So are you suggesting that if anyone has anyone has any problems or concerns with the document then they should rewrite the entire thing for the FRA, even if they clearly outlined exactly what in the document they have problems with and how it should be changed? Call me stupid, but I think feedback and comments on the concerns people have raised would be much more productive.
I actually didn't take Leckys suggestion to be such a daft idea. I'm not suggesting the FRA should just ditch their document. But as an alternative form of constructive input it's not such a bad way of making a 'suggestion'
That said, there did seem to be a degree of 'put up or shut up' to it.
I never even race, but I do marshal for my club events. If we get to a situation where I have to take training to do that, and find myself potentially liable if something goes wrong I'll not continue marshalling.
All that aside, I think there should be a tiny bit more patience shown to the FRA for getting this sorted. I'm far from convinced that the constant noise and repetition is really adding anything useful let alone constructive.
You already are liable - and the poor drafting of this document / UKA attitude, makes that considerably worse.
Wording of such documents takes a lot of time and thought - to rewrite the document in a way that makes sense, as a partership for safety (rather than whipping stick for RO and marshalls as it presently is ), would take days.
I personally am reluctant to put such effort in , until and if even simple suggestions to remove some of the more absurd wording are taken on board. Clause 4 still renders current courses non compliant and otherwise does not make proper sense. The statement on weather hazards is ridiculous etc...
It is not just about updating old rules, it is about rewriting them to recognise real world difficulties of RO and marshalls, to prevent "expert witness" testimony that has an alice in wonderland view of what is really possible - at present if you make an inevitable mistake as a marshall , you more or less stand accused of incompetence And failure of duty in a legal proceeding . Is that what you want?
As those of us who have taken professional safety qualifications know: Proper safety policies are written to balance interests. As much to defend the reasonable actions of those in the chain of command, as to accuse them if they fail to act reasonably. This is "do it our way or else" usurping the proper role of an organiser to act responsibly, when " our way" has been so poorly drafted, it is neither clear nor in some cases possible.
The process is inevitably halted a week for the karrimor - for such as wynn to spend their time organising there. It would be wholly unreasonable to ignore her concerns and move it on in the meantime.
Last edited by alwaysinjured; 23-10-2013 at 08:35 AM.
As "alwaysinjured" has already commented, as a marshall you are potentially liable NOW if something goes wrong.
That is why the UKA insurance policy provides cover for technical officials as detailed in the document entitled "UKA Insurance for Technical Officials" on http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/g...nce/insurance/
Thanks margc.
But it should also be pointed out that deliberate acts of commission or ommission will invalidate insurance, As is stated in that insurance, and no doubt insurers would specifically look for rule breaches to make a case for not paying on that basis. It is what insurers do. So it could be a chocolate fireguard.
So unambiguous practical rules are vital, to be able to show compliance.
Last edited by alwaysinjured; 23-10-2013 at 08:58 AM.
image.jpg
Hazard ? Get yer claim form out
Race Organisers will have received an email updating them on developments this morning from Nick Harris, the FRA Secretary.
Jim
Last edited by jtinnion; 23-10-2013 at 09:27 AM.
I hope that Race organisers with concerns are reassured by what they read in the document sent out to them today by the Fra, as am I. Many of you will not have seen the document so I have copied it below for you to see for yourselves. No doubt some will once again find fault but hey, that's democracy !
" Race registration 2014 and revision to the safety guidance.
We thought we should give you an update on the race registration for races in 2014 and progress on gaining final agreement to the revised safety guidance.
1. Any process of change carries with it questions and uncertainty. The FRA committee, many of whom are race organisers, including myself, recognise that in many ways the FRA and fell running exists because of race organisers and the teams we all put together. We are determined to help race organises through the planned changes.
2. Many thanks to all the race organisers who have already registered your races. Many of you have completed this process and we would encourage other organisers to help the Fixtures Secretary by registering in advance of the deadline of Thursday 31st Oct.
3. Thank you, again, to all the race organisers and other members who have made constructive and useful comments on the safety guidance that has enabled us to ‘tweak’ the draft slightly, aiding clarity in a number of places.
If you have further specific suggestions that could further improve the draft safety guidance can you please send these to Graham Breeze who is co-ordinating the drafting process. [email protected]
(Normal registration queries should go to Andy Butler - [email protected].)
4. Before we are able to finalise the safety guidance we would wish to include any issues arising from the inquest into the death of Brian Belfield.
As we said on the website, the Coroner can make a report to prevent other deaths under Paragraph 7 (1) of Coroner's Rule 28 (previously rule 43). This is still awaited.
However to help all of you the current draft is attached.
We do not expect to have to make significant changes as a result of the Coroner’s report and, in any case, will not be looking to reverse any of the proposed changes from the current guidance, although, as stated above we will continue to make changes where these aid clarity and we think improve the organisation of fell races.
The changes currently proposed are those the committee feels are required in the interest of fell running and have been scrutinised by the lawyer acting for UKA; crucial if we are to maintain the confidence of UKA and the insurers in future.
5. We accept that some race organisers have concerns about registering without knowing the final details of the safety guidance. If you are one of these race organisers can we ask that you register by the closing date of 31st Oct. as you will be able to withdraw your registration at a later date. However entry in the handbook is only guaranteed if you have entered by the closing date, which is not being changed. This is to ensure that we can get out a printed calendar to the members, as usual, and before the 2014 races start.
6. Will all race organisers please note that whichever version of the safety guidance you sign up to it it will be the one in force at the time of their event that will apply.
7. As all race organisers know, from the mail out from the Fixtures Secretary, we are planning events for race organisers and other members to discuss the safety guidance changes and how they can best be implemented.
We have the first two events organised in late November and early December and I am intending to write shortly to race organisers local to these two events. We are planning other events around the country for early in 2014 and will let you know details as soon as we can.
It is intended that these events will be interactive and give race organisers the opportunity to swop good practice with each other and members of the committee.
8. As part of this process we are gathering together ideas from race organisers of processes and documents that they have found to be useful in the past. Already a number of you have sent in examples of such documents, for which our thanks. We intend to post these and others received, on the web site. Please send any such documents that you may have and which you would be willing to share with other race organisers to me.