23rd June 2013, 08:02 PM
Dinosaur Wrote:Unfortunately added membership also serves to strengthen IfA's claim to represent the majority of archaeologists - at the moment that's their weakest point, the fact that they don't represent the majority of the profession...maybe they should turn the whole organisation into one of their special interest groups - 'archaeologists who prefer playing politics'...
ehhh there very close depending on how one counts it. A big benefit (big in the sense of quantity e.g. most organizations offer) offered to employees is paying IfA fees (from what I have been told this can then be claimed back from the taxman so actually the gov. pays for it). So lots of people are in the IfA. Looking at the recent count of archaeologists 4200-4900 and the recent count of IfA membership (3300 last I heard) they probably do represent half or more of professional archaeologists(however one defines that). It gets a little dicey when one counts student members and affiliates in those numbers. Are they really students or interested or just people who want the benefits (except voting) but don't want to personally pay 200+.
So maybe they don't represent exactly half of professional archaeologists (however one defines that) but they are pretty damn close.
YES- person(s) who point(s) out that they or none of their friends are in the IfA or anyone they know in archaeology blah blah blah. Both can be true. IfA doesn't cover everyone and I suspect that there are certain groups missed. Just saving us some time
