View Full Version : Qualifying dives for Dive Leader
Hi
Can anyone confirm if a trainee Dive Leader goes elswhere to do the Open Water lessons, does he/she need to let his/her Branch DO know what he/she is planning to do?
If he/she is diving with a group of friends and there happens to be a qualified OWI there and they do a qualifying dive without actually letting his/her own DO know can the lesson be
signed off as a qualifying dive?
I am unsure as I beleive all Branch authorised dives divers must let their DO know, I could just do with a bit of clarification please.
I am trying to protect our club an ddon't want any "magic" signatures in qualification books. Call me a synic if you like!
Thanks in advance
Andi
To avoid ill feeling then out of politness it would be good to advise the TO & DO that you intend to complete some training outside the branch.
If there is any concern over the signiture then it may be appropriate for the instructor to provide a covering letter, allowing the TO/DO to add them to the club records/check up via HQ to the viability of the signiture/instructor number.
I am not certain, but I also believe that for the training to be valid the Branch must be aware of the training prior to it occuring.
If you are a member of more than one branch then your primary branch is the one through whom your BSAC membership is paid, this is also the branch that awards the diving qualifications.
Even when using a school, the final stamping issuing your diver qualification is by your primary branch.
Gareth
Ron Evans
25-07-2005, 19:46
I think that the final say has to be that of your branch's DO. The DO has to be satisfied that the training provided has been of the appropriate standard, and that the student diver has properly accomplished the skills required.
The DO is responsible for all of the branch's training, but may delegate this to the Training Officer, and thus onto the NQI's in the branch.
If the DO is satisfied that a genuine NQI has provided a signature, then it should be OK to make the grade. The diffculty for the DO will be if there are any questions about overall skill of the student, and the DO is not able to speak to the NQI(s) who have signed the book.
When the DO signs a diver up for a grade, this is not a rubber stamp exercise, but is the DO confirming, and therefore taking responsibility for, the skill of the "promotion".
It would be simpler if the intending teacher spoke to the DO in advance of the intended lesson.
If doubt remains, ask Jim Watson at BSAC HQ.
Ron
DO Southport
Hi
Can anyone confirm if a trainee Dive Leader goes elswhere to do the Open Water lessons, does he/she need to let his/her Branch DO know what he/she is planning to do?
If he/she is diving with a group of friends and there happens to be a qualified OWI there and they do a qualifying dive without actually letting his/her own DO know can the lesson be
signed off as a qualifying dive?
I am unsure as I beleive all Branch authorised dives divers must let their DO know, I could just do with a bit of clarification please.
I am trying to protect our club an ddon't want any "magic" signatures in qualification books. Call me a synic if you like!
Thanks in advance
Andi
john williams
26-07-2005, 16:47
Hi
Can anyone confirm if a trainee Dive Leader goes elswhere to do the Open Water lessons, does he/she need to let his/her Branch DO know what he/she is planning to do?
If he/she is diving with a group of friends and there happens to be a qualified OWI there and they do a qualifying dive without actually letting his/her own DO know can the lesson be
signed off as a qualifying dive?
I am unsure as I beleive all Branch authorised dives divers must let their DO know, I could just do with a bit of clarification please.
I am trying to protect our club an ddon't want any "magic" signatures in qualification books. Call me a synic if you like!
Thanks in advance
Andi
It is polite to let the person who will sign off your qualification know what you are intending to do - however manners are not compulsory!
Any, and all, training signed by an NQI is valid...and cannot be ignored by your DO.
Experience dives are generally looked at once all the training has been completed - just to ensure that a broad experience of different conditions has been gained. Experience dives can be done, and countersigned by ANYONE (does not need to be an NQI...just a buddy!)
Experience does not need to be gained on a formal training dive.
Branches need to let people go diving whenever and wherever they want...and rely on the quality of their training (and those of other NQIs from outside the branch) to instill in them the importance of doing so within their limits - or with appropriate support (like a school..or another branch etc)
In short:
Training can be given by ANY NQI - in or out of the home branch
Experiecne can be gained anywhere and with anyone.
