Ian:
I don't think ACRA and RPA are bad ideas, and I don't expect either to perform perfectly. I just don't think that raising technician rates is at the top of their priority lists. Perhaps it should be.
The reason I don't join ACRA is that I devote my resources to increasing opportunities in my own small part of the world, to good effect, I think. And I focus on those historic preservation laws that govern the kind of business my group does, which generally is not federally mandated. I deal with local agencies and governments that are accessible and, generally, open for business (yes, this is a jab at the nonsense currently pervading the US Congress).
As for RPA, I was a member for I think two years a long time ago and, not seeming to get anything for my $45 a year and prefering to invest that money in a couple of other organizations, I let it lapse. After a year or two without anybody from RPA asking me why I let it lapse, I figured my first instinct was correct...better to be a member of smaller, more local organizations where they cared whether I came or went.
ACRA and RPA should promote the needs of technicians...I just don't think they need my help. My efforts are better focused on where they do the most good. I don't discourage others from participating actively in both, but I do encourage all to help promote local archaeological review mandated at the county or parish and municipal level. Certainly in the Eastern United States, that is where we can best fulfill our research and public engagement priorities, and it is work that enables me to pay crew significantly above both the regional and national averages. And the rewards are right in front of us, easy to see and perhaps even quantify.
Good luck and best wishes to ACRA and RPA...think of me as an ally.
Jim
James G. Gibb
Gibb Archaeological Consulting
2554 Carrollton Road
Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
On 10/05/13, [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Jim: you got two ideas from me. What do you think of those? I believe that
making archaeological/crm services more valuable, and by actively discouraging
low-bid/low expectation/low standard work by ensuring it no longer gets through
review we stand a chance of raising rates, maybe not as quickly as we would
like, but it is one approach that should be taken seriously. It is one of
ACRA's objectives to raise standards in this way, and RPA's mission is of course
to raise the professional standing of archaeologists.
If more of the 1500 or so CRM firms who have not yet done so would step up and
join ACRA, and if more of the 7000 or so qualified archaeologists out there
would actually Register as Professional Archaeologists then we would have
greater ability to effect change. And please don't tell me that you don't join
these organizations because they aren't perfect. Of course they aren't. But I
know from personal experience over many years that they are filled with
dedicated, effective and collegial individuals who care about all aspects of
what we do.
Next week ACRA will hold its annual conference in Washington D.C. This is going
to significantly enhance the profile of CRM at the national level. Through
visits to numerous congressional offices and a formal Congressional Reception,
combined with our already extensively distributed informational handout (go to
http://acra-crm.org/associations/9221/files/ACRA%20Handout%20FINAL-revis4.pdf
<http://acra-crm.org/associations/9221/files/ACRA%20Handout%20FINAL-revis4.pdf>
to view this) ACRA is seeking to communicate to Congress what the CRM industry
is all about and why it is important. Non-ACRA members? You are welcome, but
we'd really like your help too.
Ian Burrow, Ph.D., RPA
Vice President, Government Relations
American Cultural Resources Association (www.acra-crm.org)
On October 5, 2013 at 12:45 PM Jim <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Not that this discussion isn't interesting and, for non-business owners
> illuminating, it still veers away from the original point which is the
> indecently low rates paid archaeological technicians. What I am looking for
> are ideas on how we may push the rates upward, immediately, significantly, and
> continuously. I think we will find that we all will benefit financially and in
> terms of prestige.
>
> As a matter of related interest, land surveyors have been dealing with these
> issues, facing the same questions of who is a professional, what does it take
> to be a professional, and what does that mean in terms of compensation and
> esteem. Our archaeological technicians share much with land survey
> technicians, except our folks tend to have four year degrees: both groups do
> the brunt of the work, often deal with adverse weather and other hazzards, and
> are poorly compesated for the work that they do.
>
>
> James G. Gibb
>
> Gibb Archaeological Consulting
>
> 2554 Carrollton Road
>
> Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
>
> 443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
>
> www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
>
> On 10/04/13, stephanie cole<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> thanks Scott this makes the process a little more clear. I do see a need for
> not allowing a "anything goes" attitude. So it is the profit margin of the
> project that is regulated not the actual pay for the employee? Hope everyone
> has a great weekend :)Â
> Stephanie Cole, MA, RPA
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Speal, Charles S" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2013 3:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Pay rates
>
>
> State and Federal govts provide a minimum wage, they do not tell you how much
> to pay your field techs. Perhaps California is somewhat different , I hear
> things are pretty crazy out there.
