Do you mean that the dive op would exclude people based on this data, or just that the divers should use their judgement whether or not to do the dive based on the local conditions? Having done a lot of charters for our dive club and having discussed this with our lawyers, I know that "vetting divers" greatly increases your liability, since if someone has a problem and you "cleared" them for the dive, that implies extra responsibility.
Of course, all divers should honestly assess any dive before undertaking it, and make a call based on their conditioning, experience and training, but not sure how that would help optimize this operators procedures.
I'm not sure if ALS means something different in your country, but in the US it's a pretty advanced course involving things like endotracheal intubation, tracheotomy, and algorithms for the use of intravenous medications like epinephrine, adrenaline and potassium. That would be a pretty high bar for the dive boat business in terms of equipment, training and recertification, and I kind of doubt that it would make a big difference to the average dive emergency. Maybe someone having a witnessed cardiac arrest due to pre-existing heart disease? We don't require ALS providers to be available on site in most other topside recreational activities, not sure why this would be different.
A BLS provider should be able to detect a carotid or femoral pulse as well as an automatic BP monitor. If the pulse is so weak in an unconscious patient that it's not detectable by palpation, I don't think that withholding CPR based on a monitor would be appropriate.