Government (GASP!) Regulation

[DeepSeaDan]

Those words usually result in howls of protest across the land...but I ask you, has the time come?

So many of the threads in this honorable forum relate directly or indirectly to training, & it seems to me the majority feel strongly that scuba instruction on the whole, is in a general state of decline. Where will it end? Will competition eventually create "drive-thru cert. centers" where you can get a hot, steaming latte along with your ticket to dive? What about Instructors? How long before some agencies prerequisites for Instructor qualification are reduced to 5 o/w dives & an open checkbook?


Once upon a dive in Ontario anyone could post a sign over his door advertising "Commercial Diving Services." At the time there were a few commercial diving operators conducting u/w work in a professional manner ( surface-supplied, communications, chambers etc., etc. ). These companies were being undercut by small outfits with next to no overhead who had a couple of sets of scuba gear. There were many fatalities & serious injuries. At long last the government stepped in to regulate the industry. It was a long, difficult process, but to their credit, they allowed recognized leaders in the industry to form committees & hammer out a set of workable regulatory standards.

Overnight, the fly-by-nighters were out of business. Anyone caught working outside the rules faced severe penalties.

The playing field was now leveled. Inspectors were hired to enforce the standards, & the incidence of injury & death fell dramatically.

So...........government could require all the certifying agencies to sit down to find a way to agree on minimum standards for all aspects of recreational & technical sport diving. It won't be pretty. It won't be easy & it won't happen overnight. But I believe government mandated legislation is the only way to stop the recreational diving industry from running the sport of diving into the ground.

Okay...let the debate begin!!

Regards,
D.S.D.

 

[VTWarrenG]

I think divers are evolving just like the agencies -- we're in the midst of revolution right now where many divers, and divers-to-be, are becoming aware of the shortcomings in the el-cheapo training. I'd venture (without statistics) that most divers are introduced to the sport by someone they know -- and if that someone knows enough to coax them away from el-cheapo training, the problem will be solved.

If the government DOES regulate, it won't be a complicated set of regulations. For example, the FAA (which is one of the government's strictest offices) only enforces simple requirements (such as 40 hrs of total instruction) on student pilots. Flight school is based on a cross-check and endorsement system where various instructors have to examine your skills and deem you worthy of progress ("endorse" you) throughout your training. To get your certificate, you must pass the FAA exam and have a test flight ("checkride") with an FAA examiner.

The same type of system could work effectively in the dive industry:

- Dive students would study and practice just like they do now in confined-water.
- Instruction would be regulated by hours in the classroom. Teaching materials would not be regulated, other than perhaps by being approved by the government.
- Dive students would do a cross-check with a more qualified instructor before being permitted to do open-water dives.
- Dive students would have to pass a government-controlled written test, and have a "test dive" with a government-approved examiner after they've been endorsed for certification by their primary instructor.

Of course, you can quibble that the test will be hard for the government to make, and it'll be pedagogically faulty, etc. -- but those fears are not entirely just. IMO, the FAA does a pretty good job with its tests, and its examiners are top-notch. Their job is to examine pilot certificate candidates -- and they're very good at it.

The reason this type of system works is simple: it prevents the current situation where only one person is involved in your training. If this one person in a bozo, you will be a bozo too, and you might not even know it. Simply requiring cross-checks, final exams, and checkout dives to be administered by a recognized, qualified examiner, would do a LOT to enhance the safety of all diving programs, while interfering little with their methodology or material. It wouldn't cost that much to implement (the examiners are paid partially by the government and partially by their examinees.) It would probably put an end to the weekend cert classes and the cattle-herding very quickly, because those students simply won't be able to impress the examiner enough to get a certificate.

- Warren

 

[MikeFerrara]

There are plenty of people on the road who can't drive a car yet carry a state issued liscence. I think all the government would do is make the whole process complicated and cost more. Independant examiners make sense. Even then, my vote would be to keep government out of it. RSTC examiners maybe?

