13th June 2008, 03:29 PM
Quote:quote:"Not true - the RAO itself is obliged to ensure that all its employees adhere to the standards, whether or not they are IFA members."
As it would be illegal to insist on IFA membership for an individual within an organisation and a non-IFA member has no obligation to work under someone elses contract with the IFA the individuals are not of course answerable to the IFA. One would hope that archaeologists would adhere to there own standards which should pretty much match those of the IFA but an RAO cannot legally enforce IFA standards on employees, but can enforce it?s own standards, via a contract, on employees these standards would have to be rigidly defined though within the contract as 'acceptable' or 'suitable' standard could equally apply to methods outside of IFA guidelines but still ethical and accurate. A non IFA member cannot therefore be brought to task for not following IFA standards and therefore developers, for example cannot have the perceived security of IFA standards when not everyone is answerable to them within an organisation.
1man1desk is quite right here. If you work for an RAO, you are obliged to adhere to the standards and guidance of the IFA. That is really the whole point of the company being an RAO. I have sugned one of these employment contracts in the past, and they are well within their rights to include a clause saying something like "the employee will abide by the standards and guidance of the IFA". An RAO cannot require you to be a member of the IFA (though they can offer to pay your subs).
The IFA is never going to meet your definition of "independent", as it will always be reliant on its members for funds. Just like all other professional associations and trade unions. Barring the possibility of an eccentric millionaire setting them up with a trust fund.