12th August 2011, 01:06 PM
kevin wooldridge Wrote:There may be a case for discussing the merits of the merger between IfA and AAIS, but it is wrong to suggest that the IfA is in any way acting beyond its remit in allowing the merger to go ahead. The Articles of Memorandum of the IfA allow it (through approval by the elected IfA council):
(k) to establish, subsidise, promote, cooperate with, receive into union, become a member of, act as or appoint trustees to, act as or appoint agents or delegates for, control, manage, superintend, lend or give monetary assistance to, or otherwise assist any association and institution, incorporated or not incorporated, with charitable objects altogether or in part similar to those of the Institute, which shall prohibit the distribution of their income and property amongst their members to an extent at least as great as is imposed on the Institute by virtue of Clause 4 hereof
This is information made freely available on the IfA website. It all seems above board to me...
Above board maybe, although I am not sure which part of that very long statement would include 'allow merger of smaller organisation into IfA'. It might have at least been polite to ask members of the IfA. I have been a member for a while, I'm not sure if something like this, or on this scale has come up before.
The issue is, as BAJR was perhaps hinting, the terms of the merger. Certain level of AAIS being made MIfA, certain level being made AIfA etc, but the manner in which the 'equivalent' grades in the AAIS were judged is completely different. So now you have people who are MIfAs on the basis of being able to draw well, which is fair enough, but are they going to change the entry requirements for everyone else? The AAIS members seem to have shot themselves in the foot, and the IfA has hobbled itself by carrying them. So some consultation would have been nice since I now have no idea what the membership levels mean or what the point of membership is.