BAJR leaves the IFA

[oldgirl]

I was really angry to hear about trowelfodder (and her colleagues) experience too. That's really bad and was not the way I understood the system to work at all.

Wierdly enough I'm starting to wish I did have the time/energy to get involved again with more of the IFA stuff, that sort of thing just shouldn't happen.

On the complaints by non-members against members bit thing, I think BAJR has said it for me, I was thinking about some of the spurious/timewasting/malicious accusations I've heard against people from others who would've been equally open to accusations, but couldn't be because they weren't members and so didn't have to abide by any sort of standards.

Sorry, I was in a stroppy mood that day, so I apologise for the offence caused!

[BAJR Host]

Nothing like a good purge of strop!

we all need it! }

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

[Windbag]

It's worth pointing out that whistleblowing is a very difficult activity in many professions. Lots of people prefer to "get on" and keep quiet, rather than jeopardise future career opportunities.

[garybrun]

quote:Originally posted by Windbag

It's worth pointing out that whistleblowing is a very difficult activity in many professions. Lots of people prefer to "get on" and keep quiet, rather than jeopardise future career opportunities.

And that's the problem... and that why people get away with what they do. If everyone took the same attitude the world would be in a worse mess than it is. (I'm not saying you do the same so please don't misconstrue my post.
If people are in danger I wouldn't think twice.

I reported a farmer I once worked for once becasue he wouldnt put a guard on the pto shaft of the machines I was working on.



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

perhaps this is a real issue.. there are various types of reportable issues..

ranging from... immediate action required, as otherwise the site will be machined away to longer term issues of (for example) harrasment and bullying.

There should be measures to deal with all the possibilities, rather than the one slow process.

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

[1man1desk]

Posted by Oxbeast:

quote:1man1desk, what was the outcome of the disciplinary case that you were involved in, and were you satisfied with it?

I don't want to go into details, but the case did lead to disciplinary action by the IFA against the individual member concerned (there was no RAO involved, but the individual was the head of his own company). The case related as much to IFA rules about treatment of employees as to archaeological standards.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[1man1desk]

Posted by BAJR Host:

quote:Indeed... who to call?

Curator for one ...

The curator is a very good port of call, and in some cases may be able to take faster and more effective action than the IFA.

However, it is important to note that the curator's action may be based principally on their influence and on an exagerrated view of their powers amongst contractors and developers. In reality, they can only take action for breach of IFA standards under certain circumstances:

1. if the planning condition, the curator's own brief or the Specification make adherence to the IFA standards a requirement, and they have been breached, then the curator can recommend to the planning authority that they should take enforcement action. They may or may not choose to do so. Such action would normally be against the developer, not the archaeological contractor, but could lead to the developer making a Professional Indemnity claim against the contractor or against the archaeological consultant.

2. if the work has not been done to the standards specified, or has not been completed, the curator can recommend to the planning authority that they do not discharge the planning condition. Again, it is up to the authority to choose whether or not to take the advice, and they are only likely to do so if there are practical steps that can be taken to rectify the situation. Again, the action is directed against the developer, not the archaeologist.

3. if the archaeologist in charge is an IFA member, or the organisation is an RAO, the curator can make a complaint to the IFA, on the same basis as any other complainant.


1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[trowelfodder]

And its a huge problem in certain areas such as wales were the curatorial staff are in house!!!

Who do you go to then?

We tried trustees but the whole email ws forwarded to the unit manager and those people who provided info were hauled over the coals for it!!

We went to the ifa in good faith believing that if we followed the guidelines they set out we would have a fair chance of changes being made and standards dragged up. Instead what we got was a farce with the unit being given the complaint letter for i think 8months to resond to specific allegations and in effect concoct records and responces. We were given 2weeks to respond to their statement which basically said "no we didnt".

How you contact 20 odd archaeologists who have now spread throughout the country and abroad to get their feedback in that time is beyond me. The ifa did visit the unit but the unit denied any problems existed.

The entire investigation consistedof asking interested parties if they did their job properly. The planning was inhouse, and as the site was a scheduled ancient monument a national organisation (X) was involved in monitoring. This was in the form of a single prearranged visit each month during which the unit manger led them around site and they did not speak to a single digger.

If they agreed with our findings them they themselves would have questions to answer. There was no independant archaeological advisor - although the council stated in the investigation that they should have had one.

So when you examine this there is no one who was asked who was independant - but yet in the summing up of the investigation it was stated that as the two sides contridicted each other they would take x view as independant and find in favour of the company. This is what we are up against. We had everything to loose but put the complaint in under a genuine feeling that something had to be done before any other sites were vandalised but were told that our opinion did not matter as much as everyone elses.

It was also interesting to note as a mark of how impartial the investigation was that the person who was the subject of the allegation spoke at the ifas annual conference this year, and it was held on his home patch. Something smells rotten to me!!!!

[1man1desk]

Posted by Trowelfodder:

quote:It was also interesting to note as a mark of how impartial the investigation was that the person who was the subject of the allegation spoke at the ifas annual conference this year, and it was held on his home patch. Something smells rotten to me!!!!

I don't know the individual case, and I have only read one side of the argument about how the investigation was conducted, so I have no view about whether the complaint was correctly or incorrectly thrown out. However, I would just like to mention the phrase 'innocent until proven guilty' - ie, if the complaint has not been positively proved, then the person must be innocent.

If an investigation has been conducted weakly or poorly, it is much more likely to be because of a lack of resources, powers and investigatory skills than because of a lack of impartiality. Remember, the IFA are not the police. That doesn't mean that this isn't a problem, but it does mean that we should not cast aspersions at the personal integrity of those who conduct the investigations (and I have no idea who they were).

In relation to my quotation from Trowelfodder, if the person has been cleared by an investigation, why shouldn't they speak at the IFA conference? Even if the complaint was proved, disciplinary action is not very likely to include banning a person from speaking at a conference, and admitting them as a speaker says nothing about the IFA's impartiality. So far as I know, the disciplinary committee does not vet the list of conference speakers.

As for the conference being 'on his home patch' - I'm sure it was on lots of other people's home patch as well. Should a particular region be banned from hosting a conference because there has been a complaint about an individual who lives there? We would pretty quickly run out of places where the conference could happen.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[mercenary]

I don't want to derail a very interesting discussion, but feel the need to respond to some of Gary's comments.

Gary I don't recognize your portrayal of archaeologists at all. Sure, there is snobbery in the profession, and perhaps you encounter more than your share because you represent the detecting community that seems to bring out extreme reactions from some archaeologists. In my experence what little snobbery there is left in archaeology tends to be in the more academic sectors. I don't think it is any worse in archaeology than in other professions in a country with a (declining) class system.

quote:You also need to realize that the public (when public money is used) want to know were that money is going and to what benefit it is to them.

Some of this I can agree with, but not for the reasons you may believe. I think you may be surprised by what the public feels about archaeology. It regularly ranks second only to nursing in surveys of jobs respected by the public. There certainly doesn't suggest widespread resentment at wasted public money. In fact I think the public would be genuinely surprised at how little public money is spent on archaeological excavations. What resentment I encounter comes from the private developers who fund most of my work, and only a small minority of them.

By the way, I would love to see the results of any survey you do Gary.