24th April 2010, 09:25 AM
Tiz a complex and often circular argument. There has been reams of dialogue (and monologue) posted on BAJR and other websites relating to the IFA over too many years to remember. For me, I would love to see an IFA that made a difference. I am now of the opinion that if we are to be taken seriously as a profession then...we do need a professional institute. I am also of the opinion that pay and conditions should not be a part of an institutions remit but should fall squarely within the realms of unions and legal representation. Archaeology (and in particular-commercial archaeology) should be subject to professional standards and the IFA have written and published them. That in itself should be applauded so in the "what have the IFA ever done for us" vein.....thats exactly what they have done for us.
In many other disscussions of the role of the IFA on here and elsewhere, it has been established that the "enforcement" of standards falls squarely and exclusively within the remit of Curatorial archaeologists at County and City level. The IFA merely write, publish and promote standards. They have no real standing in law per se. In practise, the pressures of commerce in archaeology can and do have a negative effect upon the standard of work carried out by some but not all archaeological organisations. That, as I see it, is the real challange that we as a profession face in the 21st Century. The IFA produce the standards and Curators are responsible for "policing" standards. Thats about it. In an ideal world, all professional archaeologists would work to IFA standards and promote them. In an ideal world, Curators would pro-actively police professional standards. We don`t work in an ideal world.
For me, I`m one of those people who actively promote professional standards and feel ethically, morally and professionally obliged to do so. To that end, I support the IFA without reservation. I try (when possible) to work only for IFA RAO`s who do what it says on the tin. Quite frankly, the rest is up to the Curators. As an individual working in field archaeology, I can and do promote professional standards by doing the best I can with the resources I am given. I have stopped short of joining the IFA as an individual for two reasons. It is a personal preference that I will only work for an RAO that is passionate about getting the job done properly and in that way-as a worker I am voting with my feet (or trowel!) and am therefore working to IFA standards by default. Secondly, there are thousands of professional field archaeologists out here (including me) who find it offensive to be graded as "those in the early stages of their career" after donkeys years of professional full time practise. Should the IFA re-assess their membership criteria and recognise the professionalism of the majority of the workforce....their membership levels would rise exponentially.
In conclusion.....standards are essential in a professional world and should continue to be written and promoted by the IFA. Standards should be policed and pro-actively enforced by Curatorial archaeologists. Unions and legal representatives should exclusively be the ones to advance and protect pay and conditions. As individuals, we can all contribute by entering into constructive dialogue and actively promoting standards by doing the best we can with what we are given.
In many other disscussions of the role of the IFA on here and elsewhere, it has been established that the "enforcement" of standards falls squarely and exclusively within the remit of Curatorial archaeologists at County and City level. The IFA merely write, publish and promote standards. They have no real standing in law per se. In practise, the pressures of commerce in archaeology can and do have a negative effect upon the standard of work carried out by some but not all archaeological organisations. That, as I see it, is the real challange that we as a profession face in the 21st Century. The IFA produce the standards and Curators are responsible for "policing" standards. Thats about it. In an ideal world, all professional archaeologists would work to IFA standards and promote them. In an ideal world, Curators would pro-actively police professional standards. We don`t work in an ideal world.
For me, I`m one of those people who actively promote professional standards and feel ethically, morally and professionally obliged to do so. To that end, I support the IFA without reservation. I try (when possible) to work only for IFA RAO`s who do what it says on the tin. Quite frankly, the rest is up to the Curators. As an individual working in field archaeology, I can and do promote professional standards by doing the best I can with the resources I am given. I have stopped short of joining the IFA as an individual for two reasons. It is a personal preference that I will only work for an RAO that is passionate about getting the job done properly and in that way-as a worker I am voting with my feet (or trowel!) and am therefore working to IFA standards by default. Secondly, there are thousands of professional field archaeologists out here (including me) who find it offensive to be graded as "those in the early stages of their career" after donkeys years of professional full time practise. Should the IFA re-assess their membership criteria and recognise the professionalism of the majority of the workforce....their membership levels would rise exponentially.
In conclusion.....standards are essential in a professional world and should continue to be written and promoted by the IFA. Standards should be policed and pro-actively enforced by Curatorial archaeologists. Unions and legal representatives should exclusively be the ones to advance and protect pay and conditions. As individuals, we can all contribute by entering into constructive dialogue and actively promoting standards by doing the best we can with what we are given.