1st September 2008, 07:36 PM
'Employer', 'Contractor' and 'Consultant' are terms defined in the Contract because they are central to its operation.
'Curator' is defined for information, because it is a common shorthand term in the archaeological profession, but won't be familiar to non-archaeologists (at least, not with the same meaning).
'Planning Supervisor' is not defined, because it is defined in law. It is a health-and-safety management role; nothing directly to do with either archaeology or town-and-country planning. I know the name is confusing and misleading, but don't blame me or the authors of the Contract - it was a term prescribed by law.
I don't believe anyone else has found any ambiguity or confusion between the terms 'curator' and 'Planning Supervisor' - two unrelated roles.
I don't believe that all archaeological work should come under a consultant, or under the ICE Contract. Both Consultants and the Contract are optional. However, I do believe that developer-funded projects of medium to large size benefit from being managed by a Consultant, and that in such projects the use of the ICE Contract helps to protect the interests of both the client (= the Employer) and the Contractor.
Now, to get back on topic. Mr Sith originally asked for the comments of people who had come into contact with the Contract. You clearly haven't, except for the purposes of posting on this thread. We gather that you don't like it and you don't understand it. Well, no-one is trying to make you use it, so can we make room for some comments from those who have actual experience of the Contract?
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
'Curator' is defined for information, because it is a common shorthand term in the archaeological profession, but won't be familiar to non-archaeologists (at least, not with the same meaning).
'Planning Supervisor' is not defined, because it is defined in law. It is a health-and-safety management role; nothing directly to do with either archaeology or town-and-country planning. I know the name is confusing and misleading, but don't blame me or the authors of the Contract - it was a term prescribed by law.
I don't believe anyone else has found any ambiguity or confusion between the terms 'curator' and 'Planning Supervisor' - two unrelated roles.
Quote:quote:1man are you now implying that the type of work that I do should come under the ice contract and that the Good Docs view that all fieldwork should come under an archaeological consultant is the correct implication of the ice contract.No, I am not implying that. In my last post, I was emphasising that all the work you do (just like anyone else) comes under health and safety law.
I don't believe that all archaeological work should come under a consultant, or under the ICE Contract. Both Consultants and the Contract are optional. However, I do believe that developer-funded projects of medium to large size benefit from being managed by a Consultant, and that in such projects the use of the ICE Contract helps to protect the interests of both the client (= the Employer) and the Contractor.
Quote:quote:Where I lose the plot is in clause 13.2(a) where the Consultant is the planning Supervisor as well. I suspect that this combination is the position that you are employed in.You suspect wrongly. I have often been the Consultant, but never the Planning Supervisor, and I would not accept that role as I don't have the expertise.
Quote:quote:By this I mean that possibly the Good Doc cannot act as a planning supervisor as the position is presumably responsible for the whole construction activity.You are correct in saying that the PS is responsible for the whole 'construction' operation - but under some circumstances that might principally consist of an archaeological phase of works, and a new PS could take over for later stages where the 'construction' actually involves building something. Not good practice, in my view, but it could be done.
Now, to get back on topic. Mr Sith originally asked for the comments of people who had come into contact with the Contract. You clearly haven't, except for the purposes of posting on this thread. We gather that you don't like it and you don't understand it. Well, no-one is trying to make you use it, so can we make room for some comments from those who have actual experience of the Contract?
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished