How Do We Judge a Marshal's Abilities?

[RichardW]

Chris,
I can only note with despair that every club on MWG believes that every marshal from XPC downwards needs no further assesssment unless they need to upgrade. I know of no other organisation - especially any where lives are potentially at risk - where there are no assesssment/appraisal procedures in place.
On upgrade sigs, yes, I know you don't like them, but a helluva lot of people want them back. There are ways around the problems as mentioned above. I've tried asking this question so many times before and every time failed to get an answer. How does watching cars going round in circles without doing anything qualify ANYONE for an upgrade? If you do something -and therefore get an upgrade signature - remember how it used to work? - then that does indicate experience. Attendance signatures prove just attendance - not experience and/or skills, which is what many logica lpeople feel that upgrades should be based on.
Don't get me wrong - you've made a start with the new proposals, but you ain't there yet!

[Nighthawk]

Yes How does watching cars going round in circles without doing anything qualify ANYONE for an upgrade?
we can all do that without any effort..When in this type of situation i find marshals of all grades doing things like Eating/Drinking/Chatting/and the worst of all on the mobile phone and i give up telling people about the phone things . and after a day of this a signature is expected towards there upgrade......Like so many out there i fail to understand the logic..

[Richard Sneader]

Is the refusal to go back to upgrade signatures and an upgrade sysytem sort of like the old one the opinion of every member of the MWG. Also if these are reprasenting the views of marshals in their clubs Q: How many of you marshals have been asked for your opinion of things or given your opinion to an MWG reprasentative?
Just a curious question as we are told the MWG have come up with the decision of the current scheme.
As been mentioned its a good start to improve the current scheme but not sure its going the correct way.
Knighthawk I agree with your comments too. Having seen marshals at a circuit sitting down all day on chairs by a gap where cars normally hit all day and after reporting it and nothing was done.
Also the amount of people on here saying comments are not being written suggest the shceme might not be being followed to the latter. I could be wrong. Afterall the MSA have set it so we should be following it shouldn't we including comments etc.

[Lord Summerisle]

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

Yes How does watching cars going round in circles without doing anything qualify ANYONE for an upgrade?
we can all do that without any effort..When in this type of situation i find marshals of all grades doing things like Eating/Drinking/Chatting/and the worst of all on the mobile phone and i give up telling people about the phone things . and after a day of this a signature is expected towards there upgrade......Like so many out there i fail to understand the logic..

oh my! the HORROR!!! marshals chatting...!

[Nighthawk]

Dont get me wrong...Chattings fine but some are so engrossed in it they actually miss whats happening on circuit

[Stuart Hill]

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

Dont get me wrong...Chattings fine but some are so engrossed in it they actually miss whats happening on circuit

sorry, did someome say something? must have missed it, too busy chatting !! lol

btw, does tweeting or facebookey thingy count as "chatting" ??? I sure hope so as I would ban both!

[m1fcf]

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

Dont get me wrong...Chattings fine but some are so engrossed in it they actually miss whats happening on circuit

So in future, we all stand smartly to attention, spaced 3 feet apart from our nearest neighbour, looking straight out at the track, no talking/eating/drinking?

Seems a bit extreme - if I wanted that kind of regimentation, I would have joined the army or the SAS or something like that???

Maybe we should all start the day with some drill exercises, how about these for starters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol5Df...eature=related

Oh, nearly forgot to add these in: :-) :-o

[Nighthawk]

your missing the point........
And i will add i am guilty of doing this at times....

[RichardW]

[QUOTE=m1fcf;2974597]So in future, we all stand smartly to attention, spaced 3 feet apart from our nearest neighbour, looking straight out at the track, no talking/eating/drinking?

I think that's just DTM inspection laps!!). But - all joking apart - if you're sitting down having a sandwich and a cuppa tea whilst editing your Facebook page when the track is live and a car hits the wall, I do think your incident response is going to be prejudiced somewhat. Assuming, of course, that you're still actually alive given the way that cars and debris can and do fly!

