Poll: I support the idea of an IfA Chartered Status
This poll is closed.
Yes absolutely
42.69%
111 42.69%
Yes with caveats
28.08%
73 28.08%
Not really
10.00%
26 10.00%
Absolutely not
19.23%
50 19.23%
Total 260 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
IfA - A Chartered Institute
Good thread this......
I will start out by holding up my hands to railing against the IfA (somewhat vociferouslyWink) for the best part of a decade. I finally applied for membership when I realised that career progression and pay minima could actually be positively affected by simply joining up. More importantly, I have signed up to work within professional standards (my main reason for breathing) as I have experienced far too many charades in the line of duty across the industry. Quite simply, butcher the finite resource for profit or gain (be you Curator, Unit Manager or the Pope himself) and I will refuse to take part regardless of the level of pressure applied. So sue me. I have made complaints to the IfA in the past and can openly say that those concerns were taken seriously and were acted upon. In a simplistic "better to be in the tent pissing out than outside pissing in" kind of a way, when I stand up and hold my ground in pursuit of professionalism, ethics and standards, I do so as a member of an Institute that requires me to do exactly that. I would love to see a Unit terminate my contract on the basis that I dared to adhere to the tenets of my Institution. Even those Units who are not RAOs manage to slide in the old "will work to the guidelines of the IfA" within fee proposals and WSIs. Tiz a legal contract. For me, the IfA can provide for a positive way of ensuring that the industry works towards the maintenance of professional standards (I can hear you all gasping!) and it does work best when members become proactive.
Chartership in my view does ring a few alarm bells but overall.....is it not high time that professional heritage workers become recognised on an equal footing with other industries? Even if I were to take a rather cynical view and see this as a way for top tier workers to further milk the golden calf and widen the gaps further.....surely, any increase in recognition for the industry on the whole would result in exponential increases across the spectrum?
From what I can see, the vast majority of the industry want something more from an Institute they are not willing to join. The mechanics of the Institute would actually work in favour of the majority if they were only willing to win their right to vote by being inside the tent. The answer in my view is becoming increasingly obvious.....win the right to vote (by joining)...then become the tail that wags the dog. Membership for me has had positive effects....whether I agree in principle or not....my competency levels have been recognised....my pay minima established. I`ve also signed up to professional standards and more importantly, have a vote. Forums are a superb tool where everyone can have an opinion (we owe you Mister Hosty!) but forums don`t provide the opportunity to vote in the only Institute (and possibly Chartered at that) directly able to influence our chosen industry. :face-stir:
Reply
Nicely and concisely said Troll. I totally agree....
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
Reply
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1172[/ATTACH]

The 8 October is nearly upon us and we hope members will be joining us both for the AGM and our event, Get Charter.
Members are invited to take part in a consultation event considering governance changes and to engage in a discussion about the proposed changes and their impact. You will have the opportunity to hear why we have opted to take some options over others and will be asked what you think. The event includes an open Q&A session on the subject of Chartered status and its implications for the Institute and the future of the profession. Governance changes, including applying for incorporation by Royal Charter, are the subject of the event, but not of the votes which will be taking place after the event. Once the consultation is formally closed, comments will be considered and revised documentation circulated. Depending on the timescales involved, we are hoping that you will be approached to vote on the proposed changes at an EGM in the late Spring of 2013. This session will inform the production of both sets of documentation.
Reply
aye troll - nicely said
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Reply
There... Troll said it... and who would have guessed he would a few years back? So there is a concise reason.... once that makes you want to join... :face-approve:

I don't take offence at only being BAJR... ( forum etc ) it's what I/we do and all the better for it. BUT it needs a grown up attitude to take archaeology forward. one that troll has explained very well.
Reply
I fear you do yourself a disservice sir....
The BAJR Forum has been at the forefront of heritage issues for decades and has been a vital lifeline for those of us without a voice. I don`t think for a moment that the majority of subscribers to this forum are even remotely aware of the work Mr Hosty has done behind the scenes for all of us. The BAJR Forum has hosted current and cutting edge thought in the heritage industry and continues to do so.....without an opportunity to openly enter into constructive dialogue, our disparate and geographically dispersed industry would never have been empowered in the way that it has. Opinion drives change. Huzzah Mr Hosty! :face-approve:
Reply
But Troll, its not a case of winning the right to vote. You have to pay for the right..................

Then we are straight back to the olden days of the plebs dying in the mills whilst the rich reap the benefits in the name of progress.

A bit of a dark metaphor, I know. But think about it without rosy-tinted glasses. Is a constituted society the best curator for our industry and heritage?

I'm coming at this from my experience of constituted societies. All they seem to do is break things by compromise, or follow someones personal agenda.

I am 100% in favour of chartered status for archaeologists. I just think it either should be ran as a quango-type dictatorship with clearly defined constitution, or as a cooperative with everyone having the same say.

And should definitely be free.

Maybe IFA could do it, maybe I am wrong (wouldn't be the first time), your words sound like sense, except for the warning in my heart. To me the IFA seem like the servants of darkness who seem fairer but feel fouler.

I would favour BAJR (or something similar) being the administrator of charterdom or English Heritage (even with their many many flaws) over the IFA anyday.
Reply
Jack Wrote:from my experience of chartered societies.

should definitely be free.



In your previous experience of chartered organisations exactly what percentage of them were free to join?

I'm not at all sure about chartered status for the IfA as I fear it will further drive a wedge between those at the top (chartered manager-level) and those at the bottom (everyone else). Look at the figures of membership - why are there proportionally so many more MIfAs than any other level? Is it to do with the constant instability of PIfA and AIfA level member's jobs and therefore their fluctuating ability to remain members? I see from the recent magazine that membership numbers (i.e. those given out to members) are now some way over 6000. Yet the list members by level given earlier in this thread only listed about 3-4000. Where have all the rest gone? I fear that there is a silent majority of members who join (perhaps because an employer offers to pay) but only remain a member as long as they are employed, i.e. not very long. They are the ones who have virtually no voice in the organisation but need to be listened to the most. Just a thought.
Reply
Jack Wrote:I am 100% in favour of chartered status for archaeologists. I just think it either should be ran as a quango-type dictatorship with clearly defined constitution, or as a cooperative with everyone having the same say. And should definitely be free.

The IfA has a clearly defined constitution but is neither a quango nor a dictatorship. And everyone who is a member of the IfA has a say, but clearly many choose not to say a lot.

Your main objection therefore seems to be one along the lines of 'I'd happily join IfA if it were run by Stalin and the Politburo'......we live in strange times!!
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
Reply
Jack Wrote:......I would favour BAJR (or something similar) being the administrator of charterdom .

from sainthood to deity in one breath and tinpot dictator in the next - either way the statues will be toppled and who would buy his tools?
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Chartered Archaeologists are to be a reality BAJR 95 29,902 14th March 2014, 01:10 PM
Last Post: Marc Berger
  The Institute for Archaeologists: a chartered institute? BAJR 4 3,135 3rd May 2013, 05:43 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  Council for British Research in the Levant is seeking a British Institute Scholar BAJR 1 1,130 2nd May 2010, 08:50 AM
Last Post: BAJR
  chartered status muddyandcold 8 4,737 5th June 2006, 11:32 AM
Last Post: the invisible man
  Institute of Field Archaeologists and Prospect Troll 36 9,426 21st May 2005, 10:33 AM
Last Post: BAJR Host
  professional institute Troll 26 7,773 4th May 2005, 11:40 PM
Last Post: deepdigger

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)