IFA RO only as approved contractors

[Navajo]

If some planning authorities are requiring IfA RAO status for all contractors, what about those local authority `curators` who are not IfA members themselves? Its like an engineering technician telling a chartered engineer to make the tea..:face-approve:

[Dinosaur]

I realise that I have no way of proving this as it's purely based on personal experience, but over the last 15 years I've come across a huge number of people with the letters 'IfA' after their name who appear to be borderline incompetent on site, and yet who seem to progress through the IfA grades regardless. Conversely, some of the best archaeologists I've worked for / with haven't been in the club, so I wouldn't accept that signing up is any kitemark of quality

Same experience entirely, except that the first (that I'm aware of) MIFA I came across who couldn't half-section a simple black posthole cut in yellow sand was way back in 1988, and it was still definitely the Institute of Field Archaeologists in those days, thank god (or whatever deity/philosophy of choice) they've given up on that pretence since it never did represent diggers (or anyone else likely to be found in a field) - look for any dirty-handed original self-validated MIFAs, you won't find too many, lots of managers though.....have the self-validated contingent ever been forced to go through the process properly, by the way, would hate to think that any of them might be still dictating to the membership who have been through the torture of the application process....

[vulpes]

It's true. You have to promise to never again use a trowel if you join the IFA at any corporate grade. That's right isn't it Kevin, Sadie, Chiz, BAJR host et al.

[Dinosaur]

They can as long as someone has validated that they can, and the validator has been validated.....actually I've remembered one original self-valdated MIFA I've worked for who's ok to work alone on site...ooops! :face-kiss:
(although wierdly he once asked me on site how I'd found something! -err, thought that was why he was employing me rather than someone else)

-have also remembered another MIFA who knowingly told me one day that he'd done some digging once....could be why that unit went bust....

[Marcus Brody]

@ marcus - there are probably less archaeologists in a union than there are in the ifa so it remains unlikely that will help the cause

That may be the case, but the very definition of a union is an organization of workers that have banded together for the purpose of getting better working conditions or pay, whereas the IfA is always going to suffer for the perception that it's dominated by management. I don't say that this perception is correct, and I know that those in favour of the IfA will say that the way to change this is for everyone to join so that the workers outnumber the management, but when it comes to arguing with the boss for better pay and conditions, I'd rather put my trust in a union than with an organisation that will at the very least have divided loyalties as a result of representing both staff and management.

[chiz]

It's true. You have to promise to never again use a trowel if you join the IFA at any corporate grade. That's right isn't it Kevin, Sadie, Chiz, BAJR host et al.

Yep, its true! I can't dig for s***t. I'm absolutely f****ing awful at digging. But thank jebus I never made it to manager eh? Because, you never know, I might actually have been quite good at managing projects and dealing with clients and money and all that stuff despite my absolute inability to dig astratigraphically. I mean, I'm so bloody awful I believe a cut can cut a cut. For real.

And I once met an archaeologist who wasn't in the IfA and who'd been digging for 15 years and and was pretty poor at field archaeology. His context sheets were not a pretty sight. So what did I do? Did I extrapolate from his ability and assume everyone who wasn't in the IfA was a terrible archaeologist and slag them all off. Or did I set aside time to site down with said digger and go through the basics, find out what the issues were, identify the areas in his understanding that needed work, and give him support at a level he was comfortable with so that after a while, with mentoring, he improved markedly. Your guess.

Chiz. MIfA and Digger, not in that order

The Diggers? Forum is committed to creating a positive, sustainable and financially viable career for all professional archaeologists at all points in their career. The DF represents all archaeologists working out on site at whatever grade. Membership of the DF is open to all. http://www.facebook.com/DiggersForum

[Marcus Brody]

And I once met an archaeologist who wasn't in the IfA and who'd been digging for 15 years and and was pretty poor at field archaeology. His context sheets were not a pretty sight. So what did I do? Did I extrapolate from his ability and assume everyone who wasn't in the IfA was a terrible archaeologist and slag them all off.

Yes, but the difference between that individual and someone who's similarly lacking in field skills but who happens to be a member of the IfA is that in the brave new world of IfA-only fieldwork the latter would still be allowed to work, simply because they've paid for membership of a club and somehow managed to convince that club that they know what they're doing. No-one's said that all IfA members are useless (well, vulpes implied it, but I assume it was a joke), but similarly, no-one's disputed the assertion that there are some members who seem to have progressed to a membership grade that isn't matched by their level of competency. Yes, you can argue that someone who's been digging for 15 years should have had a better grasp of the basics, but they weren't laying claim to a degree of competency that they didn't possess. Conversely, if someone has attained a grade of MIfA, it's not unreasonable to expect them to have a certain basic level of competency - after all, isn't the point of the membership grades to indicate the skills supposedly attained by the individual?

Surely this indicates the flaw in using such a blunt instrument to determine who can and can't undertake work - simply being in the IfA doesn't mean that the person is capable of undertaking work to a particular level, and doesn't even guarantee that swift disciplinary action will follow substandard work, so really, the only result of requiring that any work is undertaken by IfA members or RAOs would be to force non-members to join if they want to work.

[chiz]

But you don't necessarily have to know how to section a posthole to be a good manager, or illustrator, finds specialist or surveyor. Even I, as a diehard Digger have to accept that although 'field skills' are a Good Thing for everyone in archaeology to possess, they aren't actually essential for everyone. Unfortunately field skills are not the be all of everything or the final arbiter in some competition of who is the most archaeological. I know some managers who aren't great field archaeologists, and they come across that way on site when in my environment, but in their environment dealing with clients, programmes, money and juggling tenders they are excellent and I am the fool. And I am fine with that, as long as they leave me to run the sites and get the job done!

If you think there is substandard or unethical work then complain. Simple as that. You can even now do it anonymously.

Chiz. MIfA and Digger, not in that order

The Diggers’ Forum is committed to creating a positive, sustainable and financially viable career for all professional archaeologists at all points in their career. The DF represents all archaeologists working out on site at whatever grade. Membership of the DF is open to all. http://www.facebook.com/DiggersForum

[chiz]

and stop editing your answer whilst I'm replying to it!

[vulpes]

thanks for the much needed reality check Chiz :face-approve: