8th November 2013, 03:10 PM
Jack Wrote:Yeah, thats my second mind...........'trade' needs to be restricted to those actually capable of doing the job. And adhering to standards will make undercutting more difficult, so it follows trade should be restricted to those adhering to these standards. But............how can this be enforced....
Predictions for the number of folk employed directly or indirectly in UK archaeology is about 5000. IfA has something in the region of 3000 members, CBA claims membership of nearly 5000 and 600 affiliate groups. Some of those numbers clearly overlap, but all need to be accomodated in some relationship to Chartered archaeologists, as do whatever number of archaeologists there are, that out of principle are members of nothing or are in training (students, apprentices etc). I welcome the idea of a Chartered archaeologist, but am also happy to accomodate unchartered archaeologists...the only difference I would make is one of professionalism.
That is where I suspect folk outside of commercial archaeology will end up making the rules. So for example curators might insist that any work undertaken as part of the planning process is overseen by a Chartered archaeologist (much like the licenced field director in Ireland and other places). Insurance companies might stipulate that public liability and professional insurance rates for archaeologists are linked to Chartered status with increased premiums for non-chartered applicants....It would be for unchartered archaeologists to find their own level within the broad church of archaeology contingent with those rules.....and I am sure therefore that there will still be a place for both amateur and non-chartered participants.
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...