[Guinness2702]

Originally Posted by RichardW

having a sandwich and a cuppa tea whilst editing your Facebook

I'd never do that personally, as it wouldn't leave a hand free to smoke a cigarette ;p

[Ubique]

Originally Posted by RichardW

Chris,
I can only note with despair that every club on MWG believes that every marshal from XPC downwards needs no further assesssment unless they need to upgrade. I know of no other organisation - especially any where lives are potentially at risk - where there are no assesssment/appraisal procedures in place.

Richard can we please cut this rubbish about assessments and appraisals for everyone? Marshalling is a hobby not a job and if we put too much red tape in and start making it more like every other work place people will simply quit. In my job we have annual and mid term appraisals, does it make people better at their jobs? Well in some cases it does i.e those that want to improve but in most no it doesn't they work hard pre-appraisal then slack off again after it. Also another effect of said appraisals is that it means that twice a year for a couple of weeks my line manager is so busy doing appraisals that he is unable to actually do his job an manage us!

We all know that the grading scheme is not perfect but has it ever been? And who do you expect to do these appraisals? I'm not being funny but I have been at training days and listened to certain MSA trainers preach good marshaling only to see them at meetings failing to follow their own advice. It just isn't practicle to assess every marshal every year.

I will agree with you and the other Richard that the clubs need to listen to our views more as without the members the clubs couldn't exist. I'm a member of both the BMMC and BARC and actually find BARC listen to our views far more than the BMMC do. Since the MWG has been formed I have not once been asked by the BMMC what issues do I think need addressing however, I have been asked that very question by the BARC representative on several occassions this season alone.

[RichardW]

While I disagree, I am grateful for the comments. My point is that in a situation where lives are at risk - both marshals and drivers lives - we need to be sure that people are (still) competent. A deeply flawed grading system has allowed 'badge-chasers' to progess (with little experience or demonstration of skills) to positions of authority where they can put those lives at risk. Other factors also take their toll. Other 'emergency services' would not dream of operating without some appraisal system to ensure that people can actually do their jobs (or carry out therir duties if you prefer). But, I am not suggesting any formalised procedure below PC. If you can be sure that your XPCs and PCs are competent, then they can assess - informally, on-post - those 'below'. Any problems can then be addressed.
In the current system, if I foul up 6 weekends on the trot, what are the consequences? Simply that I am asked back the following weekend to foul up again. Can we not agree that this cannot be right or good for the sport?

Regarding people quitting, I find that more are currently quitting in despair with the system than leaving because they are expected to know what they're doing!

As a BARC man myself, I cannot disagree with your comments in the final para. Some transparency from MWG - minutes, voting records, etc, wouldn't do any harm, though.

[deley]

Originally Posted by RichardW

While I disagree, I am grateful for the comments. My point is that in a situation where lives are at risk - both marshals and drivers lives - we need to be sure that people are (still) competent. A deeply flawed grading system has allowed 'badge-chasers' to progess (with little experience or demonstration of skills) to positions of authority where they can put those lives at risk. Other factors also take their toll. Other 'emergency services' would not dream of operating without some appraisal system to ensure that people can actually do their jobs (or carry out therir duties if you prefer). But, I am not suggesting any formalised procedure below PC. If you can be sure that your XPCs and PCs are competent, then they can assess - informally, on-post - those 'below'. Any problems can then be addressed.
In the current system, if I foul up 6 weekends on the trot, what are the consequences? Simply that I am asked back the following weekend to foul up again. Can we not agree that this cannot be right or good for the sport?

Regarding people quitting, I find that more are currently quitting in despair with the system than leaving because they are expected to know what they're doing!

As a BARC man myself, I cannot disagree with your comments in the final para. Some transparency from MWG - minutes, voting records, etc, wouldn't do any harm, though.

to be fair I suspect there are some who have progressed under previous schemes who may also be a little "questionable" today

as you and I have discussed before there are flaws (will be in any scheme) however as I posted previously some of the real/perceived flaws around attendance sig vs upgrade sig can be addressed by a judicious use of the "comments" element particularly if the new record has a comment per day.

