3rd December 2005, 05:49 PM
Quote:quote:How does the IFA which seems to have accredited him feel about his veiws?(posted by trowelfodder)
Quote:quote:If the organisation really wants to demonstrate that it is fit to represent all the profession including representing the interests of the workforce, it will kick this individual out.(posted by Real Job)
If it does not, that will surely suggest that those who argue that it only represents the interests of employers are right.
The IFA has accredited this person as a PIFA, the lowest grade of membership, which is not hard to legitimately qualify for. They have not accredited his company (it is not an RAO) and they have not endorsed his working or employment practices. Note that, as the company is not an RAO, they can only take action against him as an individual for things he might have done as an individual - they have no power over the company.
As for disciplinary action - as far as I am aware, the website that has caused offence is fairly new and may only very recently have come to the attention of the IFA. The IFA can't just rush to summary judgement - they have to investigate before they can take action, and also ask the accused person for his side of the story (only fair!).
Assuming they do find that he (as an individual) is in breach of the Code of Conduct/by-laws of the IFA, I believe that they may be obliged to try to resolve the issues by discussion leading to his changing his practice, and only if this fails (or he won't cooperate) can they go to the ultimate sanction of throwing him out.
If the IFA were to act precipitately, without due process, then they would themselves be in breach not only of their own rules but also the law. While they investigate, there will be nothing visible in public, but lots of activity below the surface. So, wait (possibly some months - I'm not sure how it takes) to see what happens before you condemn the IFA for inaction.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished