23rd August 2008, 12:16 AM
Quote:quote: It is simply not a matter for the IFA to decide who should be involved in particular types of contract.Doctor- does the ice contract not proceed,presumably for members of the ifa in 1990 :
a Code of approved practice for the regulation of contractual arrangements in field archaeology for its members?
1man- does this really follow in 2004?
Quote:quote:The contract was produced this way because the IFA clearly did not have the expertise on contracts in-house but did have the required knowledge of how archaeology works, whereas the ICE/CCSJC did have both the contractual expertise and a specialist publishing house, but did not have sufficient archaeological knowledge to do the job themselves.
Why then in the ice contract, and also its guide, both intended for civil engineers, does the ifa singularly in any of the documents not mention the
Code of approved practice for the regulation of Contractual arrangements in field archaeology
Please someone tell me I am wrong, I have tried to read them twice, if only they were in digital form I could find out easily if I was making it up as I went along.
In the guide 1.5, page 3, mentions a Code of Conduct and a Code of approved Practiceâ¦.(of what).
Nowhere in the guide or contarct are clauses of the Code of approved practice for the regulation of Contractual arrangements in field archaeology, related the to the ice clause or visa versa.
What is going on!