John
It is polite to let the person who will sign off your qualification know what you are intending to do - however manners are not compulsory!
Any, and all, training signed by an NQI is valid...and cannot be ignored by your DO.
...
Training can be given by ANY NQI - in or out of the home branch
John, while I appreciate the sentiment, does this not set BSAC up for the one man and a van instructor? BSAC have traditionally resisted independant instructors and quite rightly IMVHO. Considering the trouble HSE went to reducing the number of independant commercial instructors, is this not asking for trouble?
Personally I work as part of a training team. I do not think I am sufficiently qualified to teach independantly, in fact I don't think anyone is, and there is no way I would deliver a lesson without the trainee's branch DO knowing. IMVHO the oversite on training operations imposed by the branch structure is not there for politeness it is there for safety. YMMV. If what you say is correct it seems I have yet another reason not to take up the mantle of DO.
John Williams
27-07-2005, 16:03
:=
:=It is polite to let the person who will sign off your qualification know what you are intending to do - however manners are not compulsory!
:=
:=Any, and all, training signed by an NQI is valid...and cannot be ignored by your DO.
...
:=Training can be given by ANY NQI - in or out of the home branch
John, while I appreciate the sentiment, does this not set BSAC up for the one man and a van instructor? BSAC have traditionally resisted independant instructors and quite rightly IMVHO. Considering the trouble HSE went to reducing the number of independant commercial instructors, is this not asking for trouble?
Personally I work as part of a training team. I do not think I am sufficiently qualified to teach independantly, in fact I don't think anyone is, and there is no way I would deliver a lesson without the trainee's branch DO knowing. IMVHO the oversite on training operations imposed by the branch structure is not there for politeness it is there for safety. YMMV. If what you say is correct it seems I have yet another reason not to take up the mantle of DO.
I fully agree with your thoughts. I am a DO and I MUCH prefer to help my trainees to plan their training with my knowledge and support. I go to great lengths to encourage them to do this...and their training should also reinforce this.I feel that it really does contribute to safety for new divers to use their DO as a source of advice and as a safety filter for their plans (as divers gain higher qualifications and begin to take part in the organisation of dives they obviously need less and less input...and can eventually be trusted to run dives on their own and even to give advice to the newer divers coming along behind ...then you can call them Marshalls)
However I am also an AI and an Instructor Trainer on the ITS circuit. If I happen to bump into someone on holiday and they ask me to run through "Navigation" between dives and then let them navigate on the next dive ...why not? (keeps me busy and benefits them)
What about someone who wants to give me some time off and offers to lead the dive ...in order to demonstrate their prowess for the "Dive Leadership" Assessments ...why not?
However - as a DO, if I saw that a single NQI had signed more than three or four sections of someone's training (without my prior knowledge) I'd want to speak to that NQI and would ask HQ to pass on my contact details to them with a request for them to contact me.(unless, of course, the signature was also accompanied by a school stamp - when I'd contact the school!)
If HQ keep getting requests for a certain NQI to be contacted ...then they will deal with the "man-in-a-van" scenario
I would NEVER encourage seeking out training behind your TO/DO's back ...but if the training is countersigned by a qualified NQI it cannot be ignored!
John
I fully agree with your thoughts. I am a DO and I MUCH prefer to help my trainees to plan their training with my knowledge and support.
I am speaking from the instructors point of view. I don't believe instructors are infallible and they also need a safety filter to ensure what they teach is up to date, appropriate and delivered safely. Traditionally that filter has been provided by the DO, other branch instructors and the expectation of ordinary branch diving members.
However I am also an AI and an Instructor Trainer on the ITS circuit.
With the greatest of respect your AI and ITS status is immaterial here as there is no differentiation made between how NQIs and AIs go about things. AIs may deliver additional skills but they do so under the same guidelines as NQIs.
