Event Safety, BOF Training

[Sunlit Forres]

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?

I suspect clubs would just register events against officials who are.

[Big Jon]

"but surely BOF should do something about those problems (e.g. not allowing events to be registered if the planner or organiser is unqualified)"

In that case there would be no events in Scotland because, as far as I am aware - and I will accept correction on this, there have not been any "planners" or "organisers" courses. People learn at small events and graduate to larger events. We are too busy putting on events to bother with time wasting paper based courses.

[DIDSCO]

Britain is such a crazy nanny state its embarrassing. Last week kids have to be 16 to cross the road by themself, this week you need to get a qualification to organise an event, its no wonder that participation in the sport is going down quicker than a thai hooker.

What is this British obsession with getting badges for everything?
Personally I blame Blue Peter

[AndyO]

I think Ranald Macdonald's post was a reasoned and proper approach to event safety training. I have no doubt that most of those who have been bemoaning the "nanny state" are experienced organisers/planners/controllers and will consider what might be termed "good practice" as a matter of course through experience and innate common sense. Not everyone who may offer to organise or plan an event will be so fortunate, and it doesn't seem to me OTT to try to make sure that those who do have an understanding of the basics.

[roadrunner]

I agree with AndyO that Ranald's post is a very reasonable approach. If you think about it, though, isn't this more-or-less what always happens? A novice organiser is nearly always going to get (or be able to get) some guidance from someone more experienced, and any organiser is overseen by a controller (or someone equivalent for local events), part of whose job is surely to make sure that they don't overlook crucial safety issues. And controllers are, by definition, people with experience of competing, planning and organising - and therefore, they ought to, as Ranald says, be able to provide "on the job" training and safety advice. Therefore, isn't the real need just for controllers, and those acting in that role for local events, to have a brief "refresher" course (probably online) to keep them up-to-date on the health and safety area?

Orienteering has, I think, a very good safety record: of course there have been injuries, even fatalities, but I don't recall any incident where the event officials were felt to be in any way to blame for these (someone's bound to mention the OMM, but that wasn't a normal orienteering event). There's surely a need to balance the improvement in safety that might come from mandatory training against the decrease in the number of people who might volunteer to become organisers (and hence decrease in the number of events) as a result.

[soc123]

I am glad that our club has embraced this training with an open mind. The recent course we attended - well facilitated by Katy Stubbs, got all 13 of us talking about the subject matter; well certainly at least the 8 of us in the pub afterwards!
The day had been promised with a low key o event afterwards - which unfortunately had to be cancelled at the last minute. However, the half day training/workshop proved to be better than a "tickbox exercise" with Katy's exercises breaking us up from our club cliques, giving the opportunity to work with orienteers from other clubs, and share thoughts and experiences.
It appears to me that more people should look on this, with a positive attitude, and not a closed negative response of enbugerance factor, or just a tick box exercise. Maybe that way you will get more out of it.
We will review some of our current working practices, in the light of points highlighted to us.
Now as a club we have now futureproofed our controllers, organisers and planners, and we still have 4 members wanting to do the course, who couldn't make the first date, due to holidays, visiting relatives, or having to work on a Saturday. Also we have one member who had already covered the course content in a recent Grade 1 controllers course, so when our aforementioned 4 members have completed it we will have 18 qualifed members. Job done!

[bac0990]

As a full time safety professional, I find this whole thing somewhat tedious. I do believe in Risk Assessment but despair at how people believe this should be done.
I cannot understand how I, as organiser, can be expected to carry out the RA which covers anything that occurs between the start and finish. I will not enter the competition area before the event and will only receive the maps on the morning of the event.
To counter this, I will always send a copy of my RA to both the planner and controller at least 8 weeks prior to the event for comment / update.
I have never had an acknowledgement, let alone a comment, back.
I have had plenty of comment back on the actual day of the event when the controller complains that they think a route to start or finish is not suitable / taped correctly / is too long / should be calling for compulsory cagoules ....etc.
Now where do I go? I have given them every chance to comment but now I am far too busy to change anything on the day – and the fact is that I do not believe they are correct. I have done the RA and I have organised to the control measures identified – in my, Chartered Safety Professionals opinion, it is fine – am I now expected to change something such that I am not happy with it?
I have no problem with being trained by BO but I am currently reviewing my willingness to actually organise future events.

[soc123]

Perhaps the planner and controller are in awe of you bac 0990 as a safety professional !

[bac0990]

I doubt it - it is not something that I tell anybody in my private life that I do for a living.

What I could do with, having spent this afternoon struggling with numbers, is an accounting course to help me balance the books from my last event!

