The signs that little is going to change the face of the next generation of the museum workforce were reinforced at the highly successful Moving On Up conference for entry-level professionals that took place in Leicester last month.
Having run an annual conference each year, which tended to attract the managerial tier, the Museums Association recognised an important segment falling through the net, unable to attend because of, well, basically money.
So the reasonably priced new entrants conference attracted the 20- and 30-somethings, as well as a sizeable career-changing contingent. The tone over the two days was pitch perfect - informal, informative, with a bit of soul-searching thrown in - it revealed the hot topics, provided space to debate, and gave time for self-analysis.
But the lack of brown faces among those plumping for a museum career was evident. You could count them on one hand. This really isn't good enough - but I admit there is no easy solution.
Diversify schemes have been a good start but haven't made enough of a dent or a difference. Some of the speakers acknowledged that the sector wasn't doing particularly well at diversifying the workforce.
Among the delegates I spoke to there was agreement that the issue isn't one of colour but one of class - and many thought the sector myopic for failing to tackle this head on. The fact that you have to be qualified up to the eyeballs to even get a foot in the door can't help matters. Nor do the abysmal salaries offered post-qualification.
The best way to make a difference, many people thought, was to place more emphasis on relevant experience gained outside of museums and to offer more on-the-job training. Could apprenticeship schemes be the way to go?
But that doesn't tackle the salary problem. At the moment, a second income or an inheritance is what you need to stay in a museum job. And it is this that will prolong the elitist tone that still prevails in museums.
Having run an annual conference each year, which tended to attract the managerial tier, the Museums Association recognised an important segment falling through the net, unable to attend because of, well, basically money.
So the reasonably priced new entrants conference attracted the 20- and 30-somethings, as well as a sizeable career-changing contingent. The tone over the two days was pitch perfect - informal, informative, with a bit of soul-searching thrown in - it revealed the hot topics, provided space to debate, and gave time for self-analysis.
But the lack of brown faces among those plumping for a museum career was evident. You could count them on one hand. This really isn't good enough - but I admit there is no easy solution.
Diversify schemes have been a good start but haven't made enough of a dent or a difference. Some of the speakers acknowledged that the sector wasn't doing particularly well at diversifying the workforce.
Among the delegates I spoke to there was agreement that the issue isn't one of colour but one of class - and many thought the sector myopic for failing to tackle this head on. The fact that you have to be qualified up to the eyeballs to even get a foot in the door can't help matters. Nor do the abysmal salaries offered post-qualification.
The best way to make a difference, many people thought, was to place more emphasis on relevant experience gained outside of museums and to offer more on-the-job training. Could apprenticeship schemes be the way to go?
But that doesn't tackle the salary problem. At the moment, a second income or an inheritance is what you need to stay in a museum job. And it is this that will prolong the elitist tone that still prevails in museums.