>
> And governments do typically place a cap on profits that can be claimed under
> the contracts they issue, for good reason. Here in Connecticut (at least under
> the state DOT) it is 10%, not 3.
>
> These kinds rules apply to most government contracts, not just CRM firms. And
> such firms line up to get access to those govt contracts, because they end up
> being quite lucrative (at least for those in management). I've known a number
> of people to get quite rich in some parts of the country on their access to
> govt CRM contracts.
>
> The sky is not falling on small business owners, unless they are mismanaging,
> and no the state and local governments are not eliminating 'free-market' for
> the CRM industry. Despite what some factions might suggest.
>
> Scott Speal
> National Register Specialist
> ConnDOT
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of stephanie
> cole
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 4:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Pay rates
>
> Ok so I am showing my ignorance here but........are you saying that state and
> federal govt. says how much you are allowed to pay employees and how much
> profit you can make? Is this "free market"? I don't have much business
> training but this doesn't sound right. Is this just for archaeology or
> research firms or all small businesses? Wow I had no idea maybe we as a group
> need to start trying to change these rules so that we may all be able to
> better pay our bills and keep our businesses open.
>
> Stephanie Cole, MA, RPA
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2013 1:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Pay rates
>
>
> I may be a bit late in my response, as I've been out in the field and just
> returned. Lucy, you are right on! I'm an owner of a small California-based
> firm and face the same challenges and experiences that you related. We are
> regularly audited, our overhead is based on state-mandated formulas, and often
> the state contracts (and some feds) only allow a 3% profit, if that. Some
> days (months, years!) I think I make about a quarter per hour after we pay all
> the bills, salaries, medical and dental, retirement, etc. for our employees.Â
> On federal jobs we must pay federal prevailing wage (in some places it runs
> close to $25/hr for techs). On state or private contracts we pay equal or
> above our competitors in order to find good techs and keep up our qualify of
> work. Also, don't forget that many of us CRM managers and owners worked as
> techs in our early careers and remember that low wage/uncertainty that goes
> with the tech life. Speaking for my
> company (and many others I know of), we aren't really out to underpay, take
> advantage, or abuse techs. If we did, news would travel fast in our small
> world and we couldn't get anyone to work for us.
>
> On top of all that, we are also a woman-owned business (underutilized business
> enterprise, small business, etc). That means we have more audits, must submit
> all financial records, fill out that half-inch or more of paperwork every year
> to maintain our woman-owned status. and we are regulated out the wazoo! Some
> days it seem like all my time goes to filling out paperwork for the state and
> feds related to operating and maintaining a business.
>
> So why do it? We started our business for love of what we do and lack of jobs
> in the public federal or state arena due to freezes, no federal money, etc. I
> found that in a CRM environment I have flexibility to work in new areas,
> travel, do cool research, develop public interpretation programs and learn.Â
> It keeps my interest, is challenging, and fulfilling.
>
> Mary Maniery,
> PAR Environmental Services
> business owner since 1982 (yikes!!!).
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucy Wayne <[log in to unmask]>
> To: HISTARCH <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sun, Sep 29, 2013 10:45 am
> Subject: Re: Pay rates
>
>
> Hi All--
>
> I have tried to resist chiming in on this subject, but foolishly I'm giving
> in with the full expectation of being slammed.
>
> First, I fully and completely agree that archaeologists in general are
> poorly paid and unappreciated. Commercial archaeology is a cutthroat
> industry rife with low ball bids which directly affect what we pay people.
> I also fully agree interns should be paid--the few interns we have had in
> 25 years have been put on the payroll--admittedly at the bottom of our pay
> scale.
>
> But I also think there are some misconceptions out there about how the
> business end of cultural resources works. First, there's the "huge"
> overhead rates. CRM firms are routinely subject to audits by state and
> federal agencies which require that every penny that comes into the
> business and every penny that goes out must be thoroughly explained and
> justified. In addition, there's the IRS. Even a small firm like ours
> submits at least a 1/2-inch of paper every year, again justifying every
> penny in and out. Overhead rates are set based on the figures provided in
> audits and tax reports, therefore they are strictly limited by what can be
> justified. And clients will argue with those rates and demand
> reductions--some government agencies specify up front what the overhead
> limits are. Overhead is what pays for: the space we work in, the
> utilities, the equipment, the supplies, liability and workers comp
> insurance (huge--both of them), the company match for social security and
> medicare, vehicles, any benefits we provide (match for health insurance,
> ira or pension plans), but most important and most expensive--all manhours
> not spent on project time. That includes holidays, sick time, personal
> time, vacation time, secretarial/accounting services, marketing time, and
> we-have-no-work-but-want-to-keep-you-on-the-payroll time.
