What training agency

[Thalassamania]

No Tyson, you're too young. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Anyway, welcome to the biz, were are you? I'll be glad to try and provide my First Generation DSO outlook to you, I don't demand that you agree with me, but I will tell it like it is (or at least as I saw it). I would hope we can learn from each other.

 

[martinskarin]

PADI for all my three certifications so far because that was what they had where I made the OW-class and for the AOW it was the same thing. My local shop here in Shanghai does PADI and NAUI.

Got: OW, AOW, Enriched air diver

 

[Simon-]

You also forgot the Sub Aqua Association who, if memory serves me correct (long time since I qualified with them), is also the issuing authority for CMAS certifications in the UK.

So that would give me SAA, BSAC, TDI & PADI

 

[santy2506]

Floats like a butterfly?
Stings like a bee?
Could be no one else
But Muhammed Ali

 

[Edward3c]

...It is interesting to note, that if you want to take a strict reading, the only "internationally recognized certifying agency," (e.g., recognized by a number of different governments) is CMAS.

The international standards for diving are:

• ISO 24801-1 Recreational diving services - Safety related minimum requirements for 
the training of recreational scuba divers - Part 1: Level 1 – "Supervised Diver"

• ISO 24801-2 Recreational diving services - Safety related minimum requirements for 
the training of recreational scuba divers - Part 2: Level 2 – "Autonomous Diver"

• ISO 24801-3 Recreational diving services - Safety related minimum requirements for 
the training of recreational scuba divers - Part 3: Level 3 – "Dive Leader"

The International Standard ISO 24802 
consists of the following parts:
• ISO 24802-1 Recreational Diving Services - Safety related minimum requirements for 
the training of scuba instructors - Part 1: Level 1

• ISO 24802-2 Recreational Diving Services - Safety related minimum requirements for 
the training of scuba instructors - Part 2: Level 2


• ISO 11107 Recreational diving services
 Requirements for training programmes on enriched air nitrox (EAN) diving


• ISO 11121 Recreational diving services
 Requirements for introductory training programmes to scuba diving

The EU are looking to make Dive Operators only allow diving to those certified to these standards - to my knowledge, CMAS do not meet the standards.

Regards

 

[Thalassamania]

The ISO standards are not an "internationally recognized certifying agency," the are "universal" standards being promulgated by an NGO that claims to form a bridge between the public and private sectors. It (ISO) claims to, "enable a consensus to be reached on solutions that meet both the requirements of business and the broader needs of society." a claim that is dubious, at best, if ISO has advanced standards that CMAS does not comply with, and has no interest in complying with. That's hardly a consensus.

But, in any case, we were not discussing standards, we were looking for an "internationally recognized certifying agency," of which there is only one: CMAS. There are others that have a presence in more than one county, but the only one recognized by the government funded national sports federations, like it or not, is CMAS.

In any case, this is an aside to a fine point since in Europe Scientific Diving is regulated by each country's Workplace Safety Apparatus and AAUS "standards," "certification," or "recognition" are as irrelevant as ISO 24801 and 24802.

 

[Edward3c]

The ISO standards are not an "internationally recognized certifying agency," the are "universal" standards being promulgated by an NGO that claims to form a bridge between the public and private sectors. It (ISO) claims to, "enable a consensus to be reached on solutions that meet both the requirements of business and the broader needs of society." a claim that is dubious, at best, if ISO has advanced standards that CMAS does not comply with, and has no interest in complying with. That's hardly a consensus.

Agree they are not a certifying agency, but all courses taught must comply, PADI and BSAC do; SAA (the UK CMAS body) and SSAC do not.

But, in any case, we were not discussing standards, we were looking for an "internationally recognized certifying agency," of which there is only one: CMAS. There are others that have a presence in more than one county, but the only one recognized by the government funded national sports federations, like it or not, is CMAS.

In the UK, only SSAC is government funded.

