10th March 2006, 02:14 PM
Quote from Diggerhobbit:
The standards are obligatory for all individual IFA members at any grade and for all RAOs, all of whom are subject to the IFA Code of Conduct and disciplinary procedures.
Non-members and non-RAOs are not subject to any action by the IFA, even if they say they are voluntarily subject to them. However, if the work concerned is done under an agreed WSI or a Contract that specifies that the IFA standards will be applied, you can complain to the curator or client/consultant, who may be able to take action in case of a breach. I have taken action against units on this basis in my consultant role. The benefit here is that the standards provided by the IFA provide a benchmark against which the standard of practice can be measured. Bear in mind that these options are also open as a second line of attack even where the alleged offender is an IFA member/RAO.
Personally, I would like to see IFA membership/RAO status as requirements for any person/organisation wanting to work in archaeology - then we would all be subject to the standards.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Quote:quote:I am all for the idea of supporting the implementation of standards within field archaeology, but as i understand it these are optional? (correct me if im wrong please), therefore, how can they be governed and enforced? if, i wanted to report an incident to the ifa that had been committed by a non ifa registered organisation/member - would it be disregarded because they don't have to follow the standards? therefore, what am i paying for?
The standards are obligatory for all individual IFA members at any grade and for all RAOs, all of whom are subject to the IFA Code of Conduct and disciplinary procedures.
Non-members and non-RAOs are not subject to any action by the IFA, even if they say they are voluntarily subject to them. However, if the work concerned is done under an agreed WSI or a Contract that specifies that the IFA standards will be applied, you can complain to the curator or client/consultant, who may be able to take action in case of a breach. I have taken action against units on this basis in my consultant role. The benefit here is that the standards provided by the IFA provide a benchmark against which the standard of practice can be measured. Bear in mind that these options are also open as a second line of attack even where the alleged offender is an IFA member/RAO.
Personally, I would like to see IFA membership/RAO status as requirements for any person/organisation wanting to work in archaeology - then we would all be subject to the standards.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished