3rd October 2008, 10:13 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
[quote]
Can anybody actually bullet point these improvements? more than 3 would be good.:face-huh:
I think the code of conduct argues it all by itself! Let alone the standard and guidance! Just picking on one of two points amongst many others!
Standards
Before IFA, there was no way we could argue that we were a profession and deserved to be treated as professionals. We all have discussed ad infinitum the fact that there are people out there who call themselves archaeologists but who (not to put too fine a point on it) are c**p. Without the standards and guidance, there would be no way that anyone could say 'this piece of work isn't good enough'.
Code of conduct
Specifically states that archaeologists must have respect for other archaeologists and their career aspirations. Someone has been removed from membership in the last few years because of this.
RAOs
It's not perfect, but at least there's an attempt to increase pay and better conditions using this mechanism.
CWPAT
Have produced a number of documents, in partnership with other organisations, which have had/will have a wide ranging impact. The draft guidance on assessment of setting is an example.
Groups
The IFA have supported and assisted their specialist and regional groups (including 'diggers forum')allowing dispersed groups of individuals to get support and develop their working lives.
That's 5 - and I'm just picking on one or two things within each area.
Believe me, I have had major disagreements with things the IFA have done. I didn't join until a very long time after I should have done, often for very much the same reasons quoted elsewhere. However, at least with a set of standards and a code of conduct etc you can have a discussion/argument that has boundaries and framework. You can work to change people's mind within that framework too.
So, if you were expecting 'IFA did this for me' you won't get it, because they are not a trade union! they are a professional body! This means that they are involved with strategic level stuff such as influencing government to agree that archaeology is important and should continue to be included in the planning process (there's another example). Because, let's face it, there really aren't all that many members of the public that given the choice between archaeology and having their bins collected every week would choose the former.