>
> Second, there's profit. Again--audited with clients regularly quibbling
> over it. For most firms, profit is calculated at 10% of the project cost.
> And no, it does not go directly into owners' pockets. Profit pays for
> employee bonuses (we have given them every year, even when things are
> tough), employee training, attendance at conferences and meetings,
> charitable contributions (yes, I know they are tax deductible, but they
> don't happen if there are no profits), periodic lunches or other food
> treats for employees, etc. In addition, profit only happens when the
> project is successfully completed within the contracted budget
> amount--often not the case.
>
> Third, there's the matter of owner/management salaries. Someone said these
> salaries are 10X those of workers. I wish! Look at the biannual ACRA
> salary survey (which includes academics and agencies) to get a more
> realistic idea. We are not paid the type of salaries that engineers and
> planners and architects make. A lot of us in private industry don't even
> make what federal and academic archaeologists earn. And when business is
> bad--as it has been many of the past 5 years, we often have severely
> reduced salaries, if any--particularly if we own the business. Our feeling
> at our company is that if we have to give up our own salaries to keep the
> doors open, then that's what we do. And I know a lot of other CRM firms
> where the upper management has had only partial salaries throughout this
> tough economic era. I've spent a dozen years heavily involved with ACRA,
> and I do not know anyone in ACRA who has gotten rich through the CRM
> industry.
>
> So why do it? It does give us the opportunity to be involved in the most
> active area of archaeology and occasionally to work on some really cool
> projects and do some real research--as well as sometimes save a valuable
> resource. And where else are we going to get an archaeology job? Or an
> architectural history job for that matter. There are few academic and
> agency jobs out there every year.
>
> But the bottom line is that it is not just the field and lab archaeologists
> who are underpaid and under appreciated. It goes all the way through our
> field. Look at Florida's governor--who infamously said we don't need any
> more anthropologists (even though his daughter has that degree--or maybe
> because?). And compare the salary of an archaeologist with an MA or Ph.D.
> to any engineer, architect or environmental professional. We're way, way
> below them in salary.
>
> I apologize for the rant and the lecture. Bring on the attacks--I'll just
> stop opening my email for a week or two :-).
>
> Lucy Wayne
> SouthArc, Inc.
>
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jim <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Â Tobias:
> > I've been running my own archaeological consulting business for about 25
> > years.
> > Pay rates influence the costs of a project; however, mark up (or
> > multiplier, or overhead and profit, or whatever term we use to distinguish
> > the direct cost of labor from all of the other costs) has the greatest
> > influence. If we charge 200% on salaries...pay labor a certain amount, but
> > charge clients twice that amount...we have a price for the project. If we
> > think that price is not competitive, the inclination is to keep the
> > multiplier but reduce the pay rate. In short, the people who do the work
> > get less rather than the employer taking less. Or so goes the calculation.
> > In fact, the more we charge for labor, the more we make. The limiting
> > factor is the market where competitors will cut rates of labor (but not
> > necessarily of overhead and profit) to win contracts. What we need are
> > commitments, backed by ethical considerations, to fair wages that insure
> > that we pay technicians their value, based on education and skill and
> > experience, but also on what they contribute to the financ
> >Â ial success of a project. I've cited some hourly and annual rates in
> > previous postings that do not translate well outside of the USA and that
> > require some adjustment in this country to account for regional differences
> > in cost of living. So I'll put it this way: the typical rates paid
> > technicians in the USA are about 50% higher than a high school graduate
> > without any higher education can make in a retail shop or restaurant.
> >
> > I'm not advocating a socialist approach to the business of
> > archaeology--although I'm more than willing to discuss the
> > possibility--just fair and ethical treatment of the workers without whom
> > there would be no business of archaeology. Treating these folks like
> > professionals also raises the stature of the entire field, which will help
> > when professional organizations promote legislation and establish higher
> > standards of ethics and practice.
