26th February 2008, 04:31 PM
I take everybody points about chartered status but.....
1. I doubt that legally an institute with chartered status could enforce pay rates on the private sector.
2. All of this is too late with the changes in the designation system coming and the whole concept of the historic environment and the IFA talking about merger with IHBC.
3. OK lets say we have chartered archaeologists so lets try and define what only chartered archaeologists can do would the following be included:
Building recording
Carbon 14 dating
archaeological geophysics
4. If we say destructive fieldwork can only be done by chartered archaeologists what will happen to all the Amateur groups?
5. It is government policy to break professional monopolies where the public pay for their services (except medicine and teaching).
6. Just how would obtaining chartered status be managed for the many people who have been in archaeology for years and have no actual qualifications?
7. Would making archaeology a graduate only profession be a good thing?
8. Who would pay for the infrastructure for setting up the chartered system?
What we need is a simple system for ensuring that bona fide qualified and experienced people undertake work destructive required by the planning system.
The notion of archaeology being chartered has been talked about since 1980 and the formation of the IFA. The point is us archaeologists may want to protect our jobs by chartered status but the real question is does government and the rest of society share our view?
Dr Peter Wardle
1. I doubt that legally an institute with chartered status could enforce pay rates on the private sector.
2. All of this is too late with the changes in the designation system coming and the whole concept of the historic environment and the IFA talking about merger with IHBC.
3. OK lets say we have chartered archaeologists so lets try and define what only chartered archaeologists can do would the following be included:
Building recording
Carbon 14 dating
archaeological geophysics
4. If we say destructive fieldwork can only be done by chartered archaeologists what will happen to all the Amateur groups?
5. It is government policy to break professional monopolies where the public pay for their services (except medicine and teaching).
6. Just how would obtaining chartered status be managed for the many people who have been in archaeology for years and have no actual qualifications?
7. Would making archaeology a graduate only profession be a good thing?
8. Who would pay for the infrastructure for setting up the chartered system?
What we need is a simple system for ensuring that bona fide qualified and experienced people undertake work destructive required by the planning system.
The notion of archaeology being chartered has been talked about since 1980 and the formation of the IFA. The point is us archaeologists may want to protect our jobs by chartered status but the real question is does government and the rest of society share our view?
Dr Peter Wardle