Longleat Safari & Adventure Park Staff Over-65 Forced to Retire

[Zambar]

Other threads may have highlighted the new bosses plans regarding the animal collection, but he's already making controversial staff pruning that made the BBC news homepage:

Longleat staff aged over 65 made to retire

EDIT: Mean't to be in the specific Longleat forum, so if a mod could do that it would be helpful. So people know what I'm talking about.

 

[Arizona Docent]

A similar situation happens at my zoo, which is a public city-owned zoo. Older city workers (whether they work at the zoo or any other city department) are not fired outright. They are given financial incentives to retire by 65 or even an earlier age. Basically, they get a better retirement/pension plan than if they work later in life. So as far as I know, everyone takes it - we have several long-time zoo employees who will be retiring early in the next couple years.

The reason, of course, is the city can hire young workers at a lower wage. As far as how it will affect the zoo (and perhaps any zoo that does this), I see both good and bad. The bad is that you lose a lot of experience and personal knowledge about specific animals that took years to acquire. The good is that zookeepers of that generation mostly did not have degrees while virtually every new keeper has to have a college science degree to get hired.

 

[Pertinax]

Other threads may have highlighted the new bosses plans regarding the animal collection, but he's already making controversial staff pruning that made the BBC news homepage:

I don't imagine there are any/many workers in the Safari Park in that advanced age group, whereas on the Longleat Estate itself there will be longterm Estate Workers, Longleat House staff e.g. Tour Guides etc to whom this is more likely to apply. Radio 2 also carried the story and said 'Longleat Safari Park' but I don't think that's quite correct.

 

[Steve Robinson]

Does this mean that the current loopy Marquis will also get the chop?

 

[Steve Robinson]

The good is that virtually every new keeper has to have a college science degree to get hired.

That's good????????

For a zoologist, yes.

But not for a zookeeper.

 

[EvilKittie]

That's good????????

For a zoologist, yes.

But not for a zookeeper.

Hey,

Most zoos in England require a degree in animal management (or related courses) for basic jobs. It's not good though

Cheers,
EK

 

[Satan]

Lord Bath isn't the one doing the firing. It's his son, the dooda of Weymouth. He has been running the estate since last year.

So all the headlines and news coverage in the UK is as per the norm inaccurate.

 

[Arizona Docent]

@ Steve Robinson and EvilKittie - Why is it not good to have well educated zookeepers?

 

[Steve Robinson]

I'm not saying that we don't need well educated zoo-keepers. I'm saying that we definitely don't need over educated zoo-keepers.

A zoo keeper is a carer. Their function is to do all those things for an animal that it can't do for itself - feed it, clean it, protect it from the elements, protect it from other animals, protect it from humans, watch over it for signs of illness, calm it at times of stress etc, etc, etc.

So, a good zoo keeper will be sensitive, have a good work ethic, be impervious to extremes of weather, will be able to put animals before self, will have good powers of observation, will not watch the clock etc.

None of these can be taught [nor are they taught] at university or college.

On the other hand, we find that students who complete three years [in Australia] of advanced education have the not unreasonable expectation that they will not have to start at the bottom of the ladder with a shovel and a rake. They, quite rightly, feel that their degree means that they are better qualified than their not so well educated colleagues and so don't have to perform all the tasks that I listed above.

It is my contention that, while these people have a role to play in the operation of zoos, they are not zoo KEEPERS.

 

[Pertinax]

Lord Bath isn't the one doing the firing. It's his son, the dooda of Weymouth. He has been running the estate since last year.

But if you read the article carefully it says a new Chief Executive has been 'running the attraction' (presumably the whole Longleat Estate?) since the Marquis stepped down. So maybe he was instrumental in this decision-making, though it would presumably also have had to be okayed by the current Viscount Weymouth.

I still doubt its very relevant to the Animal side of things though.

 

[EvilKittie]

@ Steve Robinson and EvilKittie - Why is it not good to have well educated zookeepers?

Sorry - wrong wording, it annoying for me as it harder to get into a basic job.

EK

 

[tetrapod]

I'm not saying that we don't need well educated zoo-keepers. I'm saying that we definitely don't need over educated zoo-keepers.

A zoo keeper is a carer. Their function is to do all those things for an animal that it can't do for itself - feed it, clean it, protect it from the elements, protect it from other animals, protect it from humans, watch over it for signs of illness, calm it at times of stress etc, etc, etc.

So, a good zoo keeper will be sensitive, have a good work ethic, be impervious to extremes of weather, will be able to put animals before self, will have good powers of observation, will not watch the clock etc.

None of these can be taught [nor are they taught] at university or college.

On the other hand, we find that students who complete three years [in Australia] of advanced education have the not unreasonable expectation that they will not have to start at the bottom of the ladder with a shovel and a rake. They, quite rightly, feel that their degree means that they are better qualified than their not so well educated colleagues and so don't have to perform all the tasks that I listed above.

It is my contention that, while these people have a role to play in the operation of zoos, they are not zoo KEEPERS.

I agree with the basics of your argument Steve, that university doesn't teach potential keepers the skills required and probably does give new keepers an inflated idea of their own worth, however I do think you are wrong that qualified biologists (depending on what you mean 'over-qualified) cannot make good zookeepers. Interested school-leavers are being encouraged both by governements and also zoos to get further educated before being considered for employment. Increasingly zoos have seen the advantages of employing keepers with a scientific background as the role of keepers has evolved with time. An example has been more involvement of keepers presenting the knowledge they have gleened through experience into print or at conferences.

Sometimes the problem stems from non-degree staff having a beef with those that have them. This can cause real issues when the non-degree staff are in charge and possibly feel that their position is threatened. I have seen cases of this bias in the UK.

It is just the same argument as employing female keepers. When I started in zoos there were about 5 female keepers out of 40, and when I finished in the industry it was rare to see a new male keeper. The reason was to do with lifting loads. The loads haven't changed but the attitude has.

I will also add the caveat that I firstly finished a degree and secondly employed in zoos. The hands-on approach is sometimes just in your blood.

 

[catinthehat]

What an interesting debate...I have to agree with tetrapod that a degree doesn't neccessarily make a good keeper, but it also isn;t a bad thing either, as I am sure there are many excellent keepers who have a degree and many who don't as well. I think this just higlights that a "good keeper" can encompass many things and that at the end of the day comes down to each individual's attributes as opposed to ticking all the boxes of an "ideal" keeper's qualities.