1st December 2009, 03:38 PM
Clare King Wrote:Prospect (in it's former guise of IPMS) has been around and had an archaeology branch since at least the early 1990s (I know because I used to be a member!). That's not that much shorter time than IfA. How come no-one's having a go at them about how bad the situation is?
Oh... tempt me..! I have found them unable to return calls, unable to investigate claims, unable to come up with solutions etc. I am sure they do some good, but as far as archaeologists are concerned.. I am not sure what it is? And what is their stance on this ? ... tumbleweed... they should not even need to be asked, as they are supposed to have finger on teh pulse... ahem... rant that could go on.
I don't think this is have a go at the IfA thread... after all it is the IfA dealing with the IfA.
And if people know of companies who are not ROs who pay under the minima... then let us know... its not against the law to tell a truth. Concerning the safety net for non-ROs that'll be BAJR.
It seems to have passed by the 12 point grading system that is already in place here on BAJR. has been for years, and is accepted by all who advertise. (or else !)
Clare King Wrote:You can't look to IfA to enforce anything on those, they're not in it.it nearly did not have to... but democratic process won by a tail. As teh DF say.. something like this should not be just for the IfA council to discuss. It was too big a deal for everyone (both in and out of the IfA)
A strong IfA and a sense of cooperation and transparency.
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Thomas Rainborough 1647