People versus Paper: The Dilemma of Organisations World Wide

If you know me, you are aware I am active in the local Surf Lifesaving Club. I qualified as a Bronze Medallion holder last century (Doesn't that sound old!!!) in the late sixties, but drifted away from the movement, distracted by education, employment,  and travel, among other things. It wasn't until my oldest boy was 7 years old, that I re-joined, and re-qualified as a lifesaving volunteer, so that the family could participate in the "Nippers" the Junior Section of the Club

What I liked about Surf Clubs, was that it is a healthy environment for kids - everyone in Queensland who is a current lifesaver has to hold a "Blue Card" which is aimed at keeping pedophiles and criminals from associating with the younger and junior members. It is also a wonderful medium for meeting people, and for staying fit. The gymnasium is the cheapest I know - the annual subscription is the membership fee for the Club, which is under $50.00. Of course, I have to patrol the beach for 40 hours a year, but that is a small price to pay, given that it is a real pleasure to do the patrols.

I learned that the best way to keep current with the latest changes to rescucitation and first aid for Lifesavers, was to teach it - I have an interest in teaching, and I discovered I love to see kids and young adults (oldies too) discover they were among the elite 3% of Australians who qualify for a Bronze Medallion.

I also learned that bureaucracy  is alive and thriving in the Lifesaving movement. The almighty "paperwork" that has to "be right" before anything can happen. I am sure you all know the ablution block joke about "the jobs not done till the paperwork is finished."

Now, I do understand that there must be procedures to follow, so that the outcomes are the same for every training , but I question that rigid adherence to procedures is the only way to interact with lifesaving personnel, in particular those volunteers who give up their time in order to pass on their knowledge and expertise.

A case in point. The Australian Lifesaving Academy states that it accepts other recognized qualifications. But the process involved in having those "other" qualifications is so long and involved that applicants may as well re-sit the assessment and complete all the (usually irrelevant or redundant) paperwork for a new award. A fellow trainer is a high school teacher in his day job, and has tried for several months to have Recognition of Previous Learning applied to his teaching qualifications - to date, he is not considered to be a fully qualified trainer by the Academy - I guess a Bachelor of Education doesn't mean much nowadays.

Another case: If anyone wants to drive the All-Terrain-Vehicles, the ATV's, the paperwork required by the Club is intimidating. Photocopies of licences, completed 15 page assessment paper, and a signed off-certificate of competency in which the signatories pledge body and soul to god and every authority that they are competent to drive an ATV, including wearing approved safety footwear (What rot!) on the beach. What a let out for an insurer!.

But the worst excesses are held in reserve, for when the (hopefully) completed paperwork is sent to the "head office" for Awards to be issued. If there are any errors at all, the offending paper is sent back to the unpaid trainer, or assessor for correction.

If you are unfortunate enough to be outside rigid time-frames for completion of the relevant paperwork, the paperwork is deemed to be invalid and the entire process will need to be repeated - not the training, but the PAPERWORK

Apparently the person who has done the training and signed off to say yes, I am competent, is not competent because the paperwork is not "right".

In my opinion, the issue is simplicity - or rather the lack of it.

For instance, the Bronze Medallion Award, which is called a Certificate II in Aquatic Rescue by the Australian Lifesaving Academy, contains of a number of "Awards" which are made up from "competencies" which are groups of procedures of which lifesaving activities consist. Sound complex? Well it is - and it isn't...

Any activity can be broken down into individual actions, which can be documented. This document is thus a record of the safe actions that make up the activity, and can be demonstrated and learned very simply in classrooms, or "on the job." Simple...

Next Step: Activities make up tasks which form part of work which "must" be performed by trained and "qualified" people. Getting less simple...

Finally: Work tasks, grouped together make up Jobs, performed by people who hold "Awards." Persons who do not hold the relevant "Award" are considered incompetent, often despite abundant evidence to the contrary, and because their qualifications have been superseded, which is bureaucrat speak for "changed so we can justify our positions." Complex? Yup...

Which brings me back to my question in the title of this post. If a person is able to perform "work" without the award, competently safely and efficiently, does the fact that he doesn't have the PAPERWORK preclude him from working?