3 unaccounted for after a flooded magnesite mine 'Maria Concordia' dive in Poland

[Vicko]

To be fair both PADI and TDI tec instructors from Europe killed, sorry did not correctly supervise, their students by not following any guidelines set by their agencies.
One of the rare moments where a good lawsuit would have fixed the issue.

 

[KevinNM]

To be fair both PADI and TDI tec instructors from Europe killed, sorry did not correctly supervise, their students by not following any guidelines set by their agencies.
One of the rare moments where a good lawsuit would have fixed the issue.

How many of these instructors were subsequently appointed to the TDI or PADI board of directors?

 

[John the Pom]

To be fair both PADI and TDI tec instructors from Europe killed, sorry did not correctly supervise, their students by not following any guidelines set by their agencies.
One of the rare moments where a good lawsuit would have fixed the issue.

When the lawyers move in, mostly all you get is a lawyers' picnic. It's only with engineering accident investigations that I've seen anything that looks like a worthwhile process and outcomes.

 

[Hiszpan]

The mine management in my opinion has no responsibility... If they start stopping instructors to teach on their site, they would only loose customers without improving the situation.

I remember some stories of the polish iantd community about another accident (also here on SB), and I remember that iantd decided to take away the instructor card of those who complained that the agency should do something to ensure the standards are respected... Crazy in my opinion, but it's like that

Your reasoning is erroneous. We are not concerned here with the loss of profit from below-standards teaching at their site, but rather with the prevention of accidents from maverick teaching practices.

The law in Poland does not know precedent. I would go too after the diving operator, ADDving, for recompense as they have tolerated their instructor breaking industry standards on a regular basis. He is deceased, but the school keeps on going.

 

[ginti]

The law in Poland does not know precedent. I would go too after the diving operator, ADDving, for recompense as they have tolerated their instructor breaking industry standards on a regular basis. He is deceased, but the school keeps on going.

I understood that the diving instructor was working autonomously and not representing the diving operator. If my understanding is incorrect, I agree with you.

Otherwise, I stand in my position - I do not see why diving operators should check anything besides the instructor card, number etc. In the end, the instructor card should already indicate that a person is good enough to teach. Otherwise, why have it?

 

[Hiszpan]

I understood that the diving instructor was working autonomously and not representing the diving operator. If my understanding is incorrect, I agree with you.

This is from the diving operator's website (accessed today 2nd of October 2022) - section 'O Nas" ('About Us') - Maciek was the instructor who perished (my post #20 presents a screenshot of the condolence page from ADDiving which lists 3 names of the deceased - Maciej is one of them.) The above bio (which has been shortened to compared to original from before accident) says "co-founder of the ADDiving Diving Centre.' It would be hard to defend a thesis that he was working autonomously and not representing the dive operator.

Otherwise, I stand in my position - I do not see why diving operators should check anything besides the instructor card, number etc. In the end, the instructor card should already indicate that a person is good enough to teach. Otherwise, why have it?

Another screenshot from their website. Text in bold says "Every stage of the training course is conducted exclusively according to the standards of the most respected diving federations.' Just that here is an outright lie when juxatposted with the final report's findings. Even assuming you are right regarding him being an independent instructor, the dive operator took your money for the course and claimed it would be conducted according to the standards - there is no way they did not owe a duty of care. This was not the first cave course conducted in that mine by the dive ops. There would be no defence "we did not know' in my opinion.

 

[Hiszpan]

Going further, my post #1 presents a screenshot of the ADDiving calendar for October 2021, with clearly marked Maria Concordia mine events branded as cave diving. It also contains Intro To Cave and Cave Course entries. Unfortunately, this is what that section of the calendar looks today:

All the cave course entries and events have been erased from that month. If you look at the post #1 calendar screenshot. the bottom entry of Intro To Cave nurkowanie has got Maciej name as an instructor.

Most of the past cave diving events and courses have been erased from their calendar altogether. However, March 2021 page still has entries that, in my opinion, clearly show that Intro To Cave and Advanced Cave - DPV were conducted in Maria Concordia (MC) on the 13th, 14th and 15th:

 

[iwona_76]

Some of you have accused us that, as the mine's administration, we allowed the Cave course to be held in the mine and that we would have lost our clients if we had not let the instructor for the course on October 3.

