> The Park Service archaeologists need to be government employees for the
> simple reason that the archaeological resources they are protecting are
> on government property.

that doesn't really make any sense one way or the other, surely? There are
many government resources which are overseen and run very efficiently to
high standards by private contractors or work undertaken by private
consultants, usually (and hopefully) with greater cost savings.

I'm still not clear, when it is government policy to privatize suitable jobs
and reduce the size of government, what exactly the arguments in this case
are for keeping the Park Service archaeologists as government employees -
other than the broad general arguments against any kind of privatization of
"government work"?

tim

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).