Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
20th August 2011, 11:40 AM
If everyone ended up joining, what would be the point of getting chartered status in the first place since nothing would have changed apart from those that run IFA being able to afford bigger salaries? The profession overall would still contain the same mix of good and bad, but IFA would just have even more disaffected members who never wanted to join in the first place but were forced to (I'd be one of those), plus of course all the currently-non-members would be poorer to the tune of their membership fees, which would, inevitably, rocket as is always the case with enforced/involuntary memberships....and still not clear how all this would improve wages for those at the end of a shovel since any significant increase in costs to the clients would just make the construction industry more beligerently anti-archaeology :face-thinks:
chartered status is, after all, just a legalised form of closed-shop
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2010
20th August 2011, 06:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 20th August 2011, 06:24 PM by Wax.)
Do not confuse a charted organisation with the current set up of the IFA. I was thinking more in line with the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, you do not have to belong to practice as a surveyor but you are unlikely to be regarded seriously if you do not join and it is not a matter of paying a membership fee but of demonstrating skills through examination and peer review. The organisation would also have a very strong commitment to the professional development of it's members providing training towards recognised qualifications and regulating industry standards including wages.
There is very much more to a charted profession than an union of workers (or management). This is why think the current IFA is not the organisation to take the profession down the chartered route.
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
21st August 2011, 08:29 PM
A well presented argument Wax
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2010
22nd August 2011, 09:01 AM
Wax, you have my views in a nutshell, thank you. Come the bright day that is the future....
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2010
22nd August 2011, 09:52 AM
So if many of us feel that charted status for archaeologists would be good but that the IFA is not the organisation to do it how do we proceed?
Can we just band together and create a new organisation or do we have to rely on consensus from pre existing bodies?
Have a look at the list of chartered organisations it makes interesting reading and includes the Boy Scouts.
The RICS seems to have arisen from a meeting of 49 surveyors in the 19th C .
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2011
30th August 2011, 04:08 PM
Dinosaur Wrote:...and still not clear how all this would improve wages for those at the end of a shovel since any significant increase in costs to the clients would just make the construction industry more beligerently anti-archaeology
the entire post is mostly codswallop but this bit is particularly irksome as it displays what must be a willful ignorance of the development process. the construction industry pays for all kinds of specialist input because it is forced to not because it wants to.
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
30th August 2011, 07:04 PM
P Prentice Wrote:the entire post is mostly codswallop but this bit is particularly irksome as it displays what must be a willful ignorance of the development process. the construction industry pays for all kinds of specialist input because it is forced to not because it wants to.
Gosh! Took you a long time to get enough bile together for that! Welcome back. :face-approve:
Any helpful stats to contribute on how many times the construction industry was/wasn't successful when it challenged PPG16 (which of course was never actually law)...and indeed has anyone challenged PPS5 in the courts yet? - and of course on most jobs the construction industry could just band together and agree that paying the fines would be cheaper than paying for the archaeology - seem to recall a recent thread about York and the stifling of development so the concept's out there, just needs some developer to begin the backlash....
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2008
30th August 2011, 07:32 PM
One of the biggest problems in commercial archaeology is archaeologist ourselves-too many companies all pulling in different directions and all wanting a slice of the pie, unfortunately, in a recession that pie shrinks-which means even less cooperation for the greater good.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2011
31st August 2011, 11:02 AM
Dinosaur Wrote:Gosh! Took you a long time to get enough bile together for that! Welcome back. :face-approve:
yea - the bloody maldives do it for me every time
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
31st August 2011, 12:37 PM
For me it's Bridlington.
Exactly why is the current IfA not the organization to take the profession (if profession it be) down the chartered route, I wonder? Does this mean that the IfA needs some kind of reform, or is a completely new body proposed? I'm not totally clear what the point of that would be.
Charteredness wouldn't necessarily mean a 'closed shop' - that would require the style or title 'archaeologist' to become a protected title, like 'architect' (I don't think 'surveyor' is protected) but would go a long way to achieving that.
