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 and I are somewhat on the same page. I'm not saying that the "Association Fee" for any organization (Doctors, Lawyers, Project Managers, CPAs, Dive Professionals, ...) is wrong or unwarranted. What both of us are saying is "skills and knowledge are perishable" and at the time (and may still be the case) there is no recurring certification. I know there would be a cost, but every 5 years or 10 years or 7 years an observation dive should be performed, if for nothing else to let the professional know where his weak spots are. Sort of like the check flight of the airlines.
Yup. Another thread asking for more regulation. Just what we need. At the LDS I work with, we always evaluate skills of any new or recently re-activated pro. We’re not going to put someone in charge of a class before checking them out.
Yup. Another thread asking for more regulation. Just what we need. At the LDS I work with, we always evaluate skills of any new or recently re-activated pro. We’re not going to put someone in charge of a class before checking them out.
While there could be justification in some cases for an "observation dive" every so many years, I don't think it necessarily solves the problem. Unless the result of the dive could result in someone being booted out of agency membership. As a teacher I was evaluated (well, twice in my 19 years, once at my own request to achieve permanent certification as I had just become a citizen). They were good evaluations, but even if they hadn't been, I wouldn't have been fired (see "Why is it so hard to fire a bad cop" in The Pub). Dive pros could be told that after 5-10 years they need to polish up this or that and then simply not do so. Then it would be up to the shop to keep checking on him/her to make sure the corrections were made. So that's just doing exactly what tridacna said in the first place but adding yet another regulation in an overly regulated world. Responsibility on both the part of the dive pro and dive op is the key, not more regulation (which probably would generate some sort of fee somewhere).
I fairly good analogy is the yearly or bi-yearly car inspections states and provinces in the East seem to deem necessary. Doesn't mean the car owner is having the vehicle properly maintained in the time in between. But, a fee is collected. I know of no proof that accidents are more common in places without inspections. If they were, all places would have the inspections.
The real problems I see with professionals has little to do with their personal diving skills. It lies in what they choose to do with those skills. Here are some examples.
My niece was certified while stationed in Okinawa in the Air Force after one 2-hour pool session and one OW dive to a maximum depth of 10 feet.
An instructor in a university program conducts the pool sessions from a chair alongside the pool. He tells the students what to do and then sits in the chair while the students go under water and do it.
An instructor in Utah took 3 discover scuba students into a low-visibility lake, overweighted them tremendously, and then went to the surface to check on the adult who lost buoyancy control and surfaced (easy to do with a full BCD in shallow water), leaving the two children behind. One died.
An instructor working with OW students in a low-visibility lake in Virginia led the divers single file and took the group to shore. He did not realize that the last diver in the line had gotten separated until they were on shore. She was later found drowned.
Two DMs in California working on behalf of their dive club took the roll after all 3 dives of a 3-dive day, completely missing the fact that one of the divers had not returned. (After a day of drifting on the surface, he was picked up by another boat.)
A Florida dive boat was heading back to the marina after a 2-tank dive and realized while on the Intracoastal that they had left a diver behind. The went back out and, fortunately, found him.
In a famous case from a number of years ago, a DM led OW divers well past the normal 130 foot limit, ignored a diver's repeated warnings that he was getting low on air, and then refused to share air with that diver when he eventually ran out.
In the San Diego case mentioned earlier, the onboard DM saw that a diver was having trouble getting back on the boat after the dive. He jumped in the water and helped the man take his BCD off. He forgot that it would be a good idea to take the heavy weight belt off first.
I am sure every one of those professionals would pass a diving skills exam with flying colors.
I thought I was blending in. There are hundreds of people here that voice an opinion. Not to say the following is the case here but consider this:
I would agree with you but then we would both be wrong. ☺☺☺
I am pretty confident that if put in an evaluation situation with someone watching who can take your certification away, regardless of what you will do in real life, anyone being observed would teach the required skills, actually get in the pool with the students, not lead divers beyond recreational limits, share air with an OOA diver, etc. When someone deliberately violates standards in their day-to-day work, they will know they have to observe them when being watched. People who regularly speed will drive within the limit with no difficulty when there is a police car behind them, and then resume normal habits once the police car takes the off ramp.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
☺☺☺
