Considering IFA membership

[drpeterwardle]

I have to say this thread sums up what I think is wrong with the IFA - membership ought to be an automatic choice for every practising archaeologist but.....

It is all so complicated and expensive. If this is this level of mis-understanding within archaeology how can anybody on the outside be expected to know what a corporate member actually is?

Why not just have a simple single membership grade for all qualified archaeologists rather than must have done work at this level of repsonsibility for three years lark?

Peter Wardle

[1man1desk]

General Error,

Sorry to hear that your MIFA application was turned down - but don't despair. If you really think you meet the published criteria, you can appeal, and one member of my team recently did so successfully. In addition, if you join now at AIFA, you can upgrade later, when you have a bit more experience under your belt.

Bear in mind that it is not just the amount of experience that counts - it is also the type of experience, and in particular the level of responsibility that you have worked at.

On the County Curators, what they are trying to do is assure themselves that the individual and/or organisation appointed to do the work is competent and qualified. Asking for MIFA and/or RAO is a shorthand way to do that, because someone else has validated the individual/organisation. I don't believe they actually have powers to enforce the requirement.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[historic building]

quote:Asking for MIFA and/or RAO is a shorthand way to do that, because someone else has validated the individual/organisation. I don't believe they actually have powers to enforce the requirement.

It would be a restraint of trade on an individual or organisation for a curator to state that someone MUST be MIFA or that an RAO must be used and there is no way it can be enforced. Curators can demand paperwork CVs, reports etc. or even sometimes we contact other curators and get their view to see if someone is suitably qualified. And that is the limit of the text - suitably qualified.

[Sith]

quote:Originally posted by 1man1desk

General Error,

one member of my team recently did so successfully.

True, but another one was refused at appeal, due to the goal posts being moved after the initial application. (original rejection due to nature and level of job, appeal rejection length of service at 'MIFA' level - by 1.5 months!).

D. Vader
Senior Consultant

Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants

WSIs do not concern me, Curator. I want that site, not excuses

[oldgirl]

That's not neccesarily moving the goal posts. They need to know details of the job before it can be assessed for levels of responsibility. Once the details are know, then the time criteria kicks in. And as for 1.5 months, I can understand the frustration, but there's a line drawn at 3 years. Where do you stop otherwise?

[Sith]

quote:Originally posted by oldgirl

That's not neccesarily moving the goal posts.

Quite right. However, a colleague apealed in similar circumstances and was accepted.

D. Vader
Senior Consultant

Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants

WSIs do not concern me, Curator. I want that site, not excuses

[1man1desk]

I think the key point here is that two appeals were made; one was allowed and the other not. However disappointing for the unsuccessful candidate, that does indicate both that appeals are worthwhile, because they sometimes succeed, and that in considering them the IFA is genuinely looking at individual circumstances.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[BAJR Host]

Fair point there...



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu