+- 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: Monitor scheme (/showthread.php?tid=59)
Monitor scheme - 1man1desk - 30th December 2005
The IFA have addressed that very point in their recent rule change. If you are concerned about potential career-limiting effects of reporting a breach, you can point it out to the IFA, who will investigate. If they think that the complaint holds water, they will then as one of their own staff to bring the formal complaint, without needing a 3rd party (you) to come forward publicly.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Monitor scheme - troll - 16th January 2006
And on a small site with an even smaller team, just how do the IFA think that this will protect the employment of the complainant? On the monitor front- why not have one delegated individual per site/unit who can be approached by their colleagues and who, in turn, will pass the complaints on to the IFA? Not rocket science. The monitors to be delegated by their colleagues.
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Monitor scheme - the invisible man - 17th January 2006
What's to stop you doing it? What actually is the difference? You get to choose who will never work again?
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
Monitor scheme - 1man1desk - 17th January 2006
If your fears about employment consequences are justified, just how long do you think your 'nominated individual' would stay in their job? Under this system, the original complainant is still making an anonymous complaint. Surely the IFA system, whereby that goes to someone outside the unit altogether and the unit only ever knows about the external complainant, provides better protection.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Monitor scheme - troll - 20th January 2006
Yes.And as a by-product, results in an atmosphere of distrust and suspiscion (bad spelling-long day) on site for everyone.Would it not be better to have one individual? Everyone knows who they are and-that they are simply bringing the concerns of the team(s) to the attention of the line managers.We have to come up with something.The authors of the standards can`t police them and don`t seem to be particularly bothered and-curators are either undervalued/resourced or, can`t be bothered either.Do something?Do nothing?
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Monitor scheme - 1man1desk - 20th January 2006
Do something, definitely - but make sure that the mechanics and practicability of any system you put in place have been thought through, because to make a change that fails would be worse than putting up with the status quo.
I reckon that wider use of the system made available only a few months ago by the IFA should do the trick. In any case, don't knock it until you have given it a good try.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Monitor scheme - troll - 20th January 2006
Greetings 1man1desk.I accept what you say.Have the IFA made their new system known to the wider workforce?No point in announcing it here or, in the IFA magazine.The workforce needs to know about this.
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Monitor scheme - historic building - 23rd January 2006
As a curator i would hope that anyone working on a site who saw a breach of the project design, or work not being carried out, would call me so i could visit the site and see exactly what was going on.
With the support of a good planner it is possible to bring a development to a stop which will cost the developer money until the archaeology has been adequately completed. I always suggest to developers that they should not pay the final bill until the archaeological condition is discharged. This also helps to maintain standards in quite an effective way.
At the moment an enforcement officer is forcing a developer to dismantle a listed barn conversion which was undertaken in breach of a recording condition to enable the building to be recorded and the condition fulfilled. Admittedly this is not underground archaeology but if you inform the curator there are things we can do.
And this works even if people or organisations are not in the IFA.
Monitor scheme - troll - 24th January 2006
Evening Historic.I think that`s the very sort of environment we would all like to see across the U.K- Simple and effective.I made a comment some time ago about communication between site-workers and curators. There seems to be a culture whereby curators generally discuss the fieldwork with site directors or supervisory staff (if they`re lucky).On site visits-the norm is that field workers have no contact with the curator.On a rather sad note, I`m afraid that most field workers don`t get to see a project design/method statement either.We seem to be cut out of the production line-loop despite being at the most critical end of the process.Perhaps we can nurture an environment where field workers are encouraged to open dialogue with curators and where curators get muddy for a bit too?Any County/City curators out there willing to hand field staff their business card? Any field staff willing to provide curators with their moblie numbers?
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Monitor scheme - historic building - 24th January 2006
I have to say whenever i visit a site i do try and talk to as many people as possible. Half the time me turning up on site does give them time for a cup of tea and they all do a runner so dialogue is a bit difficult.