'What has IFA ever done for us...?'

[Jack]

As per the Romans (roads, sewerage system, medicine etc...) and out of a real wish to be more informed.


Actually what has the Institute ever done for us..........discuss

[RedEarth]

Simply replace 'IfA' with the words 'field archaeologists' (and make a few other grammatical changes) and you have your answer!
Perhaps the last sentance would then have to be 'Field Archaeologists are more concerned with complaining and looking after themselves.

Team work, people, team work.

[Jack]

So are you saying that the IFA hasn't done us any good?

[Dinosaur]

Too many options on this poll, too wide a field-spread! Any statisticians out there who can tell us how large the vote has to be produce a statistically valid result? Pretty bar-chart but will never replace snail-racing :p

[trainedchimp]

vote early, vote often.:face-angel:

as ever-there are choices: join the IfA and work to change it, accept it (joined or not) in all its imperfect glory, and/or go for BAJR Fed and help build that into something that can act. Just do something constructive.

as Red Earth says, team work...

[Dinosaur]

vote early, vote often....

Tried that! :face-crying:

- u got some way past the cursed technology? :face-huh:

My money's on yellow, but the blues seem to be winning - bit predictable really, where are all the IFA enthusiasts, past their bedtime?

[Dirty Boy]

I definately support the IFA in principle, think they have done good in archaeology and think that anyone who tries to improve standards of excavation should be supported.

However, I don't think they sell themselves as well as they could. While the RO scheme is good in principle, I've worked for plenty of units over the years and have yet to see that RO = Responsible Outfit.

I also think while CPD is a good idea, I wonder how may members will see it as a form to fill in rather than a useful tool (pleanty of experience of the former from a unit with good CPD). I'm wondering how the IFA will go about checking this.

I've also been thinking about how the IFA seem to be moving away from "Field Archaeologists" as such. The drop in the name was the first time I kind of sat up. I can't remember a topic at conferences in the last 2 years or so that seem to deal with "problems on the ground" such as pay, condtions, etc, and seem to deal with "bigger archaeological issues" - (please correct me if I'm wrong here).
I think the IFA is moving towards what I feel is its "natural" place in archaeology - trying to bring up standards of investigation as a whole. Perhaps a union would be better placed, operating outside of the RO system to act on issues such as pay and conditions, and could work in tandem with the IFA on this (teamwork!)
I would suggest, however, that the IFA cuts its fees. Over 100 quid a year is a lot, and something I feel paid towards a union may be money better spent on the major isues facing field archaeologists (look! - I'm moving towards joining a union) :face-angel:

[hurting-back]

Dirty Boy,

I think you are right about where the IFA is going, and not a moment too soon. I think any notion of the IFA working towards pay and conditions in the way a union would is actually very foolish as it also takes money from employers representing a irreconcilable conflict of interest. The IFA should focus on restricting access to the profession (in commercial practice), and setting standards for professional practice. Better market regulation and restricted access will help to address the wage issue up to a point. Unions can then argue about pay.

[RedEarth]

So are you saying that the IFA hasn't done us any good?

Not at all, I'm saying that field archaeologists (whatever that might mean) don't do themselves or each other any favours - plenty of complaining but not much action. Join the IfA, join a union, do both or something, but sitting on the sidelines complaining and setting up polls which have pretty much answered themselves isn't helpful.

The IfA is at least a start, the more joining the more effective it can be. Clearly it is difficult to be as involved as one would like and field staff could be helped in this respect by their employers allowing them time to attend meetings/conferences.

[Dinosaur]

Not at all, I'm saying that field archaeologists (whatever that might mean) don't do themselves or each other any favours - plenty of complaining but not much action. Join the IfA, join a union, do both or something, but sitting on the sidelines complaining and setting up polls which have pretty much answered themselves isn't helpful....

Actually I think the poll's demonstrated a couple of things:

(a) there's a vary varied view of IFA (comparing the various results on the poll suggests mostly slightly negative of middle, Jack didn't allow too many positive options and the one there is doesn't seem too popular), so you're not going to get everyone to join etc unless there are some pretty radical changes

(b) you're in for an uphill struggle, frankly most people don't care, after 24 hours there are a massive 40 votes, at 8.30 last night 64 people were viewing it, but clearly most of them regard IFA as so irrelevent as to not be worth commenting on (I'm in the yellow camp however)