Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
Some examples (not exhaustive by any means) of potential benefits of IFA membership:
1. It can help you as an individual to get jobs. My company certainly prefers IFA members; others are not excluded, but are encouraged to join a.s.a.p. after joining the company (subs paid).
2. Opportunity to contribute to valuable initiatives in relation to professional issues. I have had the chance to make such a contribution as a member of an IFA working party (finished some time ago), and I think the work we did was of value to all commercial archaeologists (even the ones, probably a majority, who are not aware of it).
3. It provides some assurance to curators that I am competent to do my job.
4. It provides some assurance to potential clients that I (and my company, an RAO) are competent. Some firms now only invite tenders from RAOs, or require that certain individual roles are occupied by MIFAs.
5. In the event of my proving, despite the above, to be incompetent or dishonest, it provides curators and clients with the assurance that there are professional sanctions (as opposed to legal/financial ones) that they can take against me personally or against my company in its role as an RAO.
6. If the IFA was a Chartered institute, I would gain an instant ?1,000 salary hike on gaining Chartered status.
Much of the above does benefit me personally - but probably benefits my company, and the profession as a whole, more. In most professional institutions, the main benefit of membership to the individual is that jobs become available, because (unlike in archaeology) jobs (or, in some cases, promotion) are often not open at all to non-members. The actual point of these institutions is to benefit the profession concerned as a whole, principally through the promotion and maintenance of high professional standards, hence the element of compulsion. For that reason, I would favour the IFA becoming a Chartered institute with a requirement that membership (little M) is gained before you can call yourself an archaeologist. That way, the power of the IFA to maintain standards is not undermined by the fact that less than half of archaeologists are subject to its disciplinary procedures.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
chartered ... yes .... thats the way!!!
I would however say that as a curator.. I prefer people who can do the work... as at the moment (although I like the RAO idea) RAO status means not much more than you got visited once every 3 - 5 years. I have talked to Tim Howard about this and suggested a method where the curators get asked for their opinions -
I wholeheartedly agree that Chartered Stus and a protected term -Archaeologist- is the way forward... then the IFA becomes the body I want to be part of.. (oooops... am part of  )
WIll you be up in Edinburgh in April.... I will be hoping that many of us can get together after one day and I will take you to some nice quiet bar and we can talk about achievable goals
Another day another WSI?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
I was under the impresions that local curators get invited onto the RAO inspections?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2006
I can see the benefits of the IFA becoming a chartered institute but surely they need to address some issues first.
There seems to be a moderately high number of archaeologists who choose not to be members of the IFA or have left (for whatever reasons - surely the IFA should be looking at those archaeologists and ask themselves why? Could they not do an online survey and ask for feedback from archaeologists who are not members and why they are not members? -then attempt to address some of these issues and show willing? To grow as a professional body and eventually be given chartered institute status they need to re-evaluate themselves as a professional body and target those who are not members.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
As yet.... we are still to be asked... and that is with 3 RAOs in our area... including a recent check and one who was wanting to join... both of whom are in our area.
As to the IFA needing to adress issues... thats what I feel they are doing... and one reason I joined... and it is kind of the old chicken egg senario ...
q1. what would you see as fair fee for joining..?
q2. would you agree with archaeologist being a protected term?
q3. what would make you join?
Another day another WSI?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2006
q1. what would you see as fair fee for joining..?
its not so much the fee (although having said that with everything else even c8pounds a month could be stretching it at the minute!) - its more what do i get for the fee when looking at the big picture? I am all for the idea of supporting the implementation of standards within field archaeology, but as i understand it these are optional? (correct me if im wrong please), therefore, how can they be governed and enforced? if, i wanted to report an incident to the ifa that had been committed by a non ifa registered organisation/member - would it be disregarded because they don't have to follow the standards? therefore, what am i paying for?
q2. would you agree with archaeologist being a protected term?