As for ongoing assessments - any system that purports to establish and maintain "standards" needs a means of measuring and maintaining those over time (particularly in a situation where regulation and practices can change over an extended period of time)

As for visibility of the MWG items, certainly couldn't do any harm ....

Dave

[RichardW]

Thanks, Dave. I think you're right about the need for standards to be maintained whatever upgrade system is used. Although the comments box could be useful - if used!! - the fact remains that people will be able to request an upgrade assessment based on number of days attended - even though they may have done nothing on some or even all of those days. I just don't think that can be right.
The logistics of continuous assessments aren't easy, of course. But when were worthwhile objectives achieved without effort. Over the MWG!

[Richard Duvall]

Whilst I applaud the efforts to improve the grading system, I sometimes wonder to what extent problems have actually arisen through people having risen through the grades too quickly? What is a "badge chaser"?

[Woolley]

Under the old system some people clearly progressed who shouldn't have done, and some were held back or didn't bother, and some gave up and left the sport.

I don't think that's changed under the current system, TBH, it may just be different people falling into the various catogories.

I feel for the people trying to create a system that does work, whilst still recognising that those partaking are volunteers who often need encouragement, yet still are required to perform a difficult, often dangerous and sometimes vital task. It's not easy and I salute them for their efforts. Any criticism I make is intended as constructive, even though sometimes it may not seem that way.

IMO we need to separate grading from training to a certain extent, the former being partially the result of the latter. Training takes two forms - theoretical (including excercises) and practical (or on the job). Flagging in particular I believe requires a lot of practical training and has been overlooked as an important separate grade with a resultant drop in overall standards.

Incident, on the other hand, I think benefits from a lot of more theoretical work. Whilst you always come across new and interesting ways of having an accident, they still basically fall into a number of groups and looking at them thoroughly at training days means you're better prepared and better aware when they occur.

Some aspects of the new system I like - I think proper assessments in order to award the grade are a positive step, although I'd like to see training for the assessors and only those people authorised to grant upgrade signatures in order to ensure consistency. My worry there is not that some people aren't good enough to carry out the assessments so much as those who are may be either undermined (avoid him, he's too tough) or not recognised for their ability in this field.

Some - the lack of proper flag training to acheive it's own recognised grade, I don't like.

We do know that those responsible for running the grading system read and post on here, so let's help with constructive comments rather than belittling their efforts.

[RichardW]

More interesting comments. To Richard D, I would say that - yes, IMHO - there are clear examples of people who have progressed beyond where they should be and do not display the qualities needed in their current grade. If I have an IO who can't give a briefing or control a team, and as PC I have to do those things, I have to question how that IO got upgraded? I think the term badge-chaser is generally understood to mean those that try every upgrade at the earliest oportunity, rather than waiting until they are seen to be ready.
To Woolley, I would agree that no system is perfect. But I have to suggest again that upgrade signatures do demonstrate something which attendance signatures never can or will.
I agree there should be a flag speciality and specialist training - I ran such a session at Brands a few years ago.
I also agree about constructive comments and we really have tried - with both written submissions and oral presentation at Colnbrook. But when one VVVVIP bluntly says - with no committee discussion - 'there is no way I'm going back to upgrade signatures', it does make the task a tad more tricky!!

[Nighthawk]

VVVVIP..I wonder who that could be....We need a committee thats speaks for us...sorry to say at the end of the day there are to many Chiefs on the committee who take all the credit and as for us out on the bank its accept or get out situation..
This again is why i dont join clubs as i feel thay are not representing us.....
dont mean to offend anyone this is my own opinion...

[RichardW]

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

VVVVIP..I wonder who that could be....We need a committee thats speaks for us...sorry to say at the end of the day there are to many Chiefs on the committee who take all the credit and as for us out on the bank its accept or get out situation..
This again is why i dont join clubs as i feel thay are not representing us.....
dont mean to offend anyone this is my own opinion...

Maybe we'll get a comment from him? Who knows?
It would be good if there was a more open method of deciding who sits on these committees and how they get voted on - and off if necessary. And, as mentioned before, has anyone seen voting records or minutes from MWG or other committees?? Can't say I ever have.