If I happen to bump into someone on holiday and they ask me to run through "Navigation" between dives and then let them navigate on the next dive ...why not? (keeps me busy and benefits them)
If you happen to bump into the marshall at the same time and the marshall agrees to the lesson, I don't see a problem.
What about someone who wants to give me some time off and offers to lead the dive ...in order to demonstrate their prowess for the "Dive Leadership" Assessments ...why not?
If someone wants to lead a dive fair enough. If they want their book signed, I regard it as a teaching opportunity and I will take the opportunity to teach. Personally I only teach on branch dives, that is dives properly authorised by a DO or his delegate.
However - as a DO, if I saw that a single NQI had signed more than three or four sections of someones training (without my prior knowledge) I'd want to speak to that NQI and would ask HQ to pass on my contact details to them with a request for them to contact me.(unless, of course, the signature was also accompanied by a school stamp - when I'd contact the school!)
What about 4 instructor numbers which you do not recognise? What if you contact the owners of those numbers and they deny all knowledge? What if this happens subsequent to a fatal incident?
If HQ keep getting requests for a certain NQI to be contacted ...then they will deal with the "man-in-a-van" scenario
Of course this would be a lot easier if the QRB boxes were large enough for signatures and instructor numbers to be written clearly :-(
I would NEVER encourage seeking out training behind your TO/DO's back ...but if the training is countersigned by a qualified NQI it cannot be ignored!
I was always under the impression that BSAC branch training was only valid when delivered during a branch dive. Personally I think that is the best way to maintain traceability and ensure oversight. According to the BOH, a branch dive is one which the DO has authorised, so any lesson delivered without his knowledge can not be a branch dive.
Allowing NQIs to sign off lessons without the DOs knowledge and compelling the DO to endorse it, leaves the QRB wide open to abuse. In these days of instructor shortages and access to lessons being the number 1 complaint, I believe this is a very real risk. My concern is not for the owner of the fraudulent QRB, but the unfortunate DO who is forced to take responsibility for lessons he has no control over and the unfortunate club member that may get caught up in an incident as a result.
Thanks everyone,
I see I many have opened up a small debate here, not my intention!
Your comments have all been very helpful
Many thanks
Andi
Keith Lawrence(BSAC)
28-07-2005, 19:22
I see I many have opened up a small debate here, not my intention!
Why not! It's what the forums are for :-)
Keith L
Nigel Hewitt
29-07-2005, 08:27
>>I see I many have opened up a small debate here, not my intention!
>Why not! It's what the forums are for :-)
*grin* I like forums. I've been reading this thread with interest as the club sent me on an IFC but I need the dives for DL signed off before I can do much more. I've done the lectures and the exam and have some ticks in the boxes from SDCs but some of the bulk is missing.
Because of my history not having DL does not restrict my diving (CCR 'mix qualified) but it would be nice to have the people skills, such as leading and marshalling, sorted out before the training cycle starts again in the autumn as they are new.
*sigh* The TO's sick so I guess it's beat up on the DO time.
nigelH
John Williams
03-08-2005, 11:35
:=I fully agree with your thoughts. I am a DO and I MUCH prefer to help my trainees to plan their training with my knowledge and support.
I am speaking from the instructors point of view. I don't believe instructors are infallible and they also need a safety filter to ensure what they teach is up to date, appropriate and delivered safely. Traditionally that filter has been provided by the DO, other branch instructors and the expectation of ordinary branch diving members.
That's the point...your DO cannot overrule the safety mechanisms that the BSAC, or other branches, have put into place to ensure that Instructors are up-to-date. A BSAC instructor is a BSAC instructor - wherever they instruct!
You cannot refuse to accept training done by an approved instructor - wherever they complete it. Instructor status is not limited to your home branch!
If you complete an SDC with the Region/A school then your DO MUST accept the exemptions that they come with.
If someone transfers to your branch as an AD ...do you immediately discount all their training because it has been done by unfamiliar instructors?