 

[VTWarrenG]

RSTC?

- Warren

 

[Drew Sailbum]

I have seen some level of government regulation in action during several months of diving in Malta. The Maltese government is proud of its regulations, and claims that the regulation helps prevent diving accidents.

I have no idea what sort of restrictions they may place on commercial diving, but the recreational diving regulations are fairly straightforward. The Maltese governmental regulations require:

1. all divers to be at least 18 years of age.
2. all divers have a medical exam before diving regardless of whether the diver is already certified. Medical exams must be repeated at intervals based, in part, on the diver's age - older divers examined more frequently.
3. that all divers dive under the in-water supervision of a certified instructor, unless the diver applies for and receives a "Sports Diving Card" from the Department of Health.
   [/list=1]
   
   To receive a "sports diving card" the diver must:
   • provide phtocopy proof of certification to an advanced level by a recognized training agency. Temporary cards are not generally acceptable. The government reviews each training agency and determines what they consider to be "advanced". PADI Advanced Open Water, NAUI's advanced, or CMAS 2-star are minimal acceptable levels of training. (I have no idea about other agencies. I never saw a YMCA c-card the entire time I was there.)
   • file a copy of a medical fitness to dive form signed by a licensed physician. This form covers basic medical information and this record is maintained by the hyperbaric chamber at St Luke's Hospital for access in an emergency.
   
   
   So does this regulation really prevent accidents? Not in my limited experience. What it does do is ensure that the vast majority of vacationing divers are under direct in-water supervision of a government-licensed instructor who is presumably familiar with the dive site, trained in accident management, and familiar with local emergency response procedures.
   
   During three months there, I witnessed one cardiac arrest victim being extricated from the water and another person collapse and lose conciousness minutes after his dive. Since both incidents were at popular dive sites, there were probably ten instructors in the immediate vicinity each time. In each instance, response was rapid, and proper first aid care was provided (within the limits of available resources) until the ambulance arrived.
   
   So while Malta does not require certain training standards to dive, the government effectively sets a minimum standard to dive unaccompanied by a professional.

 

[g2]

In general, I believe governmental intervention in an industry they know nothing about can only make matters worse. Ham-fisted regulations by legislatures will only reduce flexibility and not necessarily enhance safety. Based on the stats I've seen, recreational scuba diving safety has actually improved remarkably over the years, and continues to do so under self-regulation.

Economic forces, especially liability issues, will weed out the inefficient or unsafe training agencies, which is how I think it should be. I suspect the dive industry agrees with my assessment.

Every time there is a high profile accident in the recreational diving industry, government(s) go through a spasm of regulation threats. So far, the dive industry seems to have deflected most of these.

A notable exception might be Australia's rules about accounting for all passengers, after one operator left some folks behind -- an embarrassing and tragic event, and no doubt harmful to tourism. But there again economics became the bottom line: a regulation was seen as a market necessity.

g2

 

[VTWarrenG]

Wow... I agree Drew, I think the Maltese system accomplishes nothing, at great expense....

- Warren

 

[jetblast00]

Originally posted by VTWarrenG
RSTC?

- Warren

Bingo...

Gov't and Lawyer regulation already exists... All certification agencies have to follow ANSI Z-86.3.
Check out:
http://www.scubadiving.com/training/instruction/trainagency/
http://diverlink.com/newdiver/whichagency.htm

 

[VTWarrenG]

g2,

Do you think just having qualified check-out examiners and a standardized final exam will "reduce flexibility" without enhancing safety?

Modelling the dive industry after the very successful FAA system has been my pet solution for a long time. You can buy lots of different kinds of training materials (or none at all, if you prefer), and you can learn from lots of different kinds of people at very different airports -- i.e. you still have flexibility in the way you choose to learn. But when you're ready to get certified, you have to have some face-time with a qualified examiner. I'm interested to see what other people think of the pros and cons of that system.

- Warren

 

[SubMariner]

RSTC = Recreational Scuba Training Council

~SubMariner~