archaeological Trust) Sharing Financial Risk: The Application of Measured Contract Practices to Archaeological Contracting Michael Heaton, Michael Heaton Heritage Consultants
Uncertainty of financial outcome, borne of the inherent unpredictability of archaeological investigation, is arguably the principal obstacle to the fulfilment of archaeological contracting as a commercial and intellectual undertaking. It causes stress in what should be an intellectually-rewarding pursuit, and hinders investment in skills and public engagement. That uncertainty of outcome is largely the result of unsophisticated contract practices based on ‘lump sum’ and so-called ‘fixed price’ contracts, naively adopted in the years either side of PPG16 and left unchallenged.
Civil engineering groundworks – the commercial undertaking most readily comparable to archaeological contracting – is invariably undertaken on the basis of ‘Measured’ contracts, in which the contractor is paid for what they have had to do, not what someone thought they might have to do. Such contracts explicitly acknowledge the inherent unpredictability of groundworks, share the financial risk between contractor and client, and are accepted throughout the international construction industry. They are directly applicable to archaeological contracting.
This short paper presents the author’s experience, as a consultant, of applying such practices to archaeological excavations in southern England, and his thoughts on how the method could be adapted for more widespread use in archaeological contracting. It is based, in part, on the author’s Construction Management coursework undertaken for a Graduate Diploma in Building Surveying at the University of the West of England, and his on-going discussions with UWE teaching staff and fellow professionals.
Which Archaeologist? Improving commercial practice, understanding value and risk Tim Malim, SLR Consulting Ltd
The successful development of commercial archaeology over the past 25 years has generated opportunities for graduate careers, produced a massive output of archaeological data, and led to increased professionalism. Commercial archaeology is driven, however, by developer-funding, and the down-side of this success story has been the operational difficulties caused by price competition within a largely unregulated market place. Other professions have developed educational pathways and business practices that allow them to operate effectively as part of the development process, and commercial archaeology now needs to develop similar strategies, as well as developing complementary skill sets to increase value to their paymasters.
As a profession, simply understanding the nuts and bolts of the discipline and how we can practically apply archaeological investigation is insufficient to be a successful business. In future archaeologists need to become fully-fledged members of development project teams, with a wide knowledge of legislation and the planning process beyond just the historic environment, and they will need to execute rigorous business and financial planning, to operate effective methods of project management and quality assurance, and develop partnerships to maximise value and opportunity within development schemes. This paper will explore what mechanisms exist to help us improve quality and identify risk, so that clients can make better value judgements on which archaeologist they should appoint.
Democracy in action at the AGM at Barley Hall (photo York Archaeological Trust) -
Risky Business? Speaker summaries
This year’s FAME Forum on risk management in development-led archaeology is only a week away, on Friday, 28 June at the Merchant Taylors Hall, York. Tickets are free to FAME members and £50 (including lunch, morning coffee and afternoon tea) to non-members. To book your tickets, contact gbrown@pre-construct.com, or to join FAME and book your free tickets, contact h.cooper-reade@albion-arch.com.
The future of CDM – pitfalls and opportunities?
Russell Adfield, HM Principal Inspector and Giles Meredith, HM Inspector, CDM Unit, Construction Sector, Health and Safety Executive
The Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007 are currently under review by the Health and Safety Executive. The proposed reforms will go out to public consultation later this year, with the new regulations due to be introduced in April 2014. This paper will outline the background to the review and the reasons for it, and will explain the parameters and timetable of the consultation process.
It will be followed by an open forum on what the proposed reforms will mean for the construction sector in general and for archaeological practitioners in particular. It will also provide the opportunity to raise questions on wider aspects of health and safety, such as competence cards, with two senior representatives of HSE.
Understanding your insurance obligations
Tariq Mian, Towergate Insurance
Why do you need adequate insurance cover, and why is it important to understand what insurance you are buying? This paper will examine Public Liability, Employers Liability and Professional indemnity Insurance, and will consider questions such as where they are compulsory, what they cover, and what implications they have in terms of risk management.
It will also discuss risk exposure as a director, officer or trustee of a company or charity: how your decisions can affect you personally, and how you can insure against getting it wrong through directors, officers or charity trustees liability insurance. It will also consider business interruption – insuring your cash flow and what you need to know about it, and insuring your assets and why it is important to keep your broker or insurer informed. It will include some examples of claims, and will provide an opportunity for questions and discussion.