I do but i think it would have to be a well structured protocol - i mean how would you define who is and who isnt an archaeologist? would an archaeologist have to have a degree to be called an archaeologist or 5 years+ experience in the field??
q3. what would make you join?
I would resent having to join just for the sake of getting a job - i would consider joining if my unit contributed towards the fee and i knew for sure and could rely upon the fact that standards would be adhered to at all costs but again whats happens if your an IFA member working for a non IFA registered unit? I suppose this is why a chartered institute is a good idea.....I would also consider joining if the IFA looked at pay and conditions in greater detail, but i do understand that this is more a union issue.....
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
Quote:quote:The IFA exists to advance the practice of archaeology and allied disciplines by promoting professional standards and ethics for conserving, managing, understanding and promoting enjoyment of heritage.
Thats the IFAs mission statement and so it should be. I think that the abysmal pay suffered by most in the archaeological profession falls within their purview. Diggerhobbit, I agree that pay is the responsibility of trade unions, but not at the expense of the IFA having resposibility. Poor pay is a problem for the profession as a whole and therefore the IFA must take a stand in the interests of 'advancing the practice of archaeology'. That means a dramatic increase in their recommended pay rates and meaningful action against RAOs who don't pay it (at present they do not get stripped of their RAO status - even witht current low pay rates).
The Ifa taking a meaningful stand on pay instead of acting as a brake on pay would convince me that they were serious about the profession and worth joining.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2006
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Real Job
Poor pay is a problem for the profession as a whole and therefore the IFA must take a stand in the interests of 'advancing the practice of archaeology'. That means a dramatic increase in their recommended pay rates and meaningful action against RAOs who don't pay it (at present they do not get stripped of their RAO status - even witht current low pay rates).
The Ifa taking a meaningful stand on pay instead of acting as a brake on pay would convince me that they were serious about the profession and worth joining.
I completely agree Real, but many diggers I have spoken to believe that the IFA have no interest in taking that sort of action and are in fact a toothless, ineffectual organisation who merely validate their existance and extortionate membership fees by sending out a pretty news letter.
Sorry had a bad day! 
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
WanderingApe, I agree! Thats why I'm not a member.
I believe that the IFA acts more like a trade association like 'the dairy industry federation' or the 'federation of bakers'. Those organisations act as pressure groups for employers/businesses within their sector and attempt to regulate their own marketplaces. Businesss owners join them becaus its in their interests to have a united voice, but nobody expects the poor sods who make the cheese or knead the dough to join them (they have differnt interests from their bosses)!
But the IFA wants to be a professional institute (that the whole profession is a member of), not a trade association. That involves representing the interests of the whole profession, not just the employers but the employees as well. That means, in our particular case, that they have to take serious action over pay (in the interests of the profession as a whole).
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
10th March 2006, 02:14 PM
Quote from Diggerhobbit: Quote:quote:I am all for the idea of supporting the implementation of standards within field archaeology, but as i understand it these are optional? (correct me if im wrong please), therefore, how can they be governed and enforced? if, i wanted to report an incident to the ifa that had been committed by a non ifa registered organisation/member - would it be disregarded because they don't have to follow the standards? therefore, what am i paying for?
The standards are obligatory for all individual IFA members at any grade and for all RAOs, all of whom are subject to the IFA Code of Conduct and disciplinary procedures.
Non-members and non-RAOs are not subject to any action by the IFA, even if they say they are voluntarily subject to them. However, if the work concerned is done under an agreed WSI or a Contract that specifies that the IFA standards will be applied, you can complain to the curator or client/consultant, who may be able to take action in case of a breach. I have taken action against units on this basis in my consultant role. The benefit here is that the standards provided by the IFA provide a benchmark against which the standard of practice can be measured. Bear in mind that these options are also open as a second line of attack even where the alleged offender is an IFA member/RAO.
Personally, I would like to see IFA membership/RAO status as requirements for any person/organisation wanting to work in archaeology - then we would all be subject to the standards.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
|
