CDAA

[ph]

so Rob  I see you have been appointed and accepted the role of the Site Director again...however are you actually aware that the current one hasn't resigned yet.

now let this one be serious and open discussion with no personal attacks

apologies see correction above...fucken flat out today

[onwardsupwards]

so Rob  I see you have been appointed and accepted the role of the Standards Director again...however are you actually aware that the current one hasn't resigned yet.

now let this one be serious and open discussion with no personal attacks

Is That Standards Director or Site Director? I thought the latter.

Regards Rick   

See I can play nice.

[Craig]

It is Site director not Standards

C

[Ian T]

The big question now will be their CDAA instructor rating. Sure, they lose Director positions, Access Officer, big deal. Though to affect their instructor rating is a very contentious issue.

I hardly believe that the sole 'blame' for want of a better word, can be placed on them both. It's a failure of the regulator, the governing agency, in this case, CDAA, to appropriately monitor training conducted.

There has been no independent oversight of CDAA courses for years. Reliance upon individuals to maintain standards will create problems, particularly with the very large change to the Deep Cavern program introduced a year ago. The introduction of the DC course was a shambles. The standards barely make sense themselves, let alone trying to teach them with contradictory materials. There was no instructor workshops, education, etc. Rather just a " Well you're all professional instructors, you should be able to work this out ". And then two (is there a third? - I know of one who should be !) CDAA instructors are found non-compliant with course training standards.

If you compare it to PADI, an organisation with an excellent QA system for training, they have 're-education' options if found non-compliant, you can be forced to resit an IDC/IE, or retrain under a CD. How come these options dont exist ?

[Craig]

My understanding is that it affects their Instructor rating as that was the crux of the issue.

I believe that as the issue surrounds alleged non-adherence to course standards it is primarily an allegation as instructors not as Directors. From memory I think ST's email said it is a requirement that if a director is found in breach/suspended then they must give up their directorship. I don't know if that applies to Site Access Managers but the regulations do state that the NatComm hires & fires.

Exactly what alleged breaches to training standards has to do with the ability or willingness of a volunteer to handle site access is beyond me.

Ian I agree with your comments. Not having read the course standards (I don't even think we as ordinary members have access) it seems like a basic direction is provided to the instructional team but determination of the finer details are left to the instructor. Or to the NatComm after the event as the case may be 

One would have thought that re-education or counselling would have been sufficient.

But of course we as mere members don't know the full story and it will be interesting is we ever will.

[rob b]

Hi All

Yes i am the Site Director again!.

Gary and Linda were cited on breaches of standards in a? some? cave diving courses. The investigating officers decided that the breaches were minor and the time that their teaching status was suspended for was ample puninshment. Their teaching status was reinstated. Woc working to the letter has asked for Gary regisnation as per the regs and constituition.

That's all i know. Todate i have received no info on the matter and all i know is what has been stated.

I have spoken with Gary, while he does not agree with the findings he will abide by it. After some discussions with Gary he does have a few issues with some things and i will be asking for some clarification.

Regards
Rob B

[ph]

Hi All

Yes i am the Site Director again!.

Gary and Linda were cited on breaches of standards in a? some? cave diving courses. The investigating officers decided that the breaches were minor and the time that their teaching status was suspended for was ample puninshment. Their teaching status was reinstated. Woc working to the letter has asked for Gary regisnation as per the regs and constituition.

That's all i know. Todate i have received no info on the matter and all i know is what has been stated.

I have spoken with Gary, while he does not agree with the findings he will abide by it. After some discussions with Gary he does have a few issues with some things and i will be asking for some clarification.