In any case, this is an aside to a fine point since in Europe Scientific Diving is regulated by each country's Workplace Safety Apparatus and AAUS "standards," "certification," or "recognition" are as irrelevant as ISO 24801 and 24802.

Even teaching recreational diving commercially, e.g. PADI is regulated by the Health and Safety Executive.

Regards

 

[Thalassamania]

You are mixing a few separate conversations into a compote that makes no sense.

1. The ISO process was a hash up from the get go and really only served the interests of PADI. The idea that the ISO standard needed to be a consensus standard was never given anything but lip service as shown by the fact that CMAS, the Internationally recognized congress of national diving federation is not aboard.

2. CMAS was originally set up to only recognize but one organization per country, in most cases that meant some kind of sports federation for diving that, if not governmentally funded, was at least governmentally recognized. In the US that was the Underwater Society of America, that, because of peculiarities in our system, was neither governmentally funded nor recognized.

3. Scientific Diving is not subject to the regulations and standards that cover recreational diving, but rather is covered under whatever each country's health and safety lash up, OSHA in the US (who permits use of an alternative standard), HSE in Britain (who does not), etc. But in any case this just illustrates the inappropriateness of requiring that the administrator of an employment based health and safety program obtain a recreational credential, or training a scientific diver through a recreational diver path. There, of course, should be a well defined path to facilitate a transition from the recreational diving community into the scientific diving community.

4. In Britain (and I guess the rest of Europe) Diving Instructors, like diving scientists, are considered a special form of "commercial" diver and thus have to abide by health and safety regulations and requirements that are specific to them and their workplace.

 

[Edward3c]

You are mixing a few separate conversations into a compote that makes no sense.

1. The ISO process was a hash up from the get go and really only served the interests of PADI. The idea that the ISO standard needed to be a consensus standard was never given anything but lip service as shown by the fact that CMAS, the Internationally recognized congress of national diving federation is not aboard.

PADI paid to be accredited it wasn’t just given to them. The strange thing is its the Austrian Government that are running this on behalf of the EU.

2. CMAS was originally set up to only recognize but one organization per country, in most cases that meant some kind of sports federation for diving that, if not governmentally funded, was at least governmentally recognized. In the US that was the Underwater Society of America, that, because of peculiarities in our system, was neither governmentally funded nor recognized.

Actually CMAS was set up provide a minimum standard which each member federation could use to build their specific requirements on. As I understand PADI are CMAS accredited.

3. Scientific Diving is not subject to the regulations and standards that cover recreational diving, but rather is covered under whatever each country's health and safety lash up, OSHA in the US (who permits use of an alternative standard), HSE in Britain (who does not), etc. But in any case this just illustrates the inappropriateness of requiring that the administrator of an employment based health and safety program obtain a recreational credential, or training a scientific diver through a recreational diver path. There, of course, should be a well defined path to facilitate a transition from the recreational diving community into the scientific diving community.

Agreed

4. In Britain (and I guess the rest of Europe) Diving Instructors, like diving scientists, are considered a special form of "commercial" diver and thus have to abide by health and safety regulations and requirements that are specific to them and their workplace.

Only those being paid to teach come under HSE rules (risk assessments, stand-by diver, etc), those teaching in a Branch (club) environment are not.

I think we’ve high jacked this tread enough.

Regards

 

[Thalassamania]

Sorry, just a few things that need fixing:

PADI paid to be accredited it wasn’t just given to them. The strange thing is its the Austrian Government that are running this on behalf of the EU.

So we agree that they "bought" their way in and that the need for a consensus, as per the ISO charter was ignored?

Actually CMAS was set up provide a minimum standard which each member federation could use to build their specific requirements on. As I understand PADI are CMAS accredited.

Minimum Standard - No. Equivalences between national federations - yes.

Only those being paid to teach come under HSE rules (risk assessments, stand-by diver, etc), those teaching in a Branch (club) environment are not.

Teaching in a branch or club environment is not considered employment in the sense of working for a shop.

I think we’ve high jacked this tread enough.

Agreed, unless I have written something that needs correction.