OPEN LETTER ON MY FUTURE IN THE DIVING

Brian Carney is the President of SDI / TDI / ERDI, who just posted a “mood” post on the internet about his concerns about the future of professional diving. Indeed, in the USA, a case shakes the underwater world and PADI ... His words are personal but the facts are verifiable.

It seemed interesting to translate them to deliver them.

/

OPEN LETTER ON MY FUTURE IN DIVING by Brian Carney

I have spent most of my last twenty-five years in the diving industry. Diver in an aquarium, trainer in a university diving program, member of a manufacturer's management team, I am now President and Director of the SDI / TDI / ERDI training agency. During all these years, I have taken the greatest pleasure in working with people all over the world and teaching them to breathe underwater for the first time. This is the reason why I decided to invest in a career in the diving industry.

My experience and the ever-increasing responsibilities I have taken allowed me to observe the evolution, innovations and directions that the diving industry was taking. It is because of these responsibilities and my position in an international training agency that I believe it is my duty to reveal some recent events in this industry. They are in the closet and buried for the moment as a result of confidential agreements that are detrimental to the ethics of the business world in general and the development of the diving industry in particular. All those who have worked with me know how much I prefer to be positive and how much to denigrate does not resemble me. They will tell you that it is also what I expect from my partners: mutual professional respect and the duty to advance the diving industry as a whole.
Despite my misgivings, we have arrived at a stage where I feel obliged to speak about the policy adopted by another training body vis-à-vis its instructors, because I believe their action prejudicial to the whole of the profession. After hesitating and thinking for a long time, I finally decided that, no matter what organization I belong to, I must support the dive industry first and foremost to reveal certain facts. Indeed, if the dive chooses this direction, we go to serious difficulties.

A lawsuit is currently under way in a Utah federal court (v Tuvell Boy Scouts of America, et al., ... Case 1: 12-cv-00128 DB), about a boy who lost his life in a PADI Discover program Scuba Diving. Usually, PADI supports its members and defends them vigorously in the event of a dispute ... but not this time.

Without conducting an investigation or waiting for the authorities to do their own, without even questioning any witnesses and within two weeks of the accident, PADI wrote off the instructor, a veteran of the Iraq war, only telling him that his collaboration with PADI "was no longer in the best interests of PADI". And when the instructor asked for explanations and what PADI standards he may have violated, PADI did not even have the courtesy to respond.

When the boy's parents lodged a complaint against them, PADI chose to solve the problem directly and tried to conceal the agreements reached confidentially by joining the plaintiff's defense with normally confidential documents, thus secretly instructing his instructor. . The Federal Judge heard of this conduct and sanctioned PADI. You can access and comment on this "182 Document" in the instruction folder, open to the general public on>www.pacer.gov<
PADI still pushed the villainy to the point of paying a considerable sum of money to settle this affair. The exact amount appears on the minutes of the court hearing of April 23, 2014, during which PADI was sanctioned. It is also visible on ->www.pacer.gov<But the Settlement Agreement prepared by PADI contains a clause where the parties agreed that the PADI Member Instructor was 100% responsible. After settlement, PADI then entrusted incident reports relating to its instructor member to the opposing party, without of course seeing fit to inform the instructor in question that he was doing so.
These are the reports that all members are required to file as a condition of their agreement as PADI members. These same risk management documents say, "This report is prepared to receive legal advice in anticipation of a potential dispute". In other words, incident reports are confidential. They are protected from disclosure by both solicitor-client privilege and the ethics of the advocate who advocates for the common interests and of PADI and the instructor. The instructor's lawyer insisted that PADI recall the documents and protect them, but they refused. Remember that they had signed a secret settlement with the plaintiffs including a collusion clause.

This is a perfect example: throw the instructor straight into the mouth of the wolf to defend his own selfish corporate interests and make him responsible for everything, even though he only followed PADI standards to the letter.

While full details of what actually happened during the dive will not be known until the trial is over, but based on what the general public is aware of now, this instructor has followed all training standards. required. We are therefore entitled to wonder why PADI expels one of its members so quickly, without preliminary investigation, then approaches the lawyer of the opposing party with whom he is now in cahoots, if not to charge the instructor! This is only a hypothesis, since we are still awaiting PADI's response to the multiple demands of the Federal Court and of public opinion. But it all seems pretty clear and obvious to any behind-the-scenes observer.

