'What has IFA ever done for us...?'

[Oxbeast]

Low turnout might be due to this subject being fairly chewed over over the last two or three years in a number of threads. My own view is that they would have more credibility among the workforce (but perhaps not management) if they took their own payscales more seriously and had a more transparent disciplinary process.

[RedEarth]

Actually I think the poll's demonstrated a couple of things:

(a) there's a vary varied view of IFA (comparing the various results on the poll suggests mostly slightly negative of middle, Jack didn't allow too many positive options and the one there is doesn't seem too popular), so you're not going to get everyone to join etc unless there are some pretty radical changes

(b) you're in for an uphill struggle, frankly most people don't care, after 24 hours there are a massive 40 votes, at 8.30 last night 64 people were viewing it, but clearly most of them regard IFA as so irrelevent as to not be worth commenting on (I'm in the yellow camp however)

Any number of polls might give useful results but they don't necessarily solve anything and they can be interpreted in whatever way you like. The relative lack of votes could be a reflection on the limitations of the poll's answers etc etc.

Although it does perhaps show a general sense of apathy, which is at least part of the problem. It's presumably not a coincidence that the word apathetic contains the word pathetic, but then the original meaning of pathetic was 'worthy of sympathy', which perhaps better sums up archaeologists.

[Jack]

Any number of polls might give useful results but they don't necessarily solve anything and they can be interpreted in whatever way you like.

Although it does perhaps show a general sense of apathy, which is at least part of the problem. It's presumably not a coincidence that the word apathetic contains the word pathetic, but then the original meaning of pathetic was 'worthy of sympathy', which perhaps better sums up archaeologists.

I agree....I didn't start the poll to solve anything really, just out of interest.

So if I joined the IFA what would I get for my money that I don't already have? (looking from a selfish perspective) And how could I really change things for the better (from a less selfish perspective) does the IFA take on board issues from their members? Is there a democratic process of implementing change? I'm asking because I am largely ignorant of what the IFA actually does (other than provide documents on professional standards) or how it works

[BAJR]

Have opened up this poll on Facebook as well... which seems to be bringing in more people. though the results seem to be remaining reasonably the same... though I note a larger proportion are saying that IfA have done loads.

Perhaps this is the crux... the IfA do actually quite a lot... but it is unseen... they are also caught between teh devil and the deep blue... which is why Unionisation would release the pressure.... leaving the IfA to deal with standards, guidance and professionalism

[Odinn]

So if I joined the IFA what would I get for my money that I don't already have? (looking from a selfish perspective)

Greater access to some jobs? The main reason many that I know have joined is because it gives you something else on the CV that might help you get a better job. Is that a selfish enough perspective? :face-stir:

[Jack]

.....Perhaps this is the crux... the IfA do actually quite a lot... but it is unseen...

Maybe this should be made more visible?

[BAJR]

• IfA - Conference 2010 (20/4/2010)
  
• Ministry of Justice announces deferral of burial conditions (9/4/2010)
  
• Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the historic Environment published (24/3/2010)
  
• IfA - Latest job losses report now available (18/3/2010)
  
• Mentors and Associate Monitors (Skills for the Future) (18/3/2010)
  
• IfA - Conference update and advance notice of EGM (17/3/2010)
  
• A Maritime and Marine Historic Environment Research Framework for England (16/3/2010)
  
• IfA - Finds Group day school: running fieldwork projects (10/3/2010)
  
• Study group for Roman Pottery - Conference bursary, prize and regional workshop... (8/3/2010)
  
• Women in Construction workshops (15/2/2010)
  
• IfA - Conference 2010: Provisional Programme and Online Booking now open! (2/2/2010)
  
• IfA - Scottish group course, Desk Based Assessments (18/1/2010)
  
• IfA - Recession page (15/12/2009)
  
• IfA - MAG announce final report of Maritime Archaeological Archives project (15/12/2009)
  
• EMASS 2010 call for papers (15/12/2009)
  
• England's Cathedrals - the great heritage success story (1/12/2009)
  
• Diggers' Forum response to IfA statement on minimum salaries (30/11/2009)
  
• Satellite information for heritage monitoring (20/11/2009)
  
• IfA - Clarification of points made in the statement about IfA & arch salaries (18/11/2009)
  
• IfA - New Job losses report (16/11/2009)
  

[Jack]

Cool! will trawl through this.....back in some time:p

[Dinosaur]

Greater access to some jobs? The main reason many that I know have joined is because it gives you something else on the CV that might help you get a better job. Is that a selfish enough perspective? :face-stir:

Largely supports the apathy (no real interest) view of a considerable proportion of the membership of IFA, actually only a rather small hardcore membership dictating (or at least trying to) the lives of the masses....where have I heard that before? Would be better if they stopped claiming to represent everyone, unfortunately non-archaeological organisations that they deal with (like the Gov) have no idea that they don't

[Comarch]

In reply to Dirty Boy, the dropping of the 'field archaeology' in IfA is more inclusive of the range of work being carried out in archaeology generally. I am a freelance community archaeologist doing varied projects with the public and think that the IfA should be looking to recruit people other than those in the field. The IfA should be looking at us and seeing what standards are being met in this new area. The same goes for all non field archaeologists. Diggers are going to be only one section in an expanding subject and standards should be overseen across the board.