IfA/AAIS merger

[Jack]

Thanks Chiz.......I am actually (outside appearances aside) interested in the IfA. Your post gives areal insight into it.

However, my point still stands. Its not a democracy. I don't support that kind of nearly democracy. Why can't members vote on issues and not candidates?

[P Prentice]

Its not a democracy. I don't support that kind of nearly democracy. Why can't members vote on issues and not candidates?

think of them as members of parliament or council. and would you want to vote on every aspect of governance?

[Martin Locock]

To clarify, the IfA is a democracy. Any changes to the constiitition, statetgic plan or new policy statements, or standards, are proposed by the Council and then brought to an AGM which all members may attend and vote. If members wish they can suggest a motion to go the AGM (they need a certain number of signatures to do this). In practice, AGMs tend to be poorly attended unless there are contentious issues to be discussed (changing the name was one), but voter apathy doesn't mean it's not a democracy.

[chiz]

However, my point still stands. Its not a democracy. I don't support that kind of nearly democracy. Why can't members vote on issues and not candidates?

But Jack, it is very similar to democracy (unless you mean Ancient Greece, where everyone had the vote... as long as you weren't a woman or a slave or a foreigner, or got too popular, or unpopular, or...). You vote for members and they make informed decisions following debate. ANYONE can stand, whether you are a digger starting out, or a retired archaeologist, and your opinion would be listened to.

And by the way, you CAN vote on some issues directly. There will be votes on specific issues/changes at the AGM on October 3rd. And any member can get any subject debated at the AGM as long as they get enough support from members. And you can influence 'policy' by lobbying on any issue, plus the myriad of consultations like that on Southport. Very few reports, policies or decisions come out of the IfA without extensive consulatation -hence David's reference to it being like wading through treacle! Everyone has a chance to say what they think.

At the DF we try and help diggers get their voices across on these consultations and when these policies are being formulated -witness all the work we did on Southport- and we give a voice to site workers in council and on committees and through the newsletter. Plus we try and work for better policies and improvemnet s to things like th ecomplaints procedure and validation procedures. I want to make sure that continues which is why I'm standing. I don't understand every issue that comes to the council -I don't pretend to, but I know the issues that affect site workers because I still work on site and I have a pretty good awareness of how IfA decisions affect diggers, and how they feel about issues. If elected I will listen to all the opinions and arguments and evidence, and make a decision accordingly according to my best ability.

To be honest though, if there was a vote on every issue the result would be bedlam, imagine a world where you could vote on setting income tax? most would vote for the lowest option, only to vote for higher pensions the next day.

Chiz

[chiz]

Beat me to it Martin!

[Jack]

To clarify, the IfA is a democracy. Any changes to the constiitition, statetgic plan or new policy statements, or standards, are proposed by the Council and then brought to an AGM which all members may attend and vote. If members wish they can suggest a motion to go the AGM (they need a certain number of signatures to do this). In practice, AGMs tend to be poorly attended unless there are contentious issues to be discussed (changing the name was one), but voter apathy doesn't mean it's not a democracy.

So, in theory could some lowly member propose a change to the constitution and have it voted on at an AGM (if they had enough signatures or backing?). Or could they propose a strategic plan as opposed to the elected councils plan and have it voted through?

Another question is does everyones vote carry the same weight? Are there people who aren't allowed to vote if so in what circumstances?

Hmm, thats a lot of questions, but this is giving me a direct insight into the internal workings.

[Jack]

Thanks Chiz (and Martin)

Chiz, yes I'd prefer a democracy more like the Ancient Greece format. But with modern technology the entire membership can raise issues and have them voted on quickly and with ease. Look at the digital democracy for one version of this.
From the sound of it I would definitely vote for you (if I was a member). But would the 'system' end up corrupting, distracting or dissuading you from your mission?

Also on your last point.........exactly right. Is democracy the right way to decide issues like standards and guidance, enforcement of such and strategies for the future? I just don't know, everyone has their own agenda, axe to grind, idiosyncrasies. Who knows whats best to do? Can this be reached through debate? Or by dictation? Or by survival of the fittest? Trial and error?

One thing I am sure of..........once you give someone even a bit of power, most love to wield it and will hold onto it for dear life! (look at health and safety jobsworth officers in the construction industry).


I am only raising these issues for debate in the context of giving IfA ultimate control of our industry. Do we really want this? Do we really understand the full ramifications of handing it all over? I know I don't

[chiz]

So, in theory could some lowly member propose a change to the constitution and have it voted on at an AGM (if they had enough signatures or backing?). Or could they propose a strategic plan as opposed to the elected councils plan and have it voted through?

Another question is does everyones vote carry the same weight? Are there people who aren't allowed to vote if so in what circumstances?

Hi Jack,
thanks for the vote of confidence. My understanding is...

YES everyone's vote definitely carries the same weight, as long as they are a corporate member: the vote of a MIFA is the same as that of a PIfA. As it should be.

Not 100% sure if a (corporate) member can change the constitution that way as it is Friday night and haven't the regs to hand, don't see why not (Kevin W may know). It is certainly possible to propose a fairly major resolution, and the DF have considered this in the past. Why didn't we do it? Because we have to be absolutely sure we have the backing to do this, its not the kind of thing you can do all the time and keep credibility. Apathy means that it is very hard to mobilise support, that's why we have relaunched and are trying to show Diggers that we are serious about speaking on their behalf, so we can build trust and get support when needed to get things done.

Will I be/am I corrupted? Well as far as my friends tell me it hasn't happened yet. Its possible I guess, I do tend to listen to all sides before making a decision, but my default position is certainly not corrupted by the capitalist-running-dog-pigs. And I am very sure that my friends would give me a slap before that happens. To be perfectly honest, I'd rather not run for council, I'd rather leave it to someone else and use my annual leave to spend time with my family or go climbing rather than attending meetings, reading reports and writing newsletters. But who else is standing up for diggers? We need to get the numbers.

Re your last point. The IfA doesn't, hasn't, and never will have 'total control'. There are a host of overlapping organisations and bodies that all deal with different parts of archaeological policy, standards and different aspects of what can and is done as archaeologists. The IfA can't really force anything past the other bodies, everyone has to work together. That is as it should be. The IfA isn't a monolith, it is its members, as long as they get involved.

[kevin wooldridge]

Hi Chiz, of course a corporate member can make a proposal to change the constitution providing they get a seconder to their motion. It then goes to the membership to vote on. To do that through the AGM is free. To do it at an extraordinary general meeeting (which would require a quorum of the membership to approve) may involve a cost on those members (which the executive committee have the power to discharge if they see fit).....by the way my vote for the DF members on the IfA council is, as we speak, winging its way by snail mail from Bergen to Reading.... as is my proxy vote on the Chartered status application. Good luck to yourself, Sophie and Jeff......

[chiz]

Thanks Kevin, I was getting confused with the EGM rules hence my uncertainty. And thanks for the votes and support.

BTW, someone way back in the thread said that Chartered status would only result in the people that run the IfA getting richer. To clarify, you don't get anything for being on Council or the committees/working groups except maybe travel expenses, (which are receipted) so you don't make any money out of it, plus it takes up your free time (many employers support the IfA by allowing staff time to attend council meetings etc). There is a small staff who are obviously paid. They run the IfA day to day and put policy into practice, but it is council, committees and members who decide policy and what the IfA will do. The IfA is its membership, that's why they need to get involved.

David, perhaps the last few posts should be moved to a new thread titled 'IfA elections' as we seem to have moved off topic rather!