I am writing this open letter to the dive industry to shed light on why PADI has chosen such a special path in this Utah trial. The Diving Center and the instructor were insured at Willis Insurance who are not insurers associated with PADI programs. This accident could generate bad publicity and jeopardize the safety of its Discover Scuba Diving program. PADI wanted to get out of there as quickly and discreetly as possible. Because it would not hurt their own insurance program, they simply chose to evict their member and put him on the index. It would not cost them anything. This theory is supported by the fact that PADI's insurers have asked the Tribunal, as an appendix to the trial, to condemn the Willis insurers to cover PADI's legal costs in the Tuvell case.

PADI insurers remained involved in this trial for one year in collusion with the plaintiffs after PADI released them from liability in the Tuvell case. They also never revealed to the Federal Judge that PADI had settled the underlying case.

You are probably wondering why I am writing this letter to defend a PADI instructor who is in question following the death of a diver in one of his courses? This is because I believe that one of the biggest international diving training agencies has to behave in a positive way, for the good of the whole profession. In the past, this kind of behavior, being in collusion with complainants, has been frowned upon by everyone, and it is completely illegal. In fact, in the past PADI has publicly attacked and ridiculed lawyers and witnesses who worked for the defense in their own interests, but now they too are now acting this way with plaintiffs. That's it ? Are you starting to see the absurdity of all this? PADI believes it is okay to collude with complainants to blackball their own instructor and plot to defeat their defense… while condemning anyone who abuses the complainants.
Seeing PADI doing so should all worry us ... not just all dive instructors, but also all dive shop owners, dive equipment manufacturers, and all media, all of whom have an interest in asking themselves they can now trust PADI or more. One must ask the question: "PADI will they do the same thing if it serves their interests? Am I the next victim to go to the trap? I have never used any instructor, regardless of the organization they belonged to or because they could compete with me. On the contrary, I chose to defend them when they were in bad shape. In my opinion, as the president of a diving training agency and a businessman active in the diving industry, PADI's behavior was irresponsible, secretly selfish and very nauseating. A large firm does not attempt to sacrifice one of its members who acted entirely according to its codes of conduct. This behavior inspires contempt and serves the entire diving industry.

I end this letter by saying that I recommend, that I even urge all dive industry professionals to ask the organizations with which they work to put in writing that as long as you follow their standards you will be supported by these organizations . SDI / TDI / ERDI will be happy to do this regardless of your insurance company and I challenge all training organizations to do the same. How to work as an instructor with organizations we can not trust to provide pugnacious help in the event of an accident when standards are met? Are standards only used to protect the body and allow it to blame the instructor without trying to find out what happened?

If the above facts are proven - and they are verifiable - then the dive industry has fallen to a shameful and vile level that will contribute to undermining our collective interests and our business relational models in the world of sport that is diving.

I regret having to write this letter, I regret it very sincerely and I know that some will vilify me and ridicule me for raising the problem but it would be irresponsible for me not to launch a debate that we all need . How long will it take before we destroy this dive industry from the inside? I love diving and all the links in the chain. I regret that some do not share my passion to defend it. I would like to debate this openly with everyone, training organization leaders, manufacturers and all the other professionals in this industry.
It is high time that we all act responsibly and work hand in hand. And if a manufacturer, a training organization or any other professional refuses, then ... go spend your money elsewhere. Sometimes, at the end of the day, change happens or does not happen based on your investments. Just let your money sleep in the bank.
Everything depends on your ethics, ultimately. It's up to you to decide which route to follow. For me, everything is clear and based on common sense. And that's the road to take.

Sincerely,

Brian Carney -> Brian.Carney@tdisdi.com

For more information and to check the references above, go to www.pacer.gov and follow Tuvell v Boy Scouts of America, et al., Case 1: 12-cv-00128-DB United States District Court for the Northern District of Utah.

Consult the original letter: OPEN LETTER BY BRIAN CARNEY