Just a thought ......

[terryh]

Just a thought and following on from the previous post ...

BOH 3.2 - Duty of Care, Branch Officers Responsibilties.
Carelessness, or negligence, can occur both in acting and in
failing to act.

So doesnt this contradict the DO must sign the QRB, no matter
what doctrine?

TerryH

[Mike Halligan]

Just a thought and following on from the previous post ...

BOH 3.2 - Duty of Care, Branch Officers Responsibilties.
Carelessness, or negligence, can occur both in acting and in
failing to act.

So doesnt this contradict the DO must sign the QRB, no matter
what doctrine?

Absolutely, my dear boy, and that's why we having Diving Officers, i.e. holders of Office, rather than electronic rule-following idiots (aka computers in some quarters) or worse, the manual kind.

Merry Christmas (which despite Steve's reservations can still contain Christ), Health & prosperity to all throughout 2004.

Mike

[angiemac]

:=So doesnt this contradict the DO must sign the QRB, no matter
:=what doctrine?

Absolutely, my dear boy, and that's why we having Diving Officers, i.e. holders of Office, rather than electronic rule-following idiots (aka computers in some quarters) or worse, the manual kind.

That's interesting, because when in the past the issuing of a grade to a diver who was not considered to be up to the grade was put to the NDO the reply was if the boxes are signed you cannot refuse the grade.

However I do note that in the new BOH there is a phrase which acts as a 'get out of jail free card' in the Candidates overall attitude section which will now allow us to refuse the grade on the basis that they do not have the right attitude. This unfortunately does not solve the problem of divers we have been forced to rate in the past.

Angie

[Dave]

Just a thought and following on from the previous post ...

BOH 3.2 - Duty of Care, Branch Officers Responsibilties.
Carelessness, or negligence, can occur both in acting and in
failing to act.

So doesnt this contradict the DO must sign the QRB, no matter
what doctrine?

Doesn't seem it to me. There would be nothing negligent in awarding a qualification when the trainee has the appropriate sign offs. There would be, imo, if it was signed with anything missing but there is no reason I can see how you could argue ir was careless or negligent to sign a duly presented QRB with all boxes signed.


Dave

[Edward Haynes]

Angie

It's not new, the wording was taken from the last BOH.

Edward


However I do note that in the new BOH there is a phrase which acts as a 'get out of jail free card' in the Candidates overall attitude section which will now allow us to refuse the grade on the basis that they do not have the right attitude. This unfortunately does not solve the problem of divers we have been forced to rate in the past.

Angie