25th September 2012, 10:51 PM
Good thread this......
I will start out by holding up my hands to railing against the IfA (somewhat vociferously
) for the best part of a decade. I finally applied for membership when I realised that career progression and pay minima could actually be positively affected by simply joining up. More importantly, I have signed up to work within professional standards (my main reason for breathing) as I have experienced far too many charades in the line of duty across the industry. Quite simply, butcher the finite resource for profit or gain (be you Curator, Unit Manager or the Pope himself) and I will refuse to take part regardless of the level of pressure applied. So sue me. I have made complaints to the IfA in the past and can openly say that those concerns were taken seriously and were acted upon. In a simplistic "better to be in the tent pissing out than outside pissing in" kind of a way, when I stand up and hold my ground in pursuit of professionalism, ethics and standards, I do so as a member of an Institute that requires me to do exactly that. I would love to see a Unit terminate my contract on the basis that I dared to adhere to the tenets of my Institution. Even those Units who are not RAOs manage to slide in the old "will work to the guidelines of the IfA" within fee proposals and WSIs. Tiz a legal contract. For me, the IfA can provide for a positive way of ensuring that the industry works towards the maintenance of professional standards (I can hear you all gasping!) and it does work best when members become proactive.
Chartership in my view does ring a few alarm bells but overall.....is it not high time that professional heritage workers become recognised on an equal footing with other industries? Even if I were to take a rather cynical view and see this as a way for top tier workers to further milk the golden calf and widen the gaps further.....surely, any increase in recognition for the industry on the whole would result in exponential increases across the spectrum?
From what I can see, the vast majority of the industry want something more from an Institute they are not willing to join. The mechanics of the Institute would actually work in favour of the majority if they were only willing to win their right to vote by being inside the tent. The answer in my view is becoming increasingly obvious.....win the right to vote (by joining)...then become the tail that wags the dog. Membership for me has had positive effects....whether I agree in principle or not....my competency levels have been recognised....my pay minima established. I`ve also signed up to professional standards and more importantly, have a vote. Forums are a superb tool where everyone can have an opinion (we owe you Mister Hosty!) but forums don`t provide the opportunity to vote in the only Institute (and possibly Chartered at that) directly able to influence our chosen industry. :face-stir:
I will start out by holding up my hands to railing against the IfA (somewhat vociferously
) for the best part of a decade. I finally applied for membership when I realised that career progression and pay minima could actually be positively affected by simply joining up. More importantly, I have signed up to work within professional standards (my main reason for breathing) as I have experienced far too many charades in the line of duty across the industry. Quite simply, butcher the finite resource for profit or gain (be you Curator, Unit Manager or the Pope himself) and I will refuse to take part regardless of the level of pressure applied. So sue me. I have made complaints to the IfA in the past and can openly say that those concerns were taken seriously and were acted upon. In a simplistic "better to be in the tent pissing out than outside pissing in" kind of a way, when I stand up and hold my ground in pursuit of professionalism, ethics and standards, I do so as a member of an Institute that requires me to do exactly that. I would love to see a Unit terminate my contract on the basis that I dared to adhere to the tenets of my Institution. Even those Units who are not RAOs manage to slide in the old "will work to the guidelines of the IfA" within fee proposals and WSIs. Tiz a legal contract. For me, the IfA can provide for a positive way of ensuring that the industry works towards the maintenance of professional standards (I can hear you all gasping!) and it does work best when members become proactive. Chartership in my view does ring a few alarm bells but overall.....is it not high time that professional heritage workers become recognised on an equal footing with other industries? Even if I were to take a rather cynical view and see this as a way for top tier workers to further milk the golden calf and widen the gaps further.....surely, any increase in recognition for the industry on the whole would result in exponential increases across the spectrum?
From what I can see, the vast majority of the industry want something more from an Institute they are not willing to join. The mechanics of the Institute would actually work in favour of the majority if they were only willing to win their right to vote by being inside the tent. The answer in my view is becoming increasingly obvious.....win the right to vote (by joining)...then become the tail that wags the dog. Membership for me has had positive effects....whether I agree in principle or not....my competency levels have been recognised....my pay minima established. I`ve also signed up to professional standards and more importantly, have a vote. Forums are a superb tool where everyone can have an opinion (we owe you Mister Hosty!) but forums don`t provide the opportunity to vote in the only Institute (and possibly Chartered at that) directly able to influence our chosen industry. :face-stir:
