30th June 2013, 06:17 PM
CPAT wisely don't have a list at all, but direct people to the list ( I see no irony in that statement )
Sorry Martin.. I should have clarified. Dyfed Briefs require the archaeologist to be MIfA therefore non MIfA archaeologists will be unable to fulfil a vital criteria of the brief - therefore defacto excluded from tendering for jobs, as they will be unable to fulfill briefs.
THe legal challange is not the point - and as I have said. I would welcome people to join the IfA. what I don't like is the way people are being forced to join . and I don't like the attitude that if you don't like it, then tough.
I will ask this again. Martin ( who gives reasonable and sensible answers - and in my opinion is a better advert for IfA than others)
If I have worked well in this county, if I have produced excellent reports - why would I be effectively barred from being allowed to work in an area because I had not joined the IfA for whatever reason? Does joining the IfA make me competent and not being in the IfA make me incompetent? I still want to see membership as something to aspire to, not forced to.
Kevin's past boiler steam seems to have cooled and Vulpes seems to have forgotten that questions are different from non-stories - The title of the thread is "Is this a restriction of trade?" it is called a question one that requires an answer. Martin was able to answer it without recourse to calling this a non-story. It is called a bit of respect. Respect the right of others to ask questions - respect other peoples points of views, respect the right for a person to get a good answer and be able to either respond or say thanks that makes a difference. I apologise to Vulpes for forcing him to comment on this thread when it is clearly of no interest to him.
Martin gives reasonable and sensible and measured answers - and in my opinion is a better advert for IfA than some others.
Sorry Martin.. I should have clarified. Dyfed Briefs require the archaeologist to be MIfA therefore non MIfA archaeologists will be unable to fulfil a vital criteria of the brief - therefore defacto excluded from tendering for jobs, as they will be unable to fulfill briefs.
THe legal challange is not the point - and as I have said. I would welcome people to join the IfA. what I don't like is the way people are being forced to join . and I don't like the attitude that if you don't like it, then tough.
I will ask this again. Martin ( who gives reasonable and sensible answers - and in my opinion is a better advert for IfA than others)
If I have worked well in this county, if I have produced excellent reports - why would I be effectively barred from being allowed to work in an area because I had not joined the IfA for whatever reason? Does joining the IfA make me competent and not being in the IfA make me incompetent? I still want to see membership as something to aspire to, not forced to.
Kevin's past boiler steam seems to have cooled and Vulpes seems to have forgotten that questions are different from non-stories - The title of the thread is "Is this a restriction of trade?" it is called a question one that requires an answer. Martin was able to answer it without recourse to calling this a non-story. It is called a bit of respect. Respect the right of others to ask questions - respect other peoples points of views, respect the right for a person to get a good answer and be able to either respond or say thanks that makes a difference. I apologise to Vulpes for forcing him to comment on this thread when it is clearly of no interest to him.
Martin gives reasonable and sensible and measured answers - and in my opinion is a better advert for IfA than some others.