I was interested to see Vicky's posting yesterday which had actually made me think I should contact the Society directly about this issue, so I was pleased also to see Jenny's message today and the subsequent postings in response, and these have prompted me to write to the list instead.
My thoughts on this are in a personal capacity but are informed by my experience at my current employers, RSA, where we employ a graduate Archive and Records Management Trainee on a fixed-term one year post prior to their applying for one of the postgraduate archives and records management courses. I certainly want to echo Jenny's appreciation of para-professionals - particularly in the context of a small archives team, perhaps with only one professional archivist in post, it is inevitable that a trainee or archives assistant will have to assume a considerable amount of responsibility. From my own time here, I can vouch for how very capable, committed and responsible our trainees have been.
Vicky asked specifically about a minimum salary that the Society is prepared to accept for advertisements for pre-course posts, and Peter has addressed this. I can see his points about the difficulty of definining precisely the responsibilities and skillsets of a trainee or archives assistant post and the Society lacking direct power; however, surely we could at least, as Victoria has suggested, provide guidance as to the likely range of responsibilities and skillsets, and recommendations as to appropriate salary? This is the approach that CILIP, for example, adopts, where a salary range is recommended for para-professionals, as well as for professionals in different circumstances, and differentiation is made by employment sector (commercial or not for profit) (see http://www.cilip.org.uk/jobscareers/salaries/salaryguides/slss.htm).
I would also argue that the issue of appropriate salaries for para-professionals cannot be adequately addressed in isolation from that of those for professionals, and in that respect I have to say that the Society's minimum salary recommendation is of very limited utility not least because it is based on local government pay scales. The majority of the profession does not work in this sector, and I have considerable problems with the idea that what local government pays its archivists can or should in any way be taken as a model for the rest of us. Of course, as Peter says, employers can decide what any particular post is worth, and, of course, that does indeed lead to substantial variations for posts, but surely the fact that we can't actually control all this doesn't mean that we never have any influence and should give up on trying to make a positive difference?
Liz's e-mail pointing up the realities of the processes of salary evaluation in the local authority sector reinforces how a 'one size fits all' approach to the issue of appropriate salaries is neither useful or workable. As things stand, all the Society can provide for anybody who enquires about what they should be paying - and employers are sometimes genuinely in need of advice and not in a position to know what any particular post is 'worth' - is the minimum salary recommendation. How does this help, say, a business, based in London and currently employing no records professionals which has decided it needs a qualified records manager with several years experience, and wants to know roughly what it should advertise at to ensure a good quantity and quality of applicants? The Society's minimum recommendation is so far below the 'going rate' as to be meaningless; they would certainly receive no appropriate applicants at that level or anything like it. I also think the concept of 'worth' needs unpicking. At the risk of sounding idealistic and/or naive, it is still the case that not all organisations - and perhaps sometimes more pertinently, not all individuals with clout within organisations - operate entirely on the basis that they want to pay their employees simply the minimum they feel they can get away with to fill the post; these might also benefit from Society guidance indicating what they ought to be paying, rather than just what they can.
The answer must be for the Society to provide more detailed advice and guidance, grounded in research, and covering different employment sectors, different parts of the profession (including conservators and conservation assistants!) and different career stages, and factoring in other variables such as geographical locations of posts. This is indeed, as Peter, suggests, difficult ground, but surely recommendations need to be both informed by market realities and a sense of value derived from skillsets, responsibilities and contribution to the organisation, set out, if inevitably in absolute terms imprecisely, nevertheless in as much detail and with as much precision as is possible.
This isn't meant as a rant, and I hope has not come across as one. I am aware it would represent a great deal of work (although it need not and should not be done in isolation, and Lifelong Learning UK, for example, has already done relevant work around skillsets and competences) and that the Society has a great deal else to be doing, but issues around pay, progress and development, and entrance to the profession - and placing those within a broader context, defining and advocating what we do - are absolutely at the core of why it exists. I feel they need to be given priority attention.
Rob Baker
(Head of Archive and Library, RSA, but in a personal capacity)
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Emmerson
Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2008 17:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Lets hear it for archive assistants
There really is no easy answer to this. As Liz says, evaluation schemes evaluate the post, based on characteristics, responsibilities, required education, skills and competencies. They don't look at the individual in the post except insofar as they are the person who has completed the JE questionnaire or interview. Additional knowledge and skills which enable the post holder to do the job better have to be rewarded in other ways - performance related bonuses for example.
For the Society to set a minimum salary would require a precise and agreed set of tasks for a standard role along with a definition of education, skills and competencies required to fulfil the role effectively. In setting a minimum for 'qualified' posts, it has the pg qualification as a benchmark. However, it's only direct power is to decline recruitment ads which don't provide for the minimum. It's still up to individual employers to decide what any particular post is worth. This leads to substantial variations even for 'qualified' posts both inside and outside local government.
I think it's important not to conflate the pre-course traineeship issue with that of archive assistants. Having established one of the first such traineeships, we were able to stress that the person recruited would need to be a graduate and that the company had a minimum salary for graduate trainees. They were being paid a real salary for a real job.
This only partly in a personal capacity, rather than as chair of the Society!
Peter Emmerson
Director
Emmerson Consulting Limited
Poplar House
5 School Street
Witton-Le-Wear
County Durham DL14 0AS
Office 01388 488865
Mobile 07516 744795
This e-mail message is confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Emmerson Consulting Limited is registered in England No. 3607347.
Registered Office: 140 Coniscliffe Road, Darlington, County Durham, DL3 7RT
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for RSA by Messagelabs. ______________________________________________________________________
The RSA combines thought leadership with social innovation to further human progress. Building on our 250 year history as a beacon for enlightenment values, we undertake influential and varied research projects and host the UK’s most ambitious free lecture series. Our work is supported by 27,000 Fellows, an international network of influencers and innovators from every field and background.
To find out more visit our website here - http://www.theRSA.org
Registered as a charity in England and Wales no. 212424 and in Scotland no. SC037784
To see our standard legal disclaimer click here - www.thersa.org/rsa/email_disclaimer.asp
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
|
