Event Safety, BOF Training

[roadrunner]

I find this need for formal training rather strange. I've been on the committee that organised a major road race (10 and 20 miles, roads not closed) and certainly we did a risk assessment - a very detailed one, I believe - and involved the police on the more dangerous road crossings, but to the best of my knowledge the person on that committee who was responsible for safety didn't have any formal training, and I don't think anyone else did either (except perhaps incidentally if they also happened to be a coach). OK, it's a bit easier with a road race because the route doesn't generally change from year to year, so a previous year's risk assessment can often be used with minor changes (and that's what was done in the case I mentioned), but I think it would surely be sufficient to have a checklist to remind the organiser of the sort of things to look out for, e.g. road crossings, high crags, deep water or bogs etc.

[cbg]

It transfers the risk from BOF/insurer to the organisers: we've trained you, so have done our part. If you did not do what we told you, you are wrong.

[Big Jon]

"left wing nanny state incompetents" - what a load of jobbie, the people behind most "nanny state" stories are right wing press determined to undermine local government.
My guess is that BOF insurers are behind this move - typical of them - in an attempt to reduce the chance of them ever paying out for a claim to an infinitesimally small figure, so they can take the ever increasing premium and pocket it.

[SJC]

I've been on the committee that organised a major road race (10 and 20 miles, roads not closed) and certainly we did a risk assessment - a very detailed one, I believe - and involved the police on the more dangerous road crossings, but to the best of my knowledge the person on that committee who was responsible for safety didn't have any formal training, and I don't think anyone else did either.

Like orienteering, this has always been the case, but probably not for much longer.

There is a very detailed Road Race Handbook 2011
http://www.runbritain.com/static/pdfs/r ... ndbook.pdf
which is sixty six pages on how to safely organise a road race.

On page 54 is the statement:
"As a service to race organisers, runbritain has developed a three-tier series of courses, covering the key areas of knowledge and expertise needed by race organisers. The first of these is scheduled for Swansea (September) a South West of England pilot at two venues in November 2010. Attendance is voluntary and not assessed. The aspiration is that you will sign up to them in line with the approximate level that coincides with the standard of your event."

It is unlikely that the voluntary nature of attending these courses will remain for very long, for exactly the same reason as those for orienteering event organisers are heading that way.

[NFKleanne]

I am organising my first event next month, and the idea of having to do a course to allow me to do more, does not seem to be a good move.
If it was on line, I could fit it round the children, my work, hubby's work, and other volunteering roles I take part in. I seriously doubt unless the course was very close I would be able to attend.

[RanaldMacdonald]

In DVO Viv and I have responsibility for recruiting Organisers and Planners/Controllers, respectively. This involves briefing, mentoring if they are inexperienced and supporting them in preparing risk assessments, directing them to BOF Rules, Guidelines, Appendices and pointing them to materials such as Barry Elkington's planning articles.

As a Grade 2 Controller and Coach as well as relatively experienced planner and controller (and Viv as organiser) we feel we can provide the safety advice which means that not everyone needs to go on courses. We can provide 'on the job' training and, hopefully, eventually be able to accredit our event officials through these activities using a work based learning and accreditation approach using materials supplied by BOF.

If this means we have to go on a course, fine, though there would be no need for everyone else to do so.

So, if BOF is being forced by its insurers to ensure event saftey training, let's find ways of doing it that are acceptable to us rather than just saying "it won't work". There is probably also a role here for associations to provide support such as the development day being run by EMOA and our RDO on December 11th.

Ranald and Viv Macdonald

[Scott]

Those whistles - dead quiet.

It depends which whistle you are using. The perry whistles that most people seem to have are pretty good when used for their intended purpose (at sea), but their sound really doesn't carry very well through terrain/vegetation. I have one of these leftover from my days as a football referee, which has been known to set off distant car alarms when blown at full strength. Maybe a bit expensive for most people's tastes, though.

[Red Adder]

I've still got my "Acme Thunderer" from reffing days. At least if you blow it in forest or on the moor you may summon solicitous assistance - rather than "whats that for / you must be *ing blind" etc that it used to bring forth (which led of course to cards and more *ing paperwork).

[denzil53]

I used to carry my Acme Thunderer (the metal one) when I first began orienteering, until I sat down on it rather heavily one day . . . .

http://www.acmewhistles.co.uk/xcart/pro ... t=1&page=1

[King Penguin]

Don't carry metal ones too close to where you hold your compass !

[graeme]

Good point KP, denzil: the details for all the events I organise used to say...
"Whistles may be carried at your own risk"
but now I suppose I should now formally add it to the risk assessment

[madmike]

"left wing nanny state incompetents" - what a load of jobbie, the people behind most "nanny state" stories are right wing press determined to undermine local government.

Well at least you are taking a balanced view

[Adrian]

It goes without saying that all officials at all events should have had safety training; the question is how should officials receive that training? I don't see the point of the stand-alone training that is being introduced, since every organiser, planner, controller and coaching course has a safety component.

[Red Adder]

Trouble is that very very few planners and organisers go on a course for that role and I suspect that many controllers took their course a long while ago when the H&S content may have been minimal or at least would not now be considered up-to-date.

If BO can provide a 3-4hr online course I'm sure it will be adequate (about 98% of industry goes this route to get their tick-in-the-box) and mostly like will provoke sufficient thought in the students to actually be of real benefit. My main fear when planning or controlling is always that someone will be injured. Anything that makes me think about avoidable risks generated by the courses and mitigate them has to be a good thing.

[Adrian]

You're right that not all planners and organisers are qualified, and that there is no requirement to renew those qualifications, but surely BOF should do something about those problems (e.g. not allowing events to be registered if the planner or organiser is unqualified) rather than adding another layer of training? Although safety is important, all the other parts of the jobs are important too. Put all those parts together and we preserve the integrity of the sport. Saying that anyone can put on an event as long as they've just done a safety module is ridiculous.