+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: IFA RO only as approved contractors (/showthread.php?tid=4146)
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Oxbeast - 29th November 2011
@P Prentice, I've never seen a Credit Default Swap, but I am prepared to believe it its existance.
IFA RO only as approved contractors - BAJR - 29th November 2011
Indeed - one = who will remain nameless for now - when called up after an email request for clarification said the following. " Oh dear, our hearts sank when we read the email - I knew you would call. We will give you a reply as soon as I can discuss this more" - that was over a week ago
I have emailed again asking for further clarification - and yes, the IfA and the Curators are reading this - I know this again from talks with curators.
Let me be absolutely clear. I have no issue with RO status being seen as a kitemark and something a client can take into consideration when choosing who to carry out their work. I have no issue with a method for policing and utilisation of IfA Standards I also think ther should be a way to ensure quality. WHat I did mind was what was essentially an attempt to snuff out those who are not ROs - NOT on quality but on membership THats the bottom line for me.
Can you do the job? If the answer is yes, then don't be barred.:face-huh:
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Wax - 29th November 2011
BAJR Wrote:I have no issue with RO status being seen as a kitemark and something a client can take into consideration when choosing who to carry out their work. I have no issue with a method for policing and utilisation of IfA Standards I also think ther should be a way to ensure quality. WHat I did mind was what was essentially an attempt to snuff out those who are not ROs - NOT on quality but on membership THats the bottom line for me.
Can you do the job? If the answer is yes, then don't be barred.:face-huh:
Well said BAJR and come on you curators out there who were willing to go along with restrictions to ROs only, stand up and justify it to the rest of us If you really belive it is the only way forward then what have you to fear. I am open to a good reasoned argument but I above all I want to see fair play.
IFA RO only as approved contractors - P Prentice - 30th November 2011
Marcus Brody Wrote:Or it's just a bit of 'Field of Dreams', if-you-build-it-they-will-come style posturing by the IfA and its apologists, trying to present paid-for legal opinion as established fact. BAJR says that he can vouch for the fact that there were/are/was curators looking at adopting this policy, but none of them seem to be keen to publicise their decision, which suggests that they're not entirely confident in it.
is someone writing your jokes for you marcus? ifa apologists made me fall of my chair
'field of dreams' though - terrible metaphor
@ oxbeast - CDS?
IFA RO only as approved contractors - BAJR - 30th November 2011
So there we have it I think.
Can we also keep the snarking to a minimum.
It is too easy to get into a IfA and Proud / I'll never join that shower discussion. Which although interesting is non constructive.
Here is the bottom line. It became apparent that some Curatorial Service were edging towards RO only commercial archaeology ---- This is based on legal advice and suggestion from the IfA ------ I have asked some of these curatorial services to confirm. This has result in a nobody wanting to say so ---- Keep the standards keep the ROs keep the curatorial power of policing the reports (and the WSIs of course ) Keep the good archaeologists.
Equality and fair play. Not coercive threat. I could be an RO but convince me why I should be rather than suggest that if I am not I won't be able to work.
So... Can anyone convince me to become an RO --- seriously - if you can, I will. Out of choice and reason. BAJR the RO... sounds like a damaged kangaroo the BAJRroo
So lets get away from the negative talk, and put some positive words out there. Benefits of RO status please.
:face-approve:
IFA RO only as approved contractors - P Prentice - 30th November 2011
bajr of the ro
some of us are tolerable diggers, some of us may even be good archaeologists; some of us will leave a legacy of excavation reports and some of us will have inspired a few others in the process. many more of us work in the sector for dramatically little reward and even less credit, but in future years, perhaps they already do, students will write papers on the significance and impact of bajr. have no doubt that any such starry-eyed acolytes will too easily recognise the enormous effort and commitment, the tireless and boundless enthusiasm, and the groundbreaking tangents from the everyday and mundane, that dear bajr can rightly feel proud – my hat is off to you bajr.
but why?, they will ask, why did it take this man of vision so long to see that the profession lacked professional status, lacked professional credibility, and professional remuneration? why did he stand so long with his back to the future? (couldn’t resist the bad film reference for marcus) and why would he not see that the great unwashed could not afford to study archaeology if they saddled themselves with an unrepayable loan? archaeology for all - indeed
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Jack - 30th November 2011
An institutional accreditation is only as good as the system of accreditation.
If no RO's did bad work I would be pushing for all to join.
IFA RO only as approved contractors - P Prentice - 30th November 2011
Jack Wrote:An institutional accreditation is only as good as the system of accreditation.
If no RO's did bad work I would be pushing for all to join.
so if all us good ones join we can kick the bad ones out - simples
IFA RO only as approved contractors - moreno - 30th November 2011
Red Earth, Wax and BAJR (et. al) have pretty much summed it up. I share their current feelings on the subject. I have no issue with being held to a "standard". I expect it. Based on the positive feedback regarding work, results with contrators and LPA's, I already consider myself a professional archaeologist. It is my choice to be independent. Until I am convinced there is a more concrete policy of fairness and openess from within the IFA (I'm not referring to the subsiduary groups within the IFA) regarding non RAO's and independents I will remain independent (non member).
I'm certainly not interested in the snide and snarky.
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Marcus Brody - 30th November 2011
I, however, am all about the snide and snarky!
P Prentice Wrote:is someone writing your jokes for you marcus? ifa apologists made me fall of my chair
'field of dreams' though - terrible metaphor
Once again, PP, I'm not sure whether you're insulting me here or not - you must be an ace at poker.
P Prentice Wrote:why did he stand so long with his back to the future? (couldn?t resist the bad film reference for marcus)
I'm not having that - field of dreams may be rubbish, but back to the future is surely a work of towering genius!