JISCMail - GEM Archives

There will never be any useful discussion on GEM if people are attacked in such a personal manner and organisations spoken about in such a way. Before calling people 'Tory's' perhaps you should get your facts straight and as Dean Veall helpfully pointed out in a previous comment look at the exceptional work carried out by some of the organisations in question. He already sited the extensive community and youth programming of the Geffrye and LTM - their approach to diversity (in the broadest sense: gender, class, ethnicity, sexuality, ability) is achieved through a multitude of avenues. The BM (and others) are also doing fab work around youth participation, community engagement, and learning and have often led from the front. Surely young people on some of these programmes who are perhaps less academic than our sector usually requires are asking how do we get in without going to uni? The answer is with great great difficulty. Look at the backlash the Museum of London got when organising a careers day precisely to try and attract young people to the variety of diferent career paths in our sector! We all know that in the past the only jobs available to young people with out 2 degrees was in attending/security and it is unusual for that to lead into other areas of our work. Where as starting out in this type of role just might, as the experience gained will help them take those next steps.

The backlash against those advertising roles on GEM are frequent and unpleasant -and usually ignore the details. EG freelance v consultancy and also ignore the very difficult finanical pressures we face. The attacks are too personal in nature as if the people creating these jobs are faceless, not our peers, have no feelings, are seeking to exploit, don't care about fair pay and wages, don't care about diversity, don't care about people - does that typically describe your colleagues working in museum education? I think not.

I do not think they are advocating for poor pay, they are paying within the structures available to them as much as they can, the alternative may be no jobs and get a volunteer in! (and before I get attacked for that comment I am very pro volunteers in museums as when done well is a way for communities to have a greater stake in our organisations). You have to remember that the nationals have had a 15% cut to funding, Renaissance is up in the air, there are pay freezes, attacks on pensions etc, and whilst it should not be a race to the bottom they are providing an alternative to the Aldi jobs - eg an opportunity to work somewhere beautiful, do something fun, do it part time, and get paid whilst gaining new experiences...

I do think the diversity argument is a valid one. Some people can not afford to volunteer. Some people will leave school with few qualifications and little experience and would very much value a 'starter' role of this nature.Some people will never go to uni, will never be academically able to go and will never have thought of going to uni, may have failed at school but may have great people skills and energy. It is these people that will help 'diversify' (in the broadest sense) eg are we saying only those who have a couple of degrees can work in anything other than security in our museums? Whilst I do not want to denegrate the work of our security colleagues - this is an opportunity to break out of the traditional division of labour in the sector. Many people can not afford to pay for uni and the 2 degrees required for the professional roles in our sector. I know from talking to school leavers that they can't even get the jobs in Aldi -can't even get an interview - an opportunity to take on a casual job in a museum may just be the catalyst for change. These are the very people it seems that the museums advertising the roles probably had in mind, especially those not located in Bloomsbury. They are providing opportunities when the rest of society has decided they are destined for the doll queue.

I do not think that paying some one above the minimum wage to do an unskilled role, that requires little or no experience is exploitative. Whilst it is laudable for Boris to promote the living wage in London - it is he and his Tory colleagues that are stripping back the public sector and driving down terms and conditions, in order to pay the living wage you have to fund organisations to be able to in the first place.

Lastly pay is not the only way to value an employee. Yes we have to pay our bills but training opportunities, a positive and supportive and stimulating environment, interesting work, good colleagues, thanks and praise, response from the public etc, all go a long way too - as I am sure we all - at what ever level in the museum world we are, know only too well...

I am sure those, BM et al will continue to argue behind the scenes to try and get the wages up to or close to the living wage for London and will continue to look at the jds/person specs to ensure they are substantially different to those of the professional staff and freelancers. I bet they won't make the mistake of advertising on GEM though! and I bet the quality of discussion on GEM will be less open as people live in fear of being ostracised. Those defending the BM wrote phrases such as 'sticking my head above the parrapet' - I bet this wish they hadn't!