1. Of course, we are a profit-making business and of course we want customers.

2. We would like to emphasize that from our point of view it is irrelevant whether the instructor would conduct a Cave course or a Mine diver course on October 3. From our point of view, it is important that the instructor conducted the OVERHEAD course.

3. The instructor was authorized to conduct both the Cave course and the Mine diver course. Practical exercises performed in both such courses are identical. The course of these exercises on October 3 would be the same if the Mine diver course was held (of course if the instructor performed the exercises in accordance with the standards).

4. As the administration of the mine, we do not ask the instructor whether the dive he will be doing with the students is the first, third or last dive of the course. We do not ask the instructor in which other caves / mines he will continue the course and whether he will surely provide the trainees with the appropriate number of diving sites required by the standards. I recall an excerpt from Witold Hoffmann's report: "Potentially, it could be possible that the mine dives were considered as 'warm-up / refresh' dives, as a form of preparation before starting the proper training in caves". It is not our role to ask the instructor about the planned course of the course, both the part held in our mine and the earlier (if any) and future stages.

5. We do not let bystanders into the mine. In the case of instructors, we assume (or at least we assumed) that the instructor would follow training standards and keep students safe.

6. The accident did not happen because the instructor chose a mine instead of a cave for the exercises.

 

[Hiszpan]

Some of you have accused us that, as the mine's administration, we allowed the Cave course to be held in the mine and that we would have lost our clients if we had not let the instructor for the course on October 3.

1. Of course, we are a profit-making business and of course we want customers.

Agreed.

2. We would like to emphasize that from our point of view it is irrelevant whether the instructor would conduct a Cave course or a Mine diver course on October 3. From our point of view, it is important that the instructor conducted the OVERHEAD course.

Arguably, this line of thinking is dangerous - there are reasons why cave courses should not be performed in the mine, even if both are classed as overhead.

3. The instructor was authorized to conduct both the Cave course and the Mine diver course. Practical exercises performed in both such courses are identical. The course of these exercises on October 3 would be the same if the Mine diver course was held (of course if the instructor performed the exercises in accordance with the standards).

Vide paragraph above.

4. As the administration of the mine, we do not ask the instructor whether the dive he will be doing with the students is the first, third or last dive of the course. We do not ask the instructor in which other caves / mines he will continue the course and whether he will surely provide the trainees with the appropriate number of diving sites required by the standards. I recall an excerpt from Witold Hoffmann's report: "Potentially, it could be possible that the mine dives were considered as 'warm-up / refresh' dives, as a form of preparation before starting the proper training in caves". It is not our role to ask the instructor about the planned course of the course, both the part held in our mine and the earlier (if any) and future stages.

It is not your role, I agree. But I would feel uneasy knowingly (I am making an assumption here that you knew about their Intro to Cave course being conducted at least in some part on your site) allowing my site to be used for official courses conducted contrary to clearly outlined industry standards (being a mine not a cave - I would not expect you to know the details of instructor's conduct.)

Witold's quote was not a statement of the fact but rather a supposition which he rebutted by a factual finding in the sentence that followed - feral dive was officially recorded as being part of the Cave course (are there any records that instructors need to file at the site that indicate what they are conducting?)

5. We do not let bystanders into the mine. In the case of instructors, we assume (or at least we assumed) that the instructor would follow training standards and keep students safe.

Agreed. There is no way of knowing unless you are inquisitive and have grounds to be suspicious.

6. The accident did not happen because the instructor chose a mine instead of a cave for the exercises.

In general, I would agree. However, I would follow with a question: would you, as a student taking part in such a course, expect the site's management to allow, or not to permit, your course to be conducted by your instructor on the type of site that is explicitly excluded by industry standards?


I have to admit I did not know before reading the final report that you cannot conduct a cave course in a mine. I was convinced you can because I saw an ad for a cave diving course in Brazil in a mine called Mina da Passagem (Mina da Passagem dive.)
SSI YouTube video of Cave Course in Mina da Passagem
Another Intro to Cave filmed there (dive ops look like SDI/TDI there)

 

[ginti]

@iwona_76, was the instructor working as an employee or a representative of your company during the accident, or was he teaching as an independent instructor?