No - you accept it because you can see the signatures are valid (and do check out dives to confirm the training has stuck!)
DOs do have a bit of a raw deal in this...but why should the DO in a branch that has not sent anyone on an ITC/IFC for 20 years (they exist!) be able to overrule say the NDO...(an instructor almost certainly not personally known to the branch) or an active ITS instructor who attends 4 IFCs each year!
Where is the line drawn?
It is drawn at the point where a BSAC qualified instructor is permitted to sign up any BSAC training that they are satisfied has been properly completed...and not even the NDO will overrule a valid signature without VERY good reason!
HTH
John
A BSAC instructor is a BSAC instructor - wherever they instruct!
...And they should be part of a hierarchy of responsibility and accountability - wherever they instruct.
You cannot refuse to accept training done by an approved instructor - wherever they complete it. Instructor status is not limited to your home branch!
If a condition of branch instruction is that it only happens on branch dives, the pupils DO must authorise the lesson for it to be valid. Delivering lessons outside that structure would be a failing on the instructor's part. That is how I always understood it to be. I understood this was desirable to prevent the 'man in a van' infecting that part of BSAC which falls outside HSE control.
If you complete an SDC with the Region/A school then your DO MUST accept the exemptions that they come with.
All SDCs are registered with HQ so the NDO does authorise them after a fashion. A DO can not overrule the NDO, there is a clear hierachy, familiar to any line manager.
Now how do you think the NDO would feel about a group of ITS instructors qualifying NQIs without her knowledge? That would seem to be the equivalent one step up the tree. Is she compelled to sign such qualification?
If someone transfers to your branch as an AD ...do you immediately discount all their training because it has been done by unfamiliar instructors?
No - you accept it because you can see the signatures are valid (and do check out dives to confirm the training has stuck!)
If I have neither signed for a lesson nor endorsed the qualification in the QRB I am hardly responsible for it. A check out dive is a sensible safety precaution but it is insufficient to completely validate an earlier training course.
DOs do have a bit of a raw deal in this...
It is not a raw deal, it is ethically wrong. No one should be compelled to take responsibility for something they can not influence.
but why should the DO in a branch that has not sent anyone on an ITC/IFC for 20 years (they exist!) be able to overrule say the NDO...(an instructor almost certainly not personally known to the branch)
A DO can not overrule the NDO...and I have never suggested they can. More to the point why should the DO attempting to make a decent job of it, be compelled to support a CI 20 years out of date. BSAC should be supporting good DOs not dubious instructors.
or an active ITS instructor who attends 4 IFCs each year!
Some instructors are more equal than others! Is that what you are saying?
Where is the line drawn?
It is drawn at the point where a BSAC qualified instructor is permitted to sign up any BSAC training that they are satisfied has been properly completed.
The question is whether they can do that outside the established structure? You are claiming that they can. When exactly did the NDO delegate NQIs to authorise dives? I have done the intro to BSAC lecture often enough to know the chain of command we teach.
NDO -> DO -> Dive Marshal -> Leading Diver -> Buddy
Please point me to where it says 'Except instructors'
..and not even the NDO will overrule a valid signature without VERY good reason!
It sounds like yet another attempt at central control to me. When are we going to realise that it does not work? Even the Russians worked it out after 50 years.
HTH
Not really John. I have spent 10 years trying to make one particular branch work because I so firmly believe that the branch structure works. So often it seems that those further up want only to undermine it. I have a great deal of respect for you personally but these exchanges always lead to me walking away wondering why the heck I have anything to do with the organisation.
John Williams
05-08-2005, 13:38
:=A BSAC instructor is a BSAC instructor - wherever they instruct!
...And they should be part of a hierarchy of responsibility and accountability - wherever they instruct.
They are...the ITS has it's own rules and regulations...that a branch DO may not add to, nor subtracts from.
:=You cannot refuse to accept training done by an approved instructor - wherever they complete it. Instructor status is not limited to your home branch!
