Liability of Agencies for their instructors??

[Eric Sedletzky]

Anyone who has ever paid for any sort of training for any kind of other sport knows that scuba instruction is ridiculously cheap. The idea that scuba instructors are ridiculously underpaid is well accepted.

Yet, in ScubaBoard threads you will see people saying the exact opposite. If I am a skier and I decide to take a class to learn how to ski gates so I can compete in NASTAR racing, of course it is assumed I will pay a lot of money for that class. If I am a scuba diver and want to take a class to learn a more advanced scuba skill, people will pile on in threads, calling the fact that such a course would even be offered an "agency money grab."

Anyone reading a typical ScubaBoard thread will assume that the typical scuba diver believes all instruction should be offered free, and any instructor who hopes to be paid for instruction is a money-grabbing piece of pond scum. I cannot think of any other activity where this is true.

I think a lot of this boils down to supply and demand.
In those other activities they are more mainstream and more visible. More visible? Yes, what I mean is spectators can visually see the activity as a casual observer. The only ones that require close up video footage would be sky diving and perhaps a helmet mounted go pro for bat suit flying, which is absolutely thrilling to watch! BTW.
Surfing, snow boarding/skiing, riding horses, race car driving, sky diving, etc. these are all visible sports.
Diving is horribly under represented. It’s not particularly easy to film to make it look extreme, it’s not fast and daredevilish, and the fact is a lot of people like activities that are terra firma.
People who are drawn to activities underwater are a very small group. I believe it is an acquired love. For me it was a fairly gradual immersion into the sport, first by fishing off the rocks, then getting a wetsuit to wade out to better rocks, to getting a kayak to get out to the kelp beds to get more fish, to seeing abalone divers then realizing I almost had all the gear, to then getting all the gear and beginning to freedive, then into scuba. It was a gradual progression over several years.
To expect a person off the street to walk into a dive shop cold and just sign up whole hog and get into diving complete with a full set of new gear and thousands of dollars in training is pretty far fetched.
How do people get inspired? Do they go on vacation and see others enjoying scuba as they float above snorkeling? How many average people can just fly off somewhere to go on a tropical vacation on regular basis?
How about local diving, is it geographical logistics that might be an incentive? For me it certainly was.
There are golf courses everywhere, but there aren’t oceans everywhere.
So all this leads to very low demand.
You can’t beg people and try and entice them to get into something they don’t really have a passion to do with ultra cheap training. The dive industry is trying to look at diving as a mass production industry and figure they’ll make up numbers with volume by offering cheap entry incentives. It’s not going to work that way. You’re not selling burgers.
The ones that want to learn to dive will learn to dive and they will pay for good training. GUE is a good example of that, just look at what a week long course costs and people are signing up.
The pleading and begging and offering dirt cheap training needs to stop, it’s embarrassing.
This isn’t the 1980’s.
And don’t listen to most of these people on SB, you have to realize that it’s an international group and in some countries it is customary to run a more volunteer approach to training through clubs and such for the betterment of the “community”.
This is not LA County 1959 either where it was a county program.
That’s not how it is now, you want something good you pay for it.
Freebies? Why? Why do most people think they are so special to always expect a freebie? Is it just because they are cheap?

 

[NothingClever]

I don't perceive that a body of people expect training to be free. I think most people just want to get what they pay for and I think dissatisfied people amongst us stumble into one of two things. Either they find at the end of a course that:

(a) the assurances provided in marketing materials proved to be rather empty compared to the actual skills developed in the course

or

(b) an individual and/or business delivered instruction in a mediocre or careless way that otherwise could have been very useful with another instructor.

I think the first problem is a function of a corporate culture or strategy in which marketing is allowed or encouraged to exceed sound and sustainable business operations. Something that compounds this problem is the disaggregation of collective skills from a single course (intended to develop a well-rounded diver) into smaller, more accessible courses. On the average, I don't think making sub-set skills more accessible has resulted in a greater sum as evidenced by the average diver here on ScubaBoard or on charter boats every weekend who innocently struggles with the basics. I think these small sub-set courses are what contribute to the grumbling din of 'money-grabbing'. In simple terms, "You got my $350 but I have little to show for it." That's just enough money to irritate somebody but nowhere close enough to merit legal action.

The second problem is a dilution of service due to a lack of QA/QC through deliberate supervisory checks. The principle of a "duty to care" seems absent. If present, it's an additive principle rather than something universally expected. In my own experience, my Basic OW instructor pressured me to use a former student's log in credentials for my e-learning. I immediately knew he was up to no good but didn't know why. I refused, of course, and later figured out through his abysmal instruction that he was skirting some kind of feedback loop. Although I succumbed to the sunk cost theory and begrudgingly finished my training with this instructor, three people after me quit his course and found somebody else. Despite a steady turnout of incompetent divers, several months later this instructor was publicly recognized and formally awarded by the regional Course Director for having trained the most divers. As backdrop, all the shops in town affiliated with this same organization sported "Five Star" banners but none of them exhibited anything I would consider five star service. To riff off the number five, the Five Guys restaurant chain clearly has QA/QC figured out as evidenced by the consistent experience and positive reviews it gets all over the United States.

In this second problem what I find particularly rotten is the upstream monetary benefit to the certifying oganizations without any of the downstream responsibility for QA/QC. The knee jerk disassociation of any corporate responsibility to sloppy, unscrupulous or dangerous instruction under the certifying organization's banner is thoroughly unethical, IMO. I think the large certifying organizations are only a half degree removed from being a Multi-level Marketing business which is not far off from a Pyramid scheme. Those that defend the current big brand dive industry profit model in spite of its obvious shortcomings can't be out of the diving business and off diving forums fast enough.

I know this drifts towards hypocrisy but I suppose there is a sliver lining to the existence of sloppy and unethical certifying organizations. Without their steady turnout of dissatisfied divers who conclude there must be something better out there, high performance organizations may never have developed or would perhaps struggle to thrive. In a symbiotic nature, the big brand certifying organizations would struggle to develop new courses such as PADI's Tec series. That series never would have come about were it not for smaller organizations committing to a higher degree of individual proficiency and the ambitious exploration objectives that higher individual proficiency enabled. But to what end? It doesn't seem that a rising tide has raised all ships since chronic training problems still exist in the big brand organizations.

Finally, in these debates I think we should refer more to the studies and recommendations of the Business of Diving Institute: Resources for Dive Industry Professionals & Scuba Divers - and the periodic industry-wide studies from DAN. They are far more objective and reliable. Many of us are over-the-hill and out-of-shape wind bags who want to defend the status quo of the industry because either we don't have professional experiences that enable us to discern mediocre from high quality (or how to lead positive change for a large, decentralized organization) or because we benefit directly from the status quo conditions and improving things means we would have to work harder to maintain our position in it.

Survey Results: What is The Best Dive Training Agency in 2024? - Business of Diving Institute

What is the best dive training agency for recreational scuba diving? Tech diving? The worst? Annual market survey on dive training agencies.

www.businessofdiving.com

 

[NW Dive Dawg]

My take on the liability issue is that the "agency" should not be liable unless there something materially wrong with their itinerary or standards. I think the primary liability should lie with whomever receives the payment for the course and the instructor.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

I don't perceive that a body of people expect training to be free. I think most people just want to get what they pay for and I think dissatisfied people amongst us stumble into one of two things. Either they find at the end of a course that:

(a) the assurances provided in marketing materials proved to be rather empty compared to the actual skills developed in the course

or

(b) an individual and/or business delivered instruction in a mediocre or careless way that otherwise could have been very useful with another instructor.

I think the first problem is a function of a corporate culture or strategy in which marketing is allowed or encouraged to exceed sound and sustainable business operations. Something that compounds this problem is the disaggregation of collective skills from a single course (intended to develop a well-rounded diver) into smaller, more accessible courses. On the average, I don't think making sub-set skills more accessible has resulted in a greater sum as evidenced by the average diver here on ScubaBoard or on charter boats every weekend who innocently struggles with the basics. I think these small sub-set courses are what contribute to the grumbling din of 'money-grabbing'. In simple terms, "You got my $350 but I have little to show for it." That's just enough money to irritate somebody but nowhere close enough to merit legal action.

The second problem is a dilution of service due to a lack of QA/QC through deliberate supervisory checks. The principle of a "duty to care" seems absent. If present, it's an additive principle rather than something universally expected. In my own experience, my Basic OW instructor pressured me to use a former student's log in credentials for my e-learning. I immediately knew he was up to no good but didn't know why. I refused, of course, and later figured out through his abysmal instruction that he was skirting some kind of feedback loop. Although I succumbed to the sunk cost theory and begrudgingly finished my training with this instructor, three people after me quit his course and found somebody else. Despite a steady turnout of incompetent divers, several months later this instructor was publicly recognized and formally awarded by the regional Course Director for having trained the most divers. As backdrop, all the shops in town affiliated with this same organization sported "Five Star" banners but none of them exhibited anything I would consider five star service. To riff off the number five, the Five Guys restaurant chain clearly has QA/QC figured out as evidenced by the consistent experience and positive reviews it gets all over the United States.

In this second problem what I find particularly rotten is the upstream monetary benefit to the certifying oganizations without any of the downstream responsibility for QA/QC. The knee jerk disassociation of any corporate responsibility to sloppy, unscrupulous or dangerous instruction under the certifying organization's banner is thoroughly unethical, IMO. I think the large certifying organizations are only a half degree removed from being a Multi-level Marketing business which is not far off from a Pyramid scheme. Those that defend the current big brand dive industry profit model in spite of its obvious shortcomings can't be out of the diving business and off diving forums fast enough.

I know this drifts towards hypocrisy but is I suppose there is a sliver lining to the existence of sloppy and unethical certifying organizations. Without their steady turnout of dissatisfied divers who conclude there must be something better out there, high performance organizations may never have developed or would perhaps struggle to thrive. In a symbiotic nature, the big brand certifying organizations would struggle to develop new courses such as PADI's Tec series. That series never would have come about were it not for smaller organizations committing to a higher degree of individual proficiency and the ambitious exploration objectives that higher individual proficiency enabled. But to what end? It doesn't seem that a rising tide has raised all ships since chronic training problems still exist in the big brand organizations.

Finally, in these debates I think we should refer more to the studies and recommendations of the Business of Diving Institute: Resources for Dive Industry Professionals & Scuba Divers - and the periodic industry-wide studies from DAN. They are far more objective and reliable. Many of us are over-the-hill and out-of-shape wind bags who want to defend the status quo of the industry because either we don't have professional experiences that enable us to discern mediocre from high quality (or how to lead positive change for a large, decentralized organization) or because we benefit directly from the status quo conditions and improving things means we would have to work harder to maintain our position in it.

Survey Results: What is The Best Dive Training Agency in 2024? - Business of Diving Institute

What is the best dive training agency for recreational scuba diving? Tech diving? The worst? Annual market survey on dive training agencies.

www.businessofdiving.com

I breezed over the survey, fascinating!

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

What if instructors were direct employees of the certification agencies, would that be better?

 

[NothingClever]

What if instructors were direct employees of the certification agencies, would that be better?

I think so, yes. Some will argue that they need independence because they don't operate out of a dive center. Technology has made it easy for a singleton instructor on the far side of the world to be accessible by and have access to the parent organization. This vertical accountability conflicts with the current model of upstream revenue without the "burden" of downstream responsibility.

I also think certifying organizations should establish a tighter assessment and selection process for Regional Managers and Course Directors and run more formal periodic reporting requirements.

I look around the profiles of ScubaBoard members, dive shops in Florida and the Red Sea and see endless amounts of Instructors and Course Directors such that it reminds me of organizations that award a variety of titles to employees to give them a sense of importance without there being any tangible distinction in responsibilities and authorities. That cultural trait needs to be curtailed. When leadership of large organizations put their people first, they understand that taking care of their employees will lead to increased profits. The leader of Bed, Bath and Beyond clearly didn't understand this fundamental when he didn't listen to his employees and drove the company into bankruptcy. So, rather than flabby titles bought with money, I think a better recognition and awards program would go a long ways towards incentivizing employee performance.

I like it when my assumptions are overturned (because it means I'm learning) but in an industry where the profit model disassociates corporate and regional responsibility from the brand representatives at the distal end, I'd find it hard to be convinced the corporate leadership are "in touch" where the rubber meets the road.

 

[NW Dive Dawg]

As a retired instructor, I am now just an advanced open water diver with a solo cert. When traveling that's all I need to have and all I need to say.