22nd April 2009, 07:23 PM
Local government organisations have to operate equal opportunities policies. The have to advertise so as to not exclude people from applying who can reasonably be expected to do the job. Which is why they ask for an archaeology degree or equivalent. In practice they appoint who they want but usually have to follow a strict points system.
Being a member of the IFA is different - it is a professional organisation not a trade union. However, it is still a restrictive practice under employment law to insist on membership. Its perfectly OK to say membership is preferred in an ad but not to insist on an employee being a member once appointed. Chartering will make no difference to this. It is only a few professions where you have to have specific qualifications eg medicine. in fields like biology and geology chartered status is merely an alternative career route. i am sure a judge would look at the make-up of the profession and argue an archaeology degree was not essential to practice the profession as there are so many people without it. In the case we are talking about the curator is operating a restricted practice by insisting on IFA membership and restricting the right of non-IFA members to carry out their profession. The council would get hammered in a court over this.
This could be changed by the government bringing in specific legislation to define an archaeologist as on the Continent but unlikely given the current drift of policy to equal opportunities and opening up professions or by licensing. The trouble with the PPG16 'professionally qualified" is EH didn't even try and define it and a judge would look at current practice. Its no good citing the professions proper like law as they operate in a different world. Legislation might not go the way you wish- they might insist on a PhD to run any major project
Being a member of the IFA is different - it is a professional organisation not a trade union. However, it is still a restrictive practice under employment law to insist on membership. Its perfectly OK to say membership is preferred in an ad but not to insist on an employee being a member once appointed. Chartering will make no difference to this. It is only a few professions where you have to have specific qualifications eg medicine. in fields like biology and geology chartered status is merely an alternative career route. i am sure a judge would look at the make-up of the profession and argue an archaeology degree was not essential to practice the profession as there are so many people without it. In the case we are talking about the curator is operating a restricted practice by insisting on IFA membership and restricting the right of non-IFA members to carry out their profession. The council would get hammered in a court over this.
This could be changed by the government bringing in specific legislation to define an archaeologist as on the Continent but unlikely given the current drift of policy to equal opportunities and opening up professions or by licensing. The trouble with the PPG16 'professionally qualified" is EH didn't even try and define it and a judge would look at current practice. Its no good citing the professions proper like law as they operate in a different world. Legislation might not go the way you wish- they might insist on a PhD to run any major project