If a condition of branch instruction is that it only happens on branch dives, the pupils DO must authorise the lesson for it to be valid. Delivering lessons outside that structure would be a failing on the instructor's part. That is how I always understood it to be. I understood this was desirable to prevent the 'man in a van' infecting that part of BSAC which falls outside HSE control.
BSAC qualifications are just that...BSAC qualifications. They are NBOT branch qualifications. If someone has met the requirements set down by the BSAC then they have met those requirements...full stop!
:=If you complete an SDC with the Region/A school then your DO MUST accept the exemptions that they come with.
All SDCs are registered with HQ so the NDO does authorise them after a fashion. A DO can not overrule the NDO, there is a clear hierachy, familiar to any line manager.
Now how do you think the NDO would feel about a group of ITS instructors qualifying NQIs without her knowledge? That would seem to be the equivalent one step up the tree. Is she compelled to sign such qualification?
Thje DO has delegated her responsibility to authorised signatories. For the signing up of training that means any NQI. For the final award of a qualification that means a branch DO. A branch DO cannot overule someone who the NDO has given authoerity to sign up training. An NQI may not sign up a diving award...they are not authorised to do so...unless they are a DO.
:=If someone transfers to your branch as an AD ...do you immediately discount all their training because it has been done by unfamiliar instructors?
:=No - you accept it because you can see the signatures are valid (and do check out dives to confirm the training has stuck!)
If I have neither signed for a lesson nor endorsed the qualification in the QRB I am hardly responsible for it. A check out dive is a sensible safety precaution but it is insufficient to completely validate an earlier training course.
So...you accept the train ing provided by others authorised to deliver/supervise it!
:=DOs do have a bit of a raw deal in this...
It is not a raw deal, it is ethically wrong. No one should be compelled to take responsibility for something they can not influence.
Yes they are...because someone who is authorised to take responsibility has already done so. A DO is at leberty to do check out dives and to recommend "refresher training" - but may not insist upon it.
:=but why should the DO in a branch that has not sent anyone on an ITC/IFC for 20 years (they exist!) be able to overrule say the NDO...(an instructor almost certainly not personally known to the branch)
A DO can not overrule the NDO...and I have never suggested they can. More to the point why should the DO attempting to make a decent job of it, be compelled to support a CI 20 years out of date. BSAC should be supporting good DOs not dubious instructors.
But each branch DO acts with the delegated authority of the NDO (and NQIs train with the blessing and authorisation of the NDO) - so to overule another NQIs qualification is to overule the delegated authority of the NDO.
:= or an active ITS instructor who attends 4 IFCs each year!
Some instructors are more equal than others! Is that what you are saying?
Not at all...exactly the opposite. I am saying that you cannot measure the difference...so all must be accepted as equals. If training is signed by a valid NQI then the training MUST be accepted.
:=Where is the line drawn?
:=It is drawn at the point where a BSAC qualified instructor is permitted to sign up any BSAC training that they are satisfied has been properly completed.
The question is whether they can do that outside the established structure? You are claiming that they can. When exactly did the NDO delegate NQIs to authorise dives? I have done the intro to BSAC lecture often enough to know the chain of command we teach.
NDO -> DO -> Dive Marshal -> Leading Diver -> Buddy
I'm afraid you have got mixed up with marshalling and teaching.
Teaching goes NDO -> Instructor
(The award of a qualification is the DO's review of completed training...there is no training involved...just the confirmation that the training has already occurred)
Please point me to where it says 'Except instructors'
:=..and not even the NDO will overrule a valid signature without VERY good reason!
It sounds like yet another attempt at central control to me. When are we going to realise that it does not work? Even the Russians worked it out after 50 years.
It seems to me that you are advocating the little fifdoms of local DOs. What I am advocating is that anyone who is qualified to deliver training is allowed to do so - without let or hindrance (but that they should do it with politeness and courtesy to the one who will eventually validate it for qualification purposes)
:=HTH
Not really John. I have spent 10 years trying to make one particular branch work because I so firmly believe that the branch structure works. So often it seems that those further up want only to undermine it. I have a great deal of respect for you personally but these exchanges always lead to me walking away wondering why the heck I have anything to do with the organisation.
