Have you used the ICE Conditions of Contract?

[Unitof1]

I suppose I will make this my last rant on this thread so don’t read it if you are feed up with all my others

Sorry doctor/1man could I not argue that from your point that you think that consultants should be involved in all field projects that I should be aware of this contract and that it does affect me.

I an sorry that, based purely on the principle that the archaeologist should secure the permission of the landowner as the owner of the archaeology, I do feel that the confusion between principle contractors planning supervisors and the device of the consultant replacing the principle contractor that has replace the employer who is not necessarily the landowner is a pigs ear particularly if you were to take the position of a digger working on one of these schemes.

Are there no views about CIS for people working under the ice contract.

quote: A big strip map sample exercise with several machines and loads of dumpers I would suggest is clearly an engineering operation and indeed is the sort of activity that the CDM regulations are designed to cover.

I think that the doctor- has tried the pre-determination is the same as post-determination because there are machines involved and it’s a health and safety issue therefore its construction, is a bit like 1mans

quote: you have to pay for archaeological work under conditions of the planning permission

You are saying that Any and All archaeologists, Amateurs, Academics are in fact construction workers and have to work under all their tax schemes and regulations.

Beamo

quote: Thus if you are carrying out a watching brief on a construction site which is subject to CDM, then you are subject to CDM and would become a 'Contractor' as defined by the CDM Regs, and would have to carry out the duries of a 'Contractor' as defined by the Regs.

quote: If you are carrying out an excavation on a construction site which is subject to CDM then you are subject to CDM and would become a 'Contractor' as defined by the Regs.

How about the concept that a watching brief (and should only be done after an evaluation is inconclusive) is obviously of a construction site but an evaluation trench or an excavation area is an archaeological site on which construction cannot occur until the archaeological activity has ceased.

Maybe ice should be relegated to watching briefs.

From a health and safety point of view I want full control and responsibility. Just the slightest chance that some planning supervisor or archaeological consultant may not understand my operations. I think its an irresponsible act for an archaeologist to leave to others. It seems to me that this so called planning supervisor is presumably the carrier of the insurance. I suggest that the archaeologist should be fully insured and if you are you then don’t need the planning thinggy. Maybe what I most don’t like about the ice contract is its obligation of heath and safety to some involuted construction model. Archaeologists don’t need it, the ifa don’t need consultants, they should shred this contract and start with a simple contract of archaeologist employs another archaeologist .