25th January 2013, 02:26 PM
Good point Kev; I think most of us know very little about what is going on and its legal/procedural background. Here was my hap'enneth:
--snip--
It is my understanding that a delegation of archaeological contractors has lobbied the IfA to remove the pay minima, and that there will be a vote in this issue at the forthcoming Council meeting. It is reported that this may lead to the abandonment of the pay minima.
My recollection of the meeting at Burlington House on November 15th was that a vote was taken regarding retention of the minima at current levels and a consultation period as to their future. The motion was carried (again, from my recollection) with one vote against and two abstentions from the members present.
Would you please respond explaining to me what is taking place, and the way in which it conforms to Institute due process. I would also like to know whether next week's meeting is open to all members and if so whether a vote will be taken from all members, rather than just the Council.
The issue of pay minima goes to the heart of the debate about what the Institute is and should be. If, as is being widely reported, the direction of this key issue is determined by Council alone without every effort being made to canvass the opinion of the wider membership (most of whom are unable to attend meetings in London), the consequences may be serious. An institution which needs to grow to achieve its goal of chartership should take great care not to alienate its grass roots and more junior members.
Regards,
---snip---
--snip--
It is my understanding that a delegation of archaeological contractors has lobbied the IfA to remove the pay minima, and that there will be a vote in this issue at the forthcoming Council meeting. It is reported that this may lead to the abandonment of the pay minima.
My recollection of the meeting at Burlington House on November 15th was that a vote was taken regarding retention of the minima at current levels and a consultation period as to their future. The motion was carried (again, from my recollection) with one vote against and two abstentions from the members present.
Would you please respond explaining to me what is taking place, and the way in which it conforms to Institute due process. I would also like to know whether next week's meeting is open to all members and if so whether a vote will be taken from all members, rather than just the Council.
The issue of pay minima goes to the heart of the debate about what the Institute is and should be. If, as is being widely reported, the direction of this key issue is determined by Council alone without every effort being made to canvass the opinion of the wider membership (most of whom are unable to attend meetings in London), the consequences may be serious. An institution which needs to grow to achieve its goal of chartership should take great care not to alienate its grass roots and more junior members.
Regards,
---snip---