Investing in staff – a risk worth taking? Reviewing the skills and training statistics from Profiling the Profession 2012–13
Kenneth Aitchison, Director, Landward Research Ltd
Profiling the Profession 2012-13 was the UK’s fourth quinquennial archaeology labour market intelligence gathering exercise. The data stretch back to 1997, and the headline figures of the number of archaeologists in employment that rose to a peak in 2007-08 have come crashing downwards since. In a shrinking profession, with an asymmetrical oversupply of untrained would-be entrants, the data on skills and training are particularly interesting, especially when read alongside the (strongly) opinionated comments that some respondents to the survey generously provided.
When we look at our competitors, the archaeological profession thinks there is a widespread problem. Archaeology lacks professional skills – we think the sector as a whole needs better data management, leadership, business skills, education and training – but as individual employers, we rarely recognise these as being areas where we would invest in training our own staff or we would consider buying in outside help. This mismatch, and whether it might represent an opportunity, is the key issue that archaeological employers and managers need to be considering.
Sharing Financial Risk: The Application of Measured Contract Practices to Archaeological Contracting
Michael Heaton, Michael Heaton Heritage Consultants
Uncertainty of financial outcome, borne of the inherent unpredictability of archaeological investigation, is arguably the principal obstacle to the fulfilment of archaeological contracting as a commercial and intellectual undertaking. It causes stress in what should be an intellectually-rewarding pursuit, and hinders investment in skills and public engagement. That uncertainty of outcome is largely the result of unsophisticated contract practices based on ‘lump sum’ and so-called ‘fixed price’ contracts, naively adopted in the years either side of PPG16 and left unchallenged.
Civil engineering groundworks – the commercial undertaking most readily comparable to archaeological contracting – is invariably undertaken on the basis of ‘Measured’ contracts, in which the contractor is paid for what they have had to do, not what someone thought they might have to do. Such contracts explicitly acknowledge the inherent unpredictability of groundworks, share the financial risk between contractor and client, and are accepted throughout the international construction industry. They are directly applicable to archaeological contracting.
This short paper presents the author’s experience, as a consultant, of applying such practices to archaeological excavations in southern England, and his thoughts on how the method could be adapted for more widespread use in archaeological contracting. It is based, in part, on the author’s Construction Management coursework undertaken for a Graduate Diploma in Building Surveying at the University of the West of England, and his on-going discussions with UWE teaching staff and fellow professionals.
Which Archaeologist? Improving commercial practice, understanding value and risk
Tim Malim, SLR Consulting Ltd
The successful development of commercial archaeology over the past 25 years has generated opportunities for graduate careers, produced a massive output of archaeological data, and led to increased professionalism. Commercial archaeology is driven, however, by developer-funding, and the down-side of this success story has been the operational difficulties caused by price competition within a largely unregulated market place. Other professions have developed educational pathways and business practices that allow them to operate effectively as part of the development process, and commercial archaeology now needs to develop similar strategies, as well as developing complementary skill sets to increase value to their paymasters.
As a profession, simply understanding the nuts and bolts of the discipline and how we can practically apply archaeological investigation is insufficient to be a successful business. In future archaeologists need to become fully-fledged members of development project teams, with a wide knowledge of legislation and the planning process beyond just the historic environment, and they will need to execute rigorous business and financial planning, to operate effective methods of project management and quality assurance, and develop partnerships to maximise value and opportunity within development schemes. This paper will explore what mechanisms exist to help us improve quality and identify risk, so that clients can make better value judgements on which archaeologist they should appoint.
-
FAME Forum 2013: Risky Business?
This year’s FAME Forum will focus on aspects of risk management in development-led archaeology. As a key decision maker in your organisation,
- Are you aware of the legal responsibilities you carry when conducting your business?
- Or the penalties that may apply when something goes wrong?
- Do you know whether or not archaeological fieldwork is covered by CDM Regulations?
- Or whether your insurance policy covers you for staff working at depths of over 2m?
- Or whether as a business you are covered by appropriate liability insurance?
- Do you believe that smarter procurement should be used in commissioning archaeological work?
- Or that measured contracts in archaeology would benefit the profession?
- Do you want to know how well the sector is performing?
The Forum will feature Russell Adfield and Giles Meredith (HSE) on the CDM review, Tariq Mian (Towergate Insurance) on insurance obligations, Kenneth Aitchison (Landward Research) on Profiling the Profession 2012-13, Michael Heaton (Michael Heaton Heritage Consultants) on the use of measured contracts, and Tim Malim (SLR) on procuring quality.
It will take place on Friday, 28 June at the Merchant Taylors Hall, York.
Admission is free to FAME members and £50 to non-members, including lunch, morning coffee and afternoon tea.
The Forum is supported by York Archaeological Trust, and admission to the Forum includes free entry to the Trust’s visitor attractions Jorvik Viking Centre, DIG York, Dig Hungate, Barley Hall and Micklegate Bar throughout the weekend.
Advance booking is essential. Click here for more details and a booking form.