Regards
Rob B

[/quot

Rob, did Warrick approach you at the State meeting and said to you to be patient and he will put you back in he just needed a little more time.....becareful of him after the elction you lost he told both Gary and Andy HIggins that you were a crap SD and it was a good move that you lost.........oh and I have more!!!!!!!!

anyway all the best

[Gooey]

pssssssssst, psssssssssssssst, psssssssssssssssssssst all this secret squirrel talk... he said she said bulls*@t, gossip queen rant..... harvs cant u resist stirring shit...... If you are  no longer in the association and no longer dive, F*@k off and stop STILL causing trouble within..... you are no longer involved for a reason......

 Gary and Linda are both great and nice ppl, but if you break the rules, you pay the price!! As you and RN know, the rules and punishments may not be right in our eyes, but they are the ones in writing... thats what needs to change.... not the ppl that  implement them!!!

[ph]

pssssssssst, psssssssssssssst, psssssssssssssssssssst all this secret squirrel talk... he said she said bulls*@t, gossip queen rant..... harvs cant u resist stirring shit...... If you are  no longer in the association and no longer dive, F*@k off and stop STILL causing trouble within..... you are no longer involved for a reason......

 Gary and Linda are both great and nice ppl, but if you break the rules, you pay the price!! As you and RN know, the rules and punishments may not be right in our eyes, but they are the ones in writing... thats what needs to change.... not the ppl that  implement them!!!

Karl, call it what you like....but it is fact....this is a discussion  forum, and this is fair discussion, so if you can't handle the truth then perhaps you should fuck off or not log on my posts, thats the beauty of a forum you can pick and choose what you want to read. I was merely bringing RB up to spead on the dirty two faces of another individual ;-)

And who the fuck made you a moderator on the list....if I am out of line then Im sure JD will deal with me accordingly...so until you are appointed as a moderator here shut the fuck up, but I don't expect any different from you..once a zealot always a zealot I guess

enjoy your day

[JD]

Folks,
This is how I understand the problem. I am not an instructor, so maybe Ian can comment and correct if neccesary.

The problem stems from the new deep cavern course. The course structure was re written to make it easier for instructors to come to the mount and do the course in 3 days. A pool session was added at the start so instructors did not have to do a prelim dive in Gouldens, it could be done in a pool in Melbourne, Adelaide or where ever. The second change was to eliminate a possible reverse profile dive. A dive was required in Gouldens in the AM, and the PM dive was little blue. Gary and Linda solved this problem by making sure the morning dive was to the bottom of Gouldens (24 m, probably more like 20m now), and doing a wall dive in Little Blue to 20m. They wanted to swap these 2 dives around, so in the new course you do the reverse of what we did on our courses.
Now, here lies the problem. It is a course standard to do these dives in the new order, however the CDAA regulations state a member must not dive in a site until they have received a temporary card or membership card. Under the rules, this card cannot be issued until the Gouldens dives had been completed, and it is a landowner requirement all diving people must be members. So in reality, the dives in Little Blue could not be done until the Gouldens dives were completed, but you were unable to let the divers do the Gouldens dive first.
Essentially, one law contravened another. The binding law however, was the one in which Gary and Linda followed. EVERY instructor teaching the new course had violated standards. Some were prosecuted, others not.
Make up your own minds.

JD

[Gooey]

Harvs, dude get a root and calm down, geeeeeeeeeee, man u make it too easy 

[ph]

Harvs, dude get a root and calm down, geeeeeeeeeee, man u make it too easy 

just so it is clear I am not in any way questioning RB as SD now or inthe past I am merely exposing some facts about what I know was about RB and to RB...... Karl as for getting a root....I am sorted, your mum was in town 

[Gooey]

Your more sicker than i thought, considering she past 3 years ago... but i wouldnt put anything past you...... thanks mate

[ph]

Your more sicker than i thought, considering she past 3 years ago... but i wouldnt put anything past you...... thanks mate

no disrespect intended......mind youy JD had an aunt who died in a bushfire didnt you JD

[ph]

[EVERY instructor teaching the new course had violated standards. Some were prosecuted, others not.
Make up your own minds.

JD
[/quote]

interesting?...Ian have you been charged yet