Unit struck of IFA list

[gumbo]

A little bird told me that a certain contracting unit in the south east have just been struck of the IFA list of approved contractors. Is this a circuit rumour? Am I getting over excited?

Gumbo

[BAJR Host]

The IFA never strike people off... the Contractor that I think you are talking about... who may or may not be the same one as mentioned in the Digger.. may or may not have left of own free will.

Have a look at http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ic...hp?page=22 to check if you are right or not

[vulpes]

It would appear that the IFA DO strike organisations off. See the foot of the page on BAJRs link.

[gumbo]

IFA Website: 'Unfortunately it has now been necessary to remove Archaeological Solutions from the RAO list for providing false information in support of an application for registration'

Does anyone know what this really means? Please enlighten me.

Gumbo

[vulpes]

According to the AS website they are still a RAO, mind you they also still apparently employ people who left the company a year ago. I would think the meaning of the IFAs statement is clear enough, rhymes with porky pies...

[Oxbeast]

What about individuals, like the MIFA who is/was presumably in charge? The IFA should be making efforts to find people who work/have worked for the said unit and give them a ticking off.

After all, this unit did recently change its name, and shed most of its staff. Much like Windscale changed its name after a massive fire...

[gumbo]

Surely the IFA should also do something about a company not on its list of RAO's that is advertising iself as an RAO on its own website. If this act doesn't contravene an IFA by-law or guideline then what's the point of having a list of RAO's in the first place?

Will it have to be down to BAJR or the digger (yet again) to point things like this out.

[Digger]

Staff at the unit are unaware of the situation and have not been informed of the status quo. Have met a few people who have worked and still work there. Some, who are still there, have been working very hard to improve things and feel that they have been ... I think you get the picture.

[Pedant]

quote:Originally posted by gumbo

Surely the IFA should also do something about a company not on its list of RAO's that is advertising iself as an RAO on its own website. If this act doesn't contravene an IFA by-law or guideline then what's the point of having a list of RAO's in the first place?

Will it have to be down to BAJR or the digger (yet again) to point things like this out.

Has anyone been in touch with the IFA yet to point out that AS claim still to be registered?
}

[vulpes]

Oxbeast, you seem to be missing the point. AS appear to have been kicked out for fibbing on their RAO application form and not for anything 'archaeological' they or any of their present or former staff may or may not have done. This would suggest to me a failure at a managemental level and not constitute a criticism of their staff in general. How many diggers do you know that fill out RAO applications?