22nd February 2011, 10:21 AM
Surely any specialist group within the IfA (be it DF or the 'Southport Group') is implicitly part of an ongoing 'recruitment drive' to attact interest in the Institute? I have always thought that the DF was at least in part, the IfA answering criticism that it only sought to represent, by default or intent, the interests of the middle and upper managment 'classes' in UK archaeology.
And as for 'IfA Lite'.......surely on that account the DF is no 'lighter' than the RAO scheme binding non-members to the IfA code of conduct, through employer association rather than direct recruitment? (Neither which I disagree with, I should add before anyone gets on my back......)
I agree with David (I think!!) that wider and more deep-seated trade union participation is necessary before a significant improvement will be achieved in the working lives of most archaeologists. But the DF is a special interest group of the IfA, and not a recruting agency for the trade unions, (although it might help in persuading archaeologists that trade union membership is a good idea) and to that end can only operate within the bounds of the IfA charter and the IfA 'sphere of activity'. The numerous trade unions that represent archaeologists must, I feel, come up with their own initiatives if they wish to 'collectivise' the potential of a mass membership.....and so far it has to be said they seem singularly lacking towards that end.
And as for 'IfA Lite'.......surely on that account the DF is no 'lighter' than the RAO scheme binding non-members to the IfA code of conduct, through employer association rather than direct recruitment? (Neither which I disagree with, I should add before anyone gets on my back......)
I agree with David (I think!!) that wider and more deep-seated trade union participation is necessary before a significant improvement will be achieved in the working lives of most archaeologists. But the DF is a special interest group of the IfA, and not a recruting agency for the trade unions, (although it might help in persuading archaeologists that trade union membership is a good idea) and to that end can only operate within the bounds of the IfA charter and the IfA 'sphere of activity'. The numerous trade unions that represent archaeologists must, I feel, come up with their own initiatives if they wish to 'collectivise' the potential of a mass membership.....and so far it has to be said they seem singularly lacking towards that end.
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...