From: sdodd@OES.ORST.EDU (Stephen M Dodd)
Subject: Re: Instructor/Agency Accountability
Organization: Oregon Extension Service, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Or.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:18:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.132954.8633@scifi.uucp> njs@scifi.uucp (Nicholas J. Simicich) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.172802.3942@talon.ucs.orst.edu> sdodd@OES.ORST.EDU (Stephen M Dodd) writes:
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'd like opinion from those of you on the net involved in training
>>students about agency accountability.
>>
>>In one of my classes last night I heard a story about a non-certified
>>diver teaching another to dive and then the second diver when to someone
>>"selling" certifications and worked his way up to instructor ... and
>>then turned around and "sold" the first guy an instructor rating.  Thus
>>ending up with two bogus instructors.
>
>Well, this is interesting.  What agency is this?  IDEA or something?

  One of those below. 

>PADI, NAUI, and SSI all have checks and balances in their system so
			      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>that you can't make it to instructor without passing a checkoff by
>someone who doesn't have a direct business relationship with the
>instructor trainer you got your initial certification from.
>

  This ^^^^ is what I want to hear about on the net.  

  The case I raised is several years old.  The instructors certificates
  probably pre-date the case quite a bit. Maybe, it is now a non-issue
  ... but how do we know that?

>Typically, one 'Instructor' can't make another 'Instructor'.  You have
>to be an instructor trainer or course director.
>
>>Both were later seen certifying divers who never made it to the water
>>because "we know they'll never dive anyway".
>
>If they are issuing cards in these circumstances, that is a real
>problem.  More likely, they like being instructors, and are faking
>classes so that their agency thinks that they are active and doesn't
>nail them for inactivity.
>

  The only intent seems to be exciting dates.   These people both have
  non-diving sports-related companies.  I am sure this is only play to
  them.  Yet the worst of it was several years ago, and it still seems
  to be going on.  Where is the agency???

>>They kind of have the opinion that their instructor ratings allow
>>them to take anyone out, particularily girlfriends, without any
>>classes.
>
>Um, actually, it does, within certain limits.  Certainly, they could
>call it a resort course and they are on their own with their
>insurance.  They have to stick to certain depth limitations, student
>ratios, and should give some instruction.
>

  In one case at least, they were offshore ...

>>The case is clear to those observing it.  And the conditions continue.
>>How's come the agencies don't catch up with them?  It's been at least
>>four years.
>
>Has anyone reported them?  Do you even know what agency they are with.
>The agency might not be getting any complaints from their (non)
>students.  Not every agency has an outreach program in their Q/A
>department. 
>

  My main concern here is for the agency accountability issue.  How
  I raised my concerns for this issue in another response to another
  user.  No, I don't think a report has been made.  It is hard to
  for a single individual to step in.  The phone calls to check it out
  alone could run a lot of money.  Lawyers, travel, investigations ...

  Besides, when I was in the same ocean same day with these guys, I had my
  own issues.  I can't attack them as they did nothing to *me*.  I have
  to attend to my dive and the instructors I went out with.  I want my
  instructors paying attention to me.  On another day you might need
  help from these same guys as well.  The sea is no place for agency
  arguments or policy discussions.
  
  My main concern here is for the agency accountability issue.  How
  could this be going on?  What are the methods agencies use to insure
  that such cases are impossible?

  As a properly certified diver I am the customer.  All the agencies
  represent themselves as backing those who hold instructors cards.
  I no longer believe that this assumption is valid.

  Steve
>
>
>-- 
>Nick Simicich - uunet!bywater!scifi!njs - njs@watson.ibm.com
>SSI #AOWI 3958, HSA 318, NAUI #14065
>Join the movement ---  turn 'to bush' into a verb.
-- 
- Stephen M. Dodd, System Analyst, Oregon Extension Service
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
sdodd@oes.orst.edu          Internet          Oregon State University
503-737-0699                                  Corvallis, OR 97331