It is a two way street. Instructors need to realise that they need DOs to validate their instruction...but DOs need to realise that they need NQIs to deliver the programme.
Until both realise that bthey need to work hand in hand ... and not against each other then the system will remain flawed!
John
:=...And they should be part of a hierarchy of responsibility and accountability - wherever they instruct.
They are...the ITS has it's own rules and regulations...that a branch DO may not add to, nor subtracts from.
I thought it was the syllabus that we were not allowed to add or subtract from. If the ITS has a different set of rules I presume they are written down somwhere. Where can I get a copy?
:=:=You cannot refuse to accept training done by an approved instructor - wherever they complete it. Instructor status is not limited to your home branch!
I am not suggesting otherwise. I am saying that training dives are _dives_ and fall under the authority of a branch DO.
Thje DO has delegated her responsibility to authorised signatories. For the signing up of training that means any NQI. For the final award of a qualification that means a branch DO.
Yes, as an NQI I am responsible for the lessons I sign up. My branch DO is responsible for authorising the dives I undertake which I assume includes the wet pratical lessons I conduct. What I and every member of my branch including my DO would appear to lack, is the authority to authorise the dives made by members of another branch.
I was under the impression that a DOs endorsment of a qualification signified that the training process had been conducted properly and is traceable. If we do not mainatin affective traceability the qualifications are worth far less. Do we need to see instructor numbers being swapped on the internet before we accept there could be a problem?
A branch DO cannot overule someone who the NDO has given authoerity to sign up training.
If we all stick to the structure that I thought was so well established, there is no reason for anyone to attempt to overrule anyone else.
So...you accept the train ing provided by others authorised to deliver/supervise it!
Yes, absolutely. On another thread I am advocateing that BSAC should fully accept all training by anyone qualified to provide it. That does not mean I want to see a free for all in the BSAC training process. Quite the opposite.
:=It is not a raw deal, it is ethically wrong. No one should be compelled to take responsibility for something they can not influence.
Yes they are.
Yes they are what? I made a statement.
But each branch DO acts with the delegated authority of the NDO (and NQIs train with the blessing and authorisation of the NDO) - so to overule another NQIs qualification is to overule the delegated authority of the NDO.
As far as I am concerned an NQI should know better than to deliver a lesson without the authorisation of the pupils DO. If Instructors are not prepared to stick to the structure, why should we expect our pupils to. If we all stick to what is a very simple hierarchial structure, there is no reason for arguments to develop. Start trying to short circuit it and you have lots of reasons for lots of arguments.
Not at all...exactly the opposite. I am saying that you cannot measure the difference...so all must be accepted as equals.
...And I thought we had a structure to ensure that was a safe proposition.
NDO -> DO -> Dive Marshal -> Leading Diver -> Buddy
I'm afraid you have got mixed up with marshalling and teaching.
Teaching goes NDO -> Instructor
You do have marshalls on your open water lessons, don't you? What you are claiming could lead to a situation where the DM calls off the dive, because it is too rough, only to have an NQI overrule him and push the boat out anyway!!!
My branch's constitution/rules state quite clearly that the branch DO must authorise ALL branch diving operations. Those rules are lodged with HQ. If our branch rules conflict with BSAC rules, why have we not been told?
:=It sounds like yet another attempt at central control to me. When are we going to realise that it does not work? Even the Russians worked it out after 50 years.
It seems to me that you are advocating the little fifdoms of local DOs.
Not at all. The DO the branch elects is down to the branch members that elect him. If they want an anal retentive in the job they are free to elect one. It may even be appropriate in a branch with a high concentration of inexperienced divers. Individual members that disagree are free to leave and join a branch that suits them better - or perhaps stand against the DO they disagree with.
