Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle

Have to say that I find the notion that the IFA should take over the role of IHBC if the IHBC donot want to merge to be a bit devisive.

What is required is more unity of purpose not less.

Then join the IFA and/or IHBC (if you haven't already) and make your feelings known. The IFA council is elected by its membership and I imagine this is also true of the IHBC council. They have a responsibility to their members. If you really don't like whats happening stand for their councils!

Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle

The question is why the IHBC does not want to merge with the IFA. On the face of merging is the logical and long over due thing to do.

According to the AGM transcript linked to above, the IHBC has about 1500 members which includes around '400 architects, 400 town planners and 56 archaeologists etc'. I imagine for the architects and town planners the IHBC represents a highly specialised secondary professional body which they joined after primarily being chartered architects or chartered surveyors etc. I can understand why they would be reluctant to lose this specialised status to a much broader and all encompassing 'Institute of Archaeology and Historic Environment', but never the less it problably needs to happen.
Posted by 'diggingthedirt', comparing the Irish licence system with a potential British chartered system:
Quote:quote:The licence system is effectively a chartered system, the difference being that the licence is granted directly by the state as a permit to a named individual with ultimate project responsibility.
Licenses are granted to individuals to do a single specific piece of work - this is very different from a Chartered system, which simply says that the Chartered individual has passed certain criteria which tend to sugges they are knowledgeable and competent in the relevant field.

Quote:quote:In short, the licence system as it is operated provides no guarantees that licence eligible directors will produce a quality archaeological product, only that they will provide a state accredited service. This stems from a separation of commercial liabilities with professional liabilities, something that would also confront the new wave of chartered British archaeologists who would presumably be employed by companies.
This is a very serious weakness of the Irish system, but there is absolutely no reason why it should carry over to any UK Chartered system.

With other Chartered professions in the UK (e.g. Civil Engineers), the company carries both the commercial and the professional liabilities (this is why they have to have Professional Indemnity Insurance). They ensure that they don't fall over on the professional side, in part, by employing Chartered individuals to lead projects.

The only circumstances that I know of in which those professional liabilities may fall on the individual are when they are self-employed, or where the company they work for has gone bust before a client sues.

It is very rare for an individual to be sued for their professional failures after the company they were working for has gone bust, but it can happen. However, it is entirely possible for a company to prevent this from occurring through the terms of its PI insurance policy and/or its standard terms and conditions of contract. I have checked, and my company has taken these steps.

Professional liabilities only come into it anyway if the client suffers in some way from a professional failure. I suspect that Diggingthedirt is really talking about professional ethical requirements, such as the obligation to provide a proper report even if the client doesn't care. This is regulated in the UK under PPG 16 (or equivalents), through curator's briefs and planning conditions, and there is no reason why Chartered status would change that. The reason it doesn't work in Ireland is that the licensing authorities don't have the teeth (or the will?) to enforce the reporting requirements of the licenses they grant.


to let, fully furnished

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)