> >
> > In the United States, there is a great deal of resistance--well, open
> > hostility--to government interference in private business, the assumption
> > being that the invisible hand of the market will make whatever adjustments
> > are necessary. If that same hand smacks labor in the face, so be it. In the
> > USA, the commitment has to come from the businesses themselves. In a way,
> > that's great because the private sector should not move at the glacial pace
> > at which government typically works. However, our field's attempts in the
> > USA to correct unfairness in offering internships and in paying fair wages
> > has matched government in the slow pace in which it has taken up these
> > issues and in which it has been correcting them. Let's hope for better in
> > Brazil and elsewhere around the world.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> >
> > James G. Gibb
> >
> > Gibb Archaeological Consulting
> >
> > 2554 Carrollton Road
> >
> > Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
> >
> > 443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
> >
> > www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
> >
> > On 09/28/13, Tobias Vilhena<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Carol and Jim!
> >
> > In BRazil, during the last 15 years, the archaeologists have been trying
> > to get the legal recognition of Archaeology as a profession.
> >
> > Nowadays, IPHAN is the public administration (linked to the Culture
> > Ministery) responsible to approve and manage (surveil) any kind of research
> > related to archaeology: 'scientific archaeology' or commercial archaeology
> > ('contract archaeology', is the term that is currently used here). As a
> > public institute IPHAN can not tell how much a work cost, and essentially
> > say if a work is well done or not and what you have to do to correct it.
> >
> > According to the national recommendations to excavate any place you have
> > to be an archaeologist. To proove that you have to show if you get a
> > Graduation or Master Degree or PHd in Archaeology. Therefore, most of the
> > archaeologists (even the technicians) in my country has an acadhemical
> > background.
> >
> >
> > Therefore, It depends on the complexity of your excavation to know how
> > much will cost your work. And the archaeologists have to negotiate that
> > subject directly with the entrepreneurs.Â
> >
> > In short, as we do not have a federal regulation on that nor a federal
> > cost table, frequently is really complicated to the entrepreneurs to
> > measure the distance of a good work and its financial cost.
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Tobias Vilhena
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >Â De: Carol McDavid <[log in to unmask]>
> > Para: 'Tobias Vilhena' <[log in to unmask]>; [log in to unmask]
> > Enviadas: Sexta-feira, 27 deSetembrode 2013 15:00
> > Assunto: RE: Pay rates
> >
> >
> > I suppose that answers my question!
> >
> > Tobias, the conversation is about pay rates for field technicians
> > (excavators) working for commercial archaeology firms here in the USA. I
> > was curious what sort of pay issues might be of concern to people outside
> > the US who are also working in commercial archaeology.
> >
> > Not sure if this was part of your question, but in case it is --- RPA is
> > the "Register of Professional Archaeologists" (http://www.rpanet.org/ )
> > and ACRA is the "American Cultural Resources Association" (
> > http://acra-crm.org/ ).
> >
> > I answered your query because it was addressed to me, but I am sure that
> > other listmembers will be able to put this conversation in a wider global
> > context better than I.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Carol
> > *****************************
> > Carol McDavid, Ph.D.
> > Executive Director, Community Archaeology Research Institute, Inc.
> > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Rice University
> > Secretary, Society for Historical Archaeology
> > Co-editor, Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage (
> > http://www.maneypublishing.com/journals/cah)
> > 1638 Branard
> > Houston, TX 77006
> > www.publicarchaeology.org
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> > Tobias Vilhena
> > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 12:31 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Pay rates
> >
> > Hi Carol !
> >
> > I'm an archaeologist from Brazil (working at IPHAN) and some parts of this
> > conversation are very difficult to understand. It will be very interesting
> > if someone could explain about this subject...
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Tobias
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > De: Carol McDavid <[log in to unmask]>
> > Para: [log in to unmask]
> > Enviadas: Quinta-feira, 26 deSetembrode 2013 17:31
> > Assunto: Re: Pay rates
> >
> >
> > Well done, Jim, for putting your money where your mouth is! I applaud your
> > willingness to commit now to raising your workers' salaries, and to noting
> > that part of the problem has to do with the overhead and profit rates
> > charged on salaries.
> >
> > With respect to Ian's comment in an earlier email, which advocated that we:
> >
> > Â Â Â Â "Lobby to get RPA declared a requirement for Principal
> > Investigators working on Federal and State reviewed projects, and expect
> > RPA to discipline or expel those who violate the standards that they have
> > undertaken to uphold."
