Events and Competitions committee minutes

[greywolf]

Yet this year this was a big uproar when the courses were too long and challenging.

Except they weren't... (they may have been tougher than the underplanned courses folk were used to, but that's a different issue...)

Can't win. Changing the JK to a middle race won't affect things much.

Obvious solution is to plan a Middle race but call it a Long race - that'll keep the moaners happy...

[GML]

Back to the minutes then. So where the minutes say

"All Organisers to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017"

It should have said:

"All Organisers of Level A, B and C events to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017"

??

I think some of us may be jumping the gun about here, what the minutes actually say is:

Targets: MH had suggested that we should set targets in place for each area so that we have a stated aim of what we want to achieve. It is clear that ESchG and EOG have precise targets in order that events go ahead, but others have none. Targets must be created by us, not imposed on us. Operational targets are easier to put in place, in particular timings for events up to 3 years ahead with officials in place for such events. Strategic targets are more difficult. Targets are about individual objectives and those of the Committee. Please think about what you would like to achieve in 6 months to 1 year. e.g.
All Organisers to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017. Action All

So from what I can see this action isn't anything to do with organisers attending Event Safety Workshops, its an action on the members of the committee to think about what they would like to achieve in 6 months to 1 year!

[awk]

I agree too, but do others?

A few years ago (2008 in fact), we carried out a post-JK survey and one of the questions was about this very topic (question first, then response analysis, then report comment):-

Was that a survey of those who had been to the JK, or all orienteers?

[DJM]

To the JK.

[roadrunner]

Back to the minutes then. So where the minutes say

"All Organisers to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017"

It should have said:

"All Organisers of Level A, B and C events to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017"

??

I think some of us may be jumping the gun about here, what the minutes actually say is:

Targets: MH had suggested that we should set targets in place for each area so that we have a stated aim of what we want to achieve. It is clear that ESchG and EOG have precise targets in order that events go ahead, but others have none. Targets must be created by us, not imposed on us. Operational targets are easier to put in place, in particular timings for events up to 3 years ahead with officials in place for such events. Strategic targets are more difficult. Targets are about individual objectives and those of the Committee. Please think about what you would like to achieve in 6 months to 1 year. e.g.
All Organisers to have attended Event Safety Workshop by 1st January 2017. Action All

So from what I can see this action isn't anything to do with organisers attending Event Safety Workshops, its an action on the members of the committee to think about what they would like to achieve in 6 months to 1 year!

Fair comment, but it does indicate the sort of thing BO would like to see.

[Adrian]

Why can't the contents of the event safety workshop also be included by default in the event organisers course, so that if someone does the latter they get both certificates and don't have to do a separate safety workshop? C'mon BOF, it's not that hard! Think!

[Snail]

The "threat" of requiring organisers (& controllers wishing to move up a grade) having to have attended an Event Safety workshop has been around for a few years now.

It makes eminent sense for (new) organiser and controller courses to cover event safety. And if someone has the time and inclination to easily attend a more detailed workshop that is also good. But it doesn't make much sense for experienced level A/B organisers and controllers to effectively be deemed incompetent simply because they haven't attended such a workshop. Controllers and organisers should be discussing relevant safety aspects for every event. Together with the "Safety" page on the BO website and Appendix E to the Rules, this really ought to be sufficient. And if there is anything "new" in the latest workshops then the Safety page needs updating to bring it back into line.

I think there are some very experienced officials with the attitude that if BO decides to prohibit them from organising / controlling future major (or perhaps even level C) events just because they haven't attended a workshop then that is BO's problem!

[dorien]

I think there are some very experienced officials with the attitude that if BO decides to prohibit them from organising / controlling future major (or perhaps even level C) events just because they haven't attended a workshop then that is BO's problem!

Clearly the intent of all this is that organisers and planners should understand how to run a safe event within acceptable risk parameters. I'd vote for that. Even for level D events - in fact, especially for level D, where the proportion of small children and new participants is often much higher.

Attending a workshop is, really, not a major pain compared to all of the other worries, chores and headaches involved in organising events. I found mine quite therapeutic.

The flaw in the current approach is that there was no objective test of whether I actually learnt anything during that therapeutic hour. (Don't worry, I did). This is a bit like allowing people to drive once they've had a driving lesson. It would make more sense to have an objective Event Safety test. Then all those who've been doing it since Noah was a lad could just pass the test, get their certificates and move on.