Can a family member RYA examiner give me qualifications?

[capnsensible]

According to the website a Day Skipper with the professional bits added can be used commercially. So I guess it is to the some limited extent.

Limits are set as distance from a safe haven. In the case off Day Skipper, 20nm.

There are also things like a Boatmaster Licence for things like tourist boats in local harbours. Fishing boat Skipper licences. And of course the stuff you will be familiar with, the MCA licences for Masters of vessels in increasing tonnageand reducing distance limits.

 

[capnsensible]

I had no problem teaching Mrs. S.

She is now a Yachtmaster (Ocean) and shorebased Instructor.

When our eldest Grandson turned 16, I did his Competent Crew course. When he was 17, Grandma ran his Day Skipper Theory and Grandad, the practical. No shortcuts or anything. He worked hard and standards achieved.

 

[Skylark]

Unless, clearly, the Principal or the Chief Instructor taught the course. They aren't all office wallahs.....

Wow, that may qualify as a “breaking news” award ?

 

[capnsensible]

Wow, that may qualify as a “breaking news” award ?

Seems to be for some people.

 

[Never Grumble]

I have friends who are examiners and they all refuse to examine people they are friends of. Don't mix work and friendship, what would happen if they failed you?

As @Never Grumble said I'd see this as a conflict of interest.

I'd agree or on the other hand what happens if you pass them and then something goes horribly wrong i.e. they kill someone?

The fact that the OP used the words "she owes me one" are even more concerning from a conflict of interest perspective.

@capnsensible no one has questioned the integrity of examiners, I dont know what the RYA rule book says if anything, it is however about morals and professional ethics. What is being pointed out is the perception surrounding impartiality/independence and how it could look. In my world I've had my independence and impartiality challenged on a number of occasions when taking quasi judicial appointments in commercial disputes so I understand a little about the subject.

 

[Refueler]

The fact that the OP used the words "she owes me one" are even more concerning from a conflict of interest perspective.

Exactly my thoughts when I read that as well .....

 

[Uricanejack]

I'd agree or on the other hand what happens if you pass them and then something goes horribly wrong i.e. they kill someone?

The fact that the OP used the words "she owes me one" are even more concerning from a conflict of interest perspective.

@capnsensible no one has questioned the integrity of examiners, I dont know what the RYA rule book says if anything, it is however about morals and professional ethics. What is being pointed out is the perception surrounding impartiality/independence and how it could look. In my world I've had my independence and impartiality challenged on a number of occasions when taking quasi judicial appointments in commercial disputes so I understand a little about the subject.

Precisely the same as with anyone else you give a thumbs up to.

While I think it’s highly unlikely this would occur with anyone here.
I gave a thumbs up to someone, who I subsequently worked with, and thought well off, who did at a much later date. Quite a period of time had passed. I was never asked officially about it. Even so after it occurred I was quite shocked to hear the incident had occurred and who was involved.
I will leave that there. Fortunately I had no further involvement.

I have known others who have been involved in incidents. Including some who I had either worked with and or trained. fortunately without fatalities. yes training is certainly an area to be investigated along with many other criteria. Most of which is not about certification. On occasion recommendations include changes to required training.

A colleague was quite shocked to find someone he recommended had a forged certificate on one occasion.
Again it was a surprise. I also knew the individual. Fortunately not someone I had trained. Though I have to admit I would probably have taken his word as well.
Now I always ask to see original documentation. I have been quite surprised to find them missing a couple times.

I am sure I was conned re experience by at least one individual. I had given a thumbs up to. He did have a certificate. it was later I came to doubt his claimed experience.

So what’s my point?

All you can do is cover the required topics for the syllabus as best you can in the time available. At the end of the day, if asked.
The candidate displayed the required minimum level of knowledge and competence at the time.

The truth is every candidate I have ever trained or assessed will go on and make mistake’s. To err is human. All humans err.
Hopefully I am able to pass on enough about good practice and procedure to catch those errors before a significant one gets missed.
Fortunately for me none of my errors was not caught in time and none ever resulted in injury or death. Or anything serious.

