IfA - A Chartered Institute

[Jack]

In your previous experience of chartered organisations exactly what percentage of them were free to join?

........<snip>.

I have no previous experience of chartered organisations, nor do I fully understand what one is.

....<snip>...Your main objection therefore seems to be one along the lines of 'I'd happily join IfA if it were run by Stalin and the Politburo'......we live in strange times!!

No, I meant I'd happily join the IfA if it was free.............I'm a skin flint..........and I object to the possibility of, If IFA gained control of the industry through handing out charteredness it would end up that people would have to pay for the right to work as an archaeologist.

Also, everyone may have their say in the IfA in some way or other............but in such oilgarchies this is just an illusion of power.

from sainthood to deity in one breath and tinpot dictator in the next - either way the statues will be toppled and who would buy his tools?

Of course! (grin) but such a benevolent dictator would be loved by his people}

[P Prentice]

..........and I object to the possibility of, If IFA gained control of the industry through handing out charteredness it would end up that people would have to pay for the right to work as an archaeologist.

Also, everyone may have their say in the IfA in some way or other............but in such oilgarchies this is just an illusion of power

its a bit like living in a democracy and paying taxes - shite, but better than the alternatives

[RedEarth]

I have no previous experience of chartered organisations, nor do I fully understand what one is.



No, I meant I'd happily join the IfA if it was free.............I'm a skin flint..........and I object to the possibility of, If IFA gained control of the industry through handing out charteredness it would end up that people would have to pay for the right to work as an archaeologist.

Also, everyone may have their say in the IfA in some way or other............but in such oilgarchies this is just an illusion of power.



Of course! (grin) but such a benevolent dictator would be loved by his people}

Sorry, I assumed from your comment that your experience of chartered organisations was some, not none. In which case it slightly invalidates any comment you make. 'I don't know anything about chartered organisations, but I don't like them'. As Prentice says, you pay your taxes you get to vote although it's obviously more complicated than that.

I don't understand what chartered status would mean either, which is what slightly worries me, perhaps just not in the same way as it bothers you. I doubt very much that the IfA would be able to 'gain control of the industry' just like chartered architects and surveyors have not pushed out everyone else. My main concern with the IfA is that this seems a waste of effort given the other problems of pay and conditions within archaeology.

[kevin wooldridge]

My main concern with the IfA is that this seems a waste of effort given the other problems of pay and conditions within archaeology.

I suspect that once again folk are thinking that IfA is a trade union - it isn't.

The only way that pay and conditions will be improved for professional archaeologists is through workers organising and campaigning for improvement. IfA can't do that - it is legally bound NOT to do that. The way that is done in most western democracies is through properly constituted trade unions or workers councils or trades councils and through negotiation with employers....

[RedEarth]

I suspect that once again folk are thinking that IfA is a trade union - it isn't.

The only way that pay and conditions will be improved for professional archaeologists is through workers organising and campaigning for improvement. IfA can't do that - it is legally bound NOT to do that. The way that is done in most western democracies is through properly constituted trade unions or workers councils or trades councils and through negotiation with employers....

Agreed, but the IfA does at least comment on recommended salary and have standards on enabling career progression etc (or whatever the word is). Would chartered status lead to a two-tier system - chartered archaeologists and those in the trade union? Is that what people would want?

[kevin wooldridge]

I don't quite understand your point. IfA has a minimum salary range for registered organisations. It consults on the increase or maintenance of that salary range, but does not enter into negotiations or act as agent for negotiators. All the IfA says on career progression is that a member shall 'recognise the aspirations of employees, colleagues and helpers with regard to all matters relating to employment, including career development, health and safety, terms and conditions of employment and equality of opportunity'. (I know that is a particularly vacuous statement because I was on the IfA committee that drafted that particular principle and 'twas me that came up with the wording for that clause!! Mea Culpa!!)

I can't quite see how (or why) you continue to equate IfA and the trade unions. Under chartered status the IfA would still maintain its status of NOT being or ACTING like a trade union. Trade Unions or their ilk would continue to be the only bodies through which archaeological workers could collectively negotiate improvement in pay and conditions. The chasm between the actions and intent of the IfA and the trade unions would continue irrespective of whether the IfA achieves Chartered status...(Or as it is more properly described in the latest IfA bulletin 'Royal Charter' status.....!!)

[RedEarth]

I don't quite understand your point. IfA has a minimum salary range for registered organisations. It consults on the increase or maintenance of that salary range, but does not enter into negotiations or act as agent for negotiators. All the IfA says on career progression is that a member shall 'recognise the aspirations of employees, colleagues and helpers with regard to all matters relating to employment, including career development, health and safety, terms and conditions of employment and equality of opportunity'. (I know that is a particularly vacuous statement because I was on the IfA committee that drafted that particular principle and 'twas me that came up with the wording for that clause!! Mea Culpa!!)

I can't quite see how (or why) you continue to equate IfA and the trade unions. Under chartered status the IfA would still maintain its status of NOT being or ACTING like a trade union. Trade Unions or their ilk would continue to be the only bodies through which archaeological workers could collectively negotiate improvement in pay and conditions. The chasm between the actions and intent of the IfA and the trade unions would continue irrespective of whether the IfA achieves Chartered status...(Or as it is more properly described in the latest IfA bulletin 'Royal Charter' status.....!!)

I wasn't equating the IfA and trade unions at all! My point was whether the 'chasm' would get bigger. I know about as much about what trade unions do as what chartered status means, royal or otherwise, basically nothing.

[kevin wooldridge]

I suspect that Chartered status would fossilise the position of the IfA as regards its non-union status. For the trade unions to move closer to the ideal of professional associations would I think require a change in primary legislation or a change in their registered status under trade union legislation. This would almost certainly result in them ceasing to be able to undertake certain activities. As neither of those two scenarios is likely, I imagine that the 'distance' between the IfA and the archaeological trade unions would remain exactly the same.

Doesn't mean of course that they couldn't co-ordinate their separate functions towards a common goal, perhaps the creation of a well rewarded, secure. legally defined and ethically strong profession....but again I suspect for this to be effective, the lead would have to come from a ground swell amongst members of the profession rather than diktat from our representative bodies....

[Dinosaur]

Fascinating how the balance of the poll at the top of the page has been gradually shifting while this discussion has been going on - still pro-IFA but a lot less so than a week ago

[Jack]

Ooops just spotted my mistake.........I meant to say in my experience of constituted (not chartered) societies!

I understand folks comments now!

But we don't live in a democracy. Our taxes are (meant to be) for the services we receive not for the right to be in the country, though thats a fine line.

My problem would be if the situation arose where an archaeologist couldn't work without paying the IfA (or anyone else) for the right to do so. It wouldn't really effect people in my situation as the company would pay, but would hit sole workers and small companies more.

Don't know if this would be the case...............but it smells like it.

Of course it won't be an issue if that fee is tax-deductable