> >
> > Perhaps if the latter part of the sentence was more true (and if the
> > "standards" included best practices for pay and benefits), the first part
> > of the sentence would make some sense. Until then, I will not support the
> > idea that everyone has to join RPA to work as a PI. We probably do need
> > some sort of vetting process to push overall salaries up (as I noted in an
> > earlier comment about how architects and engineers are licensed). But right
> > now, RPA is not adequate for that task.
> >
> > My two pence (speaking of pence…how does this conversation translate to
> > overseas contexts?).
> >
> > Carol
> >
> > *****************************
> > Carol McDavid, Ph.D.
> > Executive Director, Community Archaeology Research Institute, Inc.
> > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Rice University
> > Secretary, Society for Historical Archaeology
> > Co-editor, Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage (
> > http://www.maneypublishing.com/journals/cah)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jim
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:17 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Pay rates
> >
> > Ed,
> > I don't wholly agree. Unfortunately, I can't wholly disagree.
> > Like you, I've been at this awhile. Seems to me the real costs are in:
> > (1) Number of technician and lower management hours, more than the rate
> > for those hours, an investigator estimates will be necessary to meet the
> > requirements of a particular phase of work on a particular project;
> > (2) The overhead and profit rates charged on salaries;
> > (3) The number of upper management hours and rates; and
> > (4) The number of upper management hours devoted to tasks related to
> > working with agencies and clients...meetings that are unnecessary and
> > contribute little or nothing to the efficacy of the study.
> >
> > I don't pretend to have all the answers, but commitments to paying higher
> > rates will benefit all. Reigning in profit and upper management rates that
> > are 10X those of the people who actually do the work will help reduce the
> > impact of sharp increases in technician rates. Serious efforts at promoting
> > career development for technicians and mid-level staff also can be done
> > inexpensively and, in the long run, worth more than marginal increases in
> > salary and greatly enhance the value of more significant raises.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> >
> > James G. Gibb
> >
> > Gibb Archaeological Consulting
> >
> > 2554 Carrollton Road
> >
> > Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
> >
> > 443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
> >
> > www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
> >
> > On 09/25/13, Ed Otter<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Crm has always been a race to the bottom. Cheapest guy wins the work. Pay
> > less. Do minimal work. Cut any corner possible like hiring "consultants" to
> > avoid social security, unemployment tax and workers comp. If the people
> > bidding for work value our own profession so little we will never be able
> > raise our pay rates.
> >
> > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
> >
> > Jim <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > >Fellow HistArchers:
> > >A friend alerted me to DougsArchaeology postings on pay rates.:
> > >
> > >
> > http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/how-much-archaeologists-make-usa-2012-fieldlab-tech/
> > >
> > > http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/archaeology-job-conditions-us/
> > >
> > > As I understand it, his numbers derive from posted job listings in 2011
> > and 2012. While subject to a variety of biases, those numbers approximate
> > what I think most technicians experience: a wide range, but generally in
> > the range of $13 to $15 per hour. California's rates, although possibly a
> > little higher, aren't that far above the newly enacted minimum wage rate of
> > $10 (still not close to a living wage).
> > >
> > >Ethically and practically, we need to change this situation. Hardworking,
> > talented archaeology technicians should earn salaries commensurate with
> > their education and the value that they bring to commercial projects. It is
> > the right thing to do and it will help insure a talented pool of
> > individuals are prepared to meet the demands of the industry.
> > >
> > >I'm committing to an increase from $150/ 8-hour day (including at least
> > half the travel time for field projects) to $160/day for all projects
> > awarded after December 1, 2013. If I have projects, I expect a raise to
> > $200 per day beginning January 1, 2015. For those already paying
> > technicians at these levels, great...keep pushing them higher. For those
> > who don't, please make the commitment to improve rates in your region.
> > Education is only one measure of the esteem in which we and others hold our
> > field: levels of compensation and a sincere regard for the health and
> > welfare of our assistants, backed by action, are equally important.
> > >
> > >Jim
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >James G. Gibb
> > >
> > >Gibb Archaeological Consulting
> > >
> > >2554 Carrollton Road
> > >
> > >Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
> > >
> > >443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
> > >
> > >www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Vice President
> SouthArc, Inc.
> 3700 NW 91st Street, Suite D300
> Gainesville, FL 32606
> (352)372-2633, fax (352)378-3931, toll free 1-888-707-2721
> www.southarc.com
|
