Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"The following has been posted by the IFA on their website Archaeology News : Disciplinary investigation results in expulsion of a PIFA member of the IFA
Posted by ifa_alex on 4/1/2007 15:32:06 (178 reads)
Following an investigation into two allegations of misconduct against Karl-James Langford PIFA (4549) the Executive committee of the IFA agreed with the findings of the Disciplinary Panel that Karl-James had been in breach of a number of clauses of the IFA Code of conduct.

These included Principle 5, in particular rules 5.1 and 5.7 that:

5.1 An archaeologist shall give due regard to the requirements of employment legislation relating to employees, colleagues or helpers.

5.7 An archaeologist shall have due regard to the rights of individuals who wish to join or belong to a trade union, professional or trade association.

and Principle 1, in particular rules 1.1 and 1.12

1.1 An archaeologist shall conduct himself or herself in a manner which will not bring archaeology or the Institute into disrepute.

1.12 An archaeologist has a duty to ensure that this Code is observed throughout the membership of the Institute, and also to encourage its adoption by others (see note on Rule 1.12).

As a result the Disciplinary Panel recommended that Karl-James Langford be expelled from the Institute, and this sanction was again agreed by the Executive committee.

Following notification of the sanction, Karl-James Langford put forward an appeal to the Council of the Institute (clause 27 of the Disciplinary regulations) and this was considered at the last meeting on 11 December 2006. Council found the appeal to be frivolous and/or vexatious and therefore upheld the sanction agreed by the Executive committee.

Karl-James Langford has therefore been expelled from the Institute with immediate effect. "

The item says that the Executive committee was in agreement with the Disciplinary Committee. When I go to the IFA council and committee web site

I find neither the committee or panel mentioned nor importantly the names of members on them. Are they secret? How do you get onto them? Does the executive have to validate the disiplinary...
Thanks Peter. We can take no pleasure in this act... but are glad to see a robust act taken against an individual who used/misused membership of the IFA in the way they did.

Perhaps this would lay to rest those that felt this person was being unfairly hounded. However.. This is an appropriate and measured response.

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Have heard a bit about said individual but not enough for me to make any comments on his behaviour.Expulsion from the IFA? Cool.Will that have any effect on his behaviour? I do of course welcome a pro-active IFA but this is just one PIFA. How many others have been expelled from the IFA over the years? Just out of interest thats all. As an aside, after lengthy discussions with colleagues regarding the complaints I was about to register- I was informed that jobs may be put at risk and my colleagues felt that I should be satisfied with the slap the company got for the RAO debacle.So I wont be making my complaints.

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
I have tried but I cant fathom from the IFA web statements/web site what he might have done. So is there a point.
Unit of 1,

About a year or so ago there was a lot of discussion of this chap and indignation about his practices on BAJR, and complaints were made to the IFA. This was all based largely on statements made by the man himself on his own website and in other discussion forums.

Over the past year, the IFA have obviously investigated and then gone through the disciplinary procedures (which are documented), and then given him a chance to appeal, before publishing the result. I also believe that the IFA entered discussion with him about mending his ways before going into formal disciplinary procedures.

Their statement clearly identifies which rules he has broken, but not how he broke them.


to let, fully furnished
Hang on a sec....

The IFA are publishing details of an individuals expulsion from the IFA (fair enough). However, when an organisation was removed from membership no mention of the details of the case was published??? Is this the case that AS had more money and clout than Mr Langford??

If the reasons for expeling the individual have been published, how about the evidence???

Surely there are not double standards acting?????

Voice of reason.....
In my view the IFA have acted as they should and in fact details of the outcome of other disciplinary action has been published on their web site.

Such hearings and the evidence should be private and in this case this is particularly so. Much of the evidence will have been his statements made on Britarch and BAJR. See below.

I am satisfied with both the procedure and the outcome but it gives me no pleasure.

Can we regard this matter as now closed and stop the IFA bashing.

Life is too short

Peter Wardle

For example:

"There is no question about it, my unit supplies all the equipment,
transport, plus safety helmet, hivis jacket and toe capped boots.

If any unit manager questions my units policy they shouldn't be
undertaking professional work on any level either.

For archaeological work on ALL occasions we where safety equipment, even
when the excavation levels are slight, it looks professional. I am sick to
the back teeth as archaeologists looking like tramps, after all a
solicitor wouldn't be seen dead at work not wearing a suit.

Archaeologists have to look professional, such as wearing a hardhat or
not, if you work for me and you don't wear safety equipment after 3
warnings your suspended on appeal. That is written into a signed contract.

The individual recently we suspended had not signed any contract so they
were luckily for them treated as if them had signed a contract. If I had
my way they would have been suspended.

As for unions, I wouldn't employ anyone who was a member of a union,
socialist institutions fit for the waste bin.

Karl-James Langford PGDipAH, PIFA "
I remember now-yes...probably the most gut-wrenchingly entertaining statements I have read in a long, long time.FantasticBig Grin Please don`t stop this guy from making statements like this-expulsion from the IFA or not-have`nt wet myself so much since primary school...wonderful! Thank you Karl- been a while since I`ve had tears streaming down me ugly face.No more IFA bashing Peter? Will endeavour to behave sir..especially if they can come up with more comedy people of that calibre...fantastic!Better than a night out!Big GrinBig GrinBig Grin

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Just been doing a bit of e-research as you do when you are sad like me! If the above quote is anything to go by, im not surprised that the aforementioned individual only got 1% or so, as a candidate to be the Liberal (?!) MP for the Vale of Glamorgan.

Also there is a website:
(still displaying IFA credentials too as was the case with AS' RAO badge for a while).

Muddy: if i rememember correctly the IFA DID publish the reason AS were no longer an RAO, true, it wasnt at all detailed and it was in a section of the website marked 'beware of the leopard', but it was there! Wasn't it for giving false or out of date info on an application or something?

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)