Certification Levels

[DivemasterDennis]

I have found that the "AOW card" rule varies from one dive operation to another. Some will substitute a log book showing experience in similar conditions. My wife, who has over 200 ocean dives, over 50 of which are over 90 feet, has been told only once that she can't do a specific dive without a "private divemaster." That is me ( I keep my insurance current for that reason as well as the normal reasons). The fact is , there are a lot of experienced divers who do not have an advanced card, but are more competent to dive at any depth then an advanced card holder who has a total of ten dives, counting the training dives. Despite that fact, in this "modern age" where credential sometimes trumps competence, it's best to get the advanced card. And the training is worthwhile, even for old salts with over 100 dives.
DivemasterDennis

 

[fjpatrum]

I believe (though have no personal experience to back it up) that it is a fairly new trend. I just talked to several FL Keys operators who said basically, "if you haven't dived deep in the last 6 months, or you don't have AOW you'll pay for a DM in order to do the deep(er) wrecks". That said, I've also been told by operators that if I dive a few dives with them and they are comfortable with my skills they won't bother me with things like the above no matter how many dives I have.

I don't personally have a lot of beef with that and I'm not super interested in the deep dives anyway since I won't get much bottom time. That said, there are a couple of deeper wrecks I'd like to see so maybe I'll just hire a DM for a dive or two...

At the end of the day, the only plastic card the shops really care about says Visa/Mastercard/American Express on it...

 

[redacted]

So where are all these lawsuits (or any) that have precipitated this new restriction? Or is this just another scam to get in diver's wallets.

There are plenty of dive destinations and plenty of dive operators. Diving would have to be awfully good to make me choose one I am not satisfied with.

 

[nimoh]

I am not an operator, but if I was then I would be checking certification levels for a variety of reasons, not just liability.

1. liability, of course
2. I wouldn't want my shop associated with fatalities, even if not my fault
3. I don't want a fatality on my conscience

Requiring an AOW card is their choice, but if they won't accept a card above AOW, like a tech rating (as was posted earlier), that is just plain silly.

I would also argue, that in some cases, requiring AOW is not sufficient since AOW only means that the diver has been to at least 60', and on a 100' dive with the operator they may be experiencing narcosis for the first time.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Then there's the idiots.

In Maui one shop wouldn't book me on a charter because my NAUI Instructor card didn't say PADI on it. And in Bonaire the guy wasn't going to let me get a nitrox fill with a trimix card. In the first case, we walked across the street and booked with his competitor ... who was happy to accept both my NAUI and VISA cards. In the second case, I told the guy "OK, give me a trimix fill then ... just don't put any helium in it." He thought about it for a coupla seconds and started laughing. I got my nitrox fill ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[boulderjohn]

So much for the idea that "you can't buy experiance". A PADI Advanced card doesn't mean much.

I am not an operator, so I am speculating on what it might mean to them.

Let's say you have some dives sites you visit that require skills beyond the most basic level. You are concerned that you may be held liable for taking a diver who is not qualified in case of an accident. As I see it, you have a couple of choices.

1. You can interview the diver and look at the logbook, knowing that any idiot can buy a logbook and write anything at all limit, identifying 236 dives when in fact only 10 have been done. You can look at that juimble of dives to various depths and times and locations and decide if it is adequate. Then you can use your judgment to determine of the diver is fit for the dive.

2. You can make a clear rule that the diver must have an AOW card (or higher) from a recognized agency. By doing this, you are not making a judgment--the instructor who issued the AOW made the judgment. You can add another clear rule requiring a certain maximum time since the last dive. Again, no judgment on your part.

Which of the two is most likely to protect you from liability?

 

[freewillie]

So where are all these lawsuits (or any) that have precipitated this new restriction? Or is this just another scam to get in diver's wallets.

There are plenty of dive destinations and plenty of dive operators. Diving would have to be awfully good to make me choose one I am not satisfied with.

Doesn't have to be actual law suit, just the perception that a lawsuit is possible.

If a diver has AOW cert then the dive operator assumes that the diver already has appropriate training and skill for the dive in question. If the dive operator checks the log book they have to assume responsibilty that the diver has the skill for the dive.

Look what would happen in a deposition/court. Lawyer, "how did you know the diver had adequate training?" Defendant, "I checked their log book." Lawyer, "and how did you know the log book was accurate?" Defendant, "I trusted the diver." Lawyer, "Isn't it your responsibility to verify that the diver actually did those dives and wasn't falsifying their records. After all, isn't it your responsibility to do x, y, and z to verify the diver actually could do what he claimed he could do?"

After all, in the US it is someone else's responsibility to ensure a stupid idiot doesn't kill himself.

 

[Frosty]

Im getting three feedbacks from this discussion.
1)That padi,naui etc SHOULD HAVE all "licence" levels attained via their training by that diver on their cards.

2)Divers can and do tell porkies (lies) about their experience and competence levels.

3) Padi AOW is viewed as a "joke" certification by many.

 

[simskiscuba]

Hitler AOW



ScubaSteve :worship:

That's great!

 

[jar546]

I can see the reasoning behind a dive-op requiring at minimum AOW.

First of all, it is impractical and not cost effective to evaluate the skills of the customers before a planned dive. It just won't work.

Second, their evaluation is subjective and from a liability standpoint, it is easier to simply require a minimum of an AOW card because it is objective, not subjective since someone else issued to the card to them saying that they met the qualifications.

Think what you want of the card, it still has merit and clout as long as it is required by dive-ops.