What I am advocating is that anyone who is qualified to deliver training is allowed to do so - without let or hindrance
It is perhaps a nice ideal but the HSE appear to think it is unsafe. The situation whereby an instructor answers only to the body that certified him, was a precursor to the HSE clamp down on recreational scuba training. The other major amateur organisation, the SAA, require all divers to have DO consent for all dives. Commercial instructors have the school they are attached to and the HSE. Amateur instructors have their DOs. Allowing instructors to bypass DOs locally would be a rather unique and somewhat precarious position for BSAC to hold in their mother country.
It is a two way street. Instructors need to realise that they need DOs to validate their instruction...but DOs need to realise that they need NQIs to deliver the programme.
As far as I am concerned I work in a team headed by my DO. We work together to ensure what we do is effective, safe and meets the expectations of the other diving members within the branch. Qualifications have a place, but ultimately the branch training team is reponsible for creating divers that can dive safely with one another. The DO has the additional responsibility of ensuring it remains the case.
IMVHO it is the close peer review that has made BSAC branch's and their safety recoord the envy of the World. Should anyone in the branch start behaving unacceptably (includng the DO) they are brought to book promptly and directly by their own community. The problems are invariably caused when the NDC, ITS or some other central committee starts meddling with branch operations. Allowing instructors from one branch to bypass the DO of another would seem to do exactly that.
Until both realise that bthey need to work hand in hand ... and not against each other then the system will remain flawed!
How exactly is the system flawed. I think it works very well if you only let it. I understand that not everyone on Council will be comfortable with the lack of control they have over individual branches but natural selection will ultimately lead to the demise of clubs that can not adapt. The National BSACs role is to provide the environment that lets the clubs that can adapt flourish.
Just to tidy this one up, after enquiring with our NDO I recieved a prompt and comprehensive reply over the weekend.
To paraphrase;
Training can only occurr in branches, schools, the region
1. In branches diving operations, including training dives, are the responsibility of the DO.
2. In schools the lead instructor and the HSE are responsible
3. In the region diving operations are the responsibility of the lead instructor. - [ed]all these events are registered with HQ.
To quote:
"We do not support at all the operation of instructors out with the confines of these three umbrellas."
On the points of detail.
Where an instructor from one branch teaches a pupil from another:
"...normally the student would inform his branch's DO that the instruction is taking place."
Where the DO was not informed prior to the lesson:
"...the student would normally let his own DO know that the training has taken place as soon as is reasonably possible."
"That said, if the DO is in any doubt as to the validity of the qualification or if, for example, the qualification was obtained in a very different diving environment to the branch's normal diving environment - then the DO would be responsible in asking for some sort of check out dive.
"A sense of reasonableness should be found in these situations."
Which I feel sums it up. Deliberately avoiding DO involvement is unreasonable to my mind and the DO should be (and apparently is) able to question it - although it is very much a last resort.
On the points of detail.
Where an instructor from one branch teaches a pupil from another:
"...normally the student would inform his branch's DO that the instruction is taking place."
Where the DO was not informed prior to the lesson:
"...the student would normally let his own DO know that the training has taken place as soon as is reasonably possible."
e o
"That said, if the DO is in any doubt as to the validity of the qualification or if, for example, the qualification was obtained in a very different diving environment to the branch's normal diving environment - then the DO would be responsible in asking for some sort of check out dive.
I would agree with this as long as the check out dive is not a pre-requisite by the DO before signing.There is already coverage in the manuals regarding a person undertaking training in different environs. In this case, the award should be granted and and other additional training for those conditions that are necessary undertaken subsequently however grant of the award should not be witheld
"A sense of reasonableness should be found in these situations."
Which I feel sums it up. Deliberately avoiding DO involvement is unreasonable to my mind and the DO should be (and apparently is) able to question it - although it is very much a last resort.
The DO can question it, that has never been in dispute afaik , just that the DO cannot refuse to accept training validly given for reasons such as it being done without his blessing
Dave
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.