[Red Adder]

The last event I planned the organiser insisted we had a morning together reviewing the arrangements for registration/start/finish and download, together with any potentially "difficult" areas in the forest. As his name is on the RA I would suggest that this is a very sensible approach (and did uncover a potential problem or two that were resolved long before the event.)

If I had a controller being picky with things on the day that could (and should) have been resolved earlier I would not be happy (and probably would need persuading to work with them again). [Another pet peeve is the controller that gives you a set of course corrections, which you make and then either comes back two weeks later with further corrections to "faults" that existed on the original draft or then decides that the original versions were correct]

[AndyO]

bac0990 I don't know how you as organiser can complete the risk assessment about hazards between Start and Finish. That part of the assessment can only be completed by the planner, and checked/signed off by the controller. Your responsibility is to see that the assessment is done, and certainly as organiser, planner or controller my expectation is that the RA is a joint effort involving all of the officials. How can it be otherwise?

[Sunlit Forres]

full time safety professional

When I sought permission to produce a map of RAF Kinloss a couple of years ago, the health and safety professional on the base would not allow me to map the wooded areas due to trip hazards. These guys clearly do a great job.

[blindasabat]

Britain is such a crazy nanny state its embarrassing.

Well said Didsco!

It saddens me that we just roll over and accept this top down safety culture. Frankly its just a job creation scheme for the training industry which drives up the cost of everything we do, further advances our insidious litigation culture and gets in the way of our individual liberties.

Oh yes... the individual - we seem to have left the notion of individual responsibility out of this debate. It's about time people were reminded that they have a responsibility to look after themselves and take the consequences of their decisions. If an adult competitor decides to run across a marsh, without assessing the risk, and becomes stuck then its their fault and noboldy elses. In the same way, as a pedestrian I assess the risk each and every time I cross the road so I cannot understand how somehow in the setting of an urban race that risk assessment should be done for me by someon else - Its my neck, I still need to take that decision. Its not the planners nor the organisers fault if I run out in front of a car!

And before anyone comes back to me and mentions children, I accept that children cannot be expected to asseess personal risk in the same way adults should and we do need to consider whether our courses are safe for children. But there is such a thing as parental responsibility (remember those days?), so if the parent says its ok, then its ok. However, when we are in loco parentis such as on residential training then yes we should be expected to do the whole H&S bit. But children do need to develop their own skills in assessing risk and I happen to think that our sport is a great way of doing this - i hope it can continue to do so.

[awk]

I agree that we have somewhat lost sight of the concept of individual responsibility as a nation, but.....

There are still safety issues that planners/organisers/controllers need to be aware of, and take account of. Most of them are 'common' sense, but they still need to be considered. Of course, if an adult decides to take a route across a marsh it is their responsibility, but if the planner has positioned that control on the edge of the Grimpen Mire, with no other route available, then the planner is IMO failing to do their job properly (and whilst one might laugh, I've certainly been in a situation before where the only way route in to a control has been a narrow gap in an uncrossable marsh - not the greatest planning I've ever encountered).

And officials should be able to assess risk, and mitigate if where necessary, particularly bearing in mind that it's not only the organiser who hasn't been to see the courses - how can individuals or parents make a sensible assessment of the risk without seeing the courses? They can't - and need to know that the organising team have done their job of ensuring risk is not excessive*. Risk assessments provide the evidence to show you've done that. If you can't assess risk sensibly, you shouldn't be doing the jobs, and you need evidence to show that you've done it just in case!

None of that is about necessarily removing individual responsibility, merely showing that the organising team have taken on board their own responsibilities sensibly.

To my mind it's not the principle of ensuring that officials are trained properly - that is necessary for both competitors and their own good - it's how its delivered, and bolting yet more specific training courses on to any other training is not the way to go if one is going to avoid losing volunteers.

*I still remember the occasions where, as a parent of a competent 10 year old, I had entered my child on the appropriate course to find that the controller and planner have not done their job, and made the courses too hard, and thus potentially unsafe. I strongly feel that those officials did not pay due regard to their own responsibilities!

[Adrian]

I'm starting to get fed up of the guys who whine about our safety culture. In case you haven't noticed, O does have risks, but none of us are talking about making orienteering events difficult to arrange. Can't you see that it's unreasonable to expect anyone to insure an orienteering event if it's run by one guy who just plonks twenty flags on a mountain and tells a dozen teenagers not to get lost? You may say that you're a brilliant planner/organiser who hasn't killed anyone (yet) but how is the insurer supposed to tell?

On the other hand, I can't see how it's unreasonable to expect someone who wants to plan or organise events to attend a 6-hour course. Not to do so is unfair on novice officials who have a lot of things to take into consideration in planning/organising an event, and unfair on controllers who are supposed to be there to control events, not to teach planners.