27th October 2011, 01:22 PM
kevin wooldridge Wrote:....well I'm not going to doubt anyone's integrity...It seems to me however that there is a difference between accepting and implementing a standard (which I am sure that the majority of archaeological practitioners in the UK do) and standing up and being accountable for that standard. It strikes me that IfA members fall into the latter group. If any curator or sponsor wants to acknowledge that due diligence and professed statement of responsibility, I think they should be allowed to exercise that right (In exactly the same manner that those who don't wish to belong to the IfA can exercise their right not to join). The IfA's legal position would appear to suggest that the practice of acknowledging IfA membership is not a constraint on trade and I would not be surprised if making IfA membership a pre-requisite for certain job applications does not also soon follow that trend.
Personally I am tired of the argument for or against the IfA, it strikes me its much more simplistic - in or out. The revealing trend might be that in future, if you want to maximise work opportunities the place to be is in, but no-one is forcing anyone to do anything. I wonder if there is the appetite for any non-IfA member or corporate body to challenge the IfA's 's legal interpretation. If not - hello Brave New World!!
that's what i said
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers