NAUI shrugs as shop owner jokes about killing students

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

kammel78

Contributor
Messages
433
Reaction score
392
Location
Louisiana
# of dives
1000 - 2499

Joe Johnson, owner of Scuba Toys in Dallas, TX jokes in an instructor meeting about how many students they've killed. NAUI rep is present. Video gets sent to Jim Gunderson in 2017. NAUI apparently declines to take action. Fast forward to 2025, Scuba Toys kills another student, this time a 12 yr old girl in an absolute gross travesty of an "accident".

Pt 1: Crucial evidence 'lost' in scuba death investigation of North Texas 12-year-old, lawyer says

Pt 2: Scuba expert who witnessed NTX 12-year-old's death questions ongoing investigation

Pt 3: Scuba expert says NTX 12-year-old's death highlights risky training practices

Pt 4: Instructor 'permanently suspended' after 12-year-old North Texas girl's scuba death

Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but curious what everyone thinks the appropriate action that NAUI should've taken based on what they knew in 2017: the shop owner's video and I'm assuming their knowledge of the previous deaths he was bragging they settled on previously?

Side tangent: is QA even a thing with all but a small handful of agencies?
 
If he had in fact past fatalities, then the NAUI rep should have pulled his endorsement. If there were no fatalities, then the NAUI rep just blew it off as smack talk. Unfortunately, talk like that can come back to bite him. He blew his liability threw the roof with his past statements, regardless of whether they're true or not. His shop may be changing owners soon!
 
There's no laws against bad taste, yet. If they hadn't had any fatalities before he said it, then it was just a bad joke. How in the light of the recent tragedy it looks even worse, but is still just a joke in bad taste.
 
There's no laws against bad taste, yet. If they hadn't had any fatalities before he said it, then it was just a bad joke. How in the light of the recent tragedy it looks even worse, but is still just a joke in bad taste.
Technically, there are but that's besides the point. Putting yourself in NAUI's shoes, if someone sends you this video that shows - at the least a crass attitude towards safety - would you feel the need to perform some additional QA surveys, audits, etc or would you feel it wouldn't warrant any additional actions?
 
I assume NAUI was already well aware of the previous deaths mentioned.
 
I worked for a PADI shop whose owner killed a student in a similar way.....ignoring the missing student until it was too late.
PADI ejected him and the shop within days. The shop became an SDI shop. The owner sold the shop, moved away, and became a NAUI instructor.
 
Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but curious what everyone thinks the appropriate action that NAUI should've taken based on what they knew in 2017
  • Formal and public expulsion of Joe Johnson from NAUI
  • Immediate revocation of Scuba Toys’ affiliation with NAUI
  • Refresher training on NAUI standards for any NAUI instructor associated with Scuba Toys
  • Formal and public expulsion of any Scuba Toys instructor associated with NAUI who resisted refresher training
This stuff isn’t hard.

Leaders of certifying organizations just have to possess a clear-eyed sense of moral courage to adjudicate in favor of their own standards.

What we see once or twice a year are these painful culminating moments in the architecture of habitually poor instruction when a wishy washy organizational leader crab walks away from a situation that seems pretty elementary to everyone else.

What really puzzles me is how the business acumen of these regional and corporate leaders is so weak that they assess shooting a bad dog is going to somehow pre-empt every other opportunity to pursue profit.

Joe Johnson reflects a casual indifference and perception of guaranteed immunity towards multiple fatalities during initial training for a recreational activity; This far surpasses “bad taste”.

I’d be more worried that keeping somebody like him on would taint the public’s perception of the organization and threaten all my other profit streams. Of course, the avoidance of fatalities is the real impetus.

Losing the profit potential of one shop seems a lot more affordable than a loss of brand credibility. That Joe Johnson is a first class loser is one thing but that NAUI called this “inactionable” is gross negligence.

I’m starting to think the business of SCUBA in America attracts people of weak character. That doesn’t mean every SCUBA shop owner or instructor is morally weak, just that it seems there’s an inordinate concentration of morally weak people in the “industry”.
 
  • Formal and public expulsion of Joe Johnson from NAUI
  • Immediate revocation of Scuba Toys’ affiliation with NAUI
  • Refresher training on NAUI standards for any NAUI instructor associated with Scuba Toys
  • Formal and public expulsion of any Scuba Toys instructor associated with NAUI who resisted refresher training
This stuff isn’t hard.

Leaders of certifying organizations just have to possess a clear-eyed sense of moral courage to adjudicate in favor of their own standards.

What we see once or twice a year are these painful culminating moments in the architecture of habitually poor instruction when a wishy washy organizational leader crab walks away from a situation that seems pretty elementary to everyone else.

What really puzzles me is how the business acumen of these regional and corporate leaders is so weak that they assess shooting a bad dog is going to somehow pre-empt every other opportunity to pursue profit.

Joe Johnson reflects a casual indifference and immunity towards multiple fatalities during initial training for a recreational activity; This far surpasses “bad taste”.

I’d be more worried that keeping somebody like him on would taint the public’s perception of the organization and threaten all my other profit streams.

Losing the profit potential of one shop seems a lot more affordable than a loss of brand credibility. That Joe Johnson is a first class loser is one thing but that NAUI called this “inactionable” is gross negligence.

I’m starting to think the business of SCUBA in America attracts people of weak character. That doesn’t mean every SCUBA shop owner or instructor is morally weak, just that it seems there’s an inordinate concentration of morally weak people in the “industry”.
While breaking my hip socket, my age (62 at the time), and the general overhead associated with instructing were primary factors in deciding to retire from teaching (2022) and ultimately the entire business (2023), the bolded portion of the comment was no small factor in my decision. The industry has been headed in a direction that was against my moral and ethical beliefs when it came to training and safety.
Standards being ignored or misunderstood, a lack of accountability for shops and instructors putting profit over safety and education, and agencies turning a blind eye to some pretty shady stuff that wasn't hidden at all.
Insurers were getting harder to find and getting more expensive. When I got out, I was looking at roughly a 30% increase in premiums. That was for the minimum 1 million dollars coverage. To get the recommended 2 million was nearly double or more. One insurer quoted me 4600 a year for 2 million because I also taught tech classes. That did not include a rebreather cert, which I did not check because I didn't teach them.
I firmly believe the lack of competition in coverage was in no small part due to the increased risk of a lawsuit that underwriters were not willing to take on. Why the increased risk? Look at the deaths that have happened in training courses due to negligence and to people being taken into open water who have no business being out of the pool yet.
Because it's all about numbers. Get em in and get em out so the next group can go. And the refusal of the industry to recognize that courses are too cheap. Way too cheap. I had to basically break even on OW classes to keep up with the competition, and even then, the lie that this is a safe activity and anyone can do it with a weekend or two of instruction made it tough to teach a 40-hour OW class. 14-16 pool, 14-16 classroom, and a minimum of 8 - 10 hours over 2 days on site at OW checkouts. But I refused to lower my teaching standards.
My con-ed class however, were double the cost of my competition or more and I had no problem getting motivated students who wanted the type of class I taught. Those who didn't want to put in the work? I didn't want to teach them.
But, without fail, every time I took a class to a training site I saw many instructors doing the bare minimum, and sometimes not even that, and no one said anything. I filed a couple complaints over the years with agencies over things I witnessed at training sites.
Because I was not an instructor with those agencies, those reports were ignored.
I haven't been in the water in two years, and every time I think about going to a local site and just getting wet, my anxiety level goes up because I can't say there won't be some issue I see that gets me pissed off.
Other circumstances make traveling to dive somewhere I wouldn't expect to see training going on is just not feasible now.
So I do what I can to try and help others when they get referred to me for advice on training and I run a large social media group to try and call out shady stuff and also provide solid educational advice by giving things like Human Factors a platform to spread their message.
 
Because it's all about numbers. Get em in and get em out so the next group can go. And the refusal of the industry to recognize that courses are too cheap. Way too cheap. I had to basically break even on OW classes to keep up with the competition, and even then, the lie that this is a safe activity and anyone can do it with a weekend or two of instruction made it tough to teach a 40-hour OW class. 14-16 pool, 14-16 classroom, and a minimum of 8 - 10 hours over 2 days on site at OW checkouts. But I refused to lower my teaching standards.
My con-ed class however, were double the cost of my competition or more and I had no problem getting motivated students who wanted the type of class I taught. Those who didn't want to put in the work? I didn't want to teach them.
Well said. On top of that...Where you cut your profit margin on OW but kept con-ed higher, we have shops now trying to make up that OW margin loss and lower student count by cranking up the instructor mill. Less than $1000 and maybe a year of diving? It's just one big mill from OW to Instructor. And to your point, now we're putting students in OW who have no business in OW with Instructors who have no business being Instructors.
 

Back
Top Bottom