 

[zoidberg]

Oh, for the good old days of the mutual 'Gin and Tonic Certificate'......

 

[Praxinoscope]

I would feel that there is no problem for a qualified instructor teaching a friend or family member or even signing off their course certificates, but I would be wary of allowing them to invigilate or assess them for the exam leading to a certficate of competence.

 

[RunAgroundHard]

Conflict of Interest in my professional life does not mean I can’t do the required task. In most cases I can, as long as the conflict is declared formally in a register. There are exceptions e.g. wife owns a company that is tendering for work by my employing company. I am prohibited from being involved in tender analysis; a company rule which I think is based on anti competitive legislation.

I think the point is, some forms of relationship between parties, does not automatically exclude doing the work. I think this would fall into that category unless there is a specific rule. Most of these activities will be performed under a code of conduct, professional standards of behaviour anyway.

 

[RivalRedwing]

I wouldn't want someone I knew to be my examiner, far better some formal distance between student and assessor for all parties concerned.

 

[superheat6k]

I think the problem here is explained entirely in your thread title, especially by your use of the word 'give'. If you have any principles at all then the answer should be entirely clear to you.

 

[ylop]

Anyway, it seems to me some people are questioning the integrity of examiners.

quite the opposite - I think most people are suggesting that an examiner with professional integrity would either feel it unlikely they could be truely unbiased (either for or against the candidate) or that it might be perceived that way and it would be far better to let someone else do the examination to ensure there is no perception of bias

But no matter who the candidate is, the standard is exactly the same. As you say, a panel assess the award of the certificate of competence. Its not some kinda mafia stitch up.

the standard in law is the same for all defendants but you wouldn't expect a judge to sentence their own child or sibling.
Similarly, a driving examiner is not supposed to test their own family or close friends. School exam invigilators are not allowed to supervise the exams of their own children etc. etc.

I'm actually amazed if the RYA doesn't have a rule precluding Examiners from testing close family members (possibly even close friends) and surprised if training in ethics/independence is not part of the examiner training.

 

[ylop]

Actually, I'm surprised that candidates get the option to "pick" their examiner? That is not usually the case with any other form of formal face-to-face examination; usually, you apply to be examined and the authority responsible allocates an examiner. Otherwise presumably examiners gain a reputation and "soft" ones are sought out and tough ones avoided, whilst instructors might also learn that particular people focus on, or are particularly fastidious about certain aspects and focus their instruction there rather than evenly across the whole syllabus.

 

[finestgreen]

The yachtmaster instructor handbook says (in the section on YM exams) that "An examiner must not examine a candidate who is a personal friend, whom they have taught, or previously failed in an examination"

 

[capnsensible]

quite the opposite - I think most people are suggesting that an examiner with professional integrity would either feel it unlikely they could be truely unbiased (either for or against the candidate) or that it might be perceived that way and it would be far better to let someone else do the examination to ensure there is no perception of bias

the standard in law is the same for all defendants but you wouldn't expect a judge to sentence their own child or sibling.
Similarly, a driving examiner is not supposed to test their own family or close friends. School exam invigilators are not allowed to supervise the exams of their own children etc. etc.

I'm actually amazed if the RYA doesn't have a rule precluding Examiners from testing close family members (possibly even close friends) and surprised if training in ethics/independence is not part of the examiner training.

In my service career I routinely sat examination boards for promotion or qualifying in various watchkeeping positions. And as examiner on boards for candidates as my career progressed. Clearly, those testing the candidate knew them, often very well. This had no influence whatsoever on the pass or fail decision.

 

[Never Grumble]

In my service career I routinely sat examination boards for promotion or qualifying in various watchkeeping positions. And as examiner on boards for candidates as my career progressed. Clearly, those testing the candidate knew them, often very well. This had no influence whatsoever on the pass or fail decision.

and those were for internal positions for internal qualification.

 

[capnsensible]

and those were for internal positions for internal qualification.

It proves the point that examiners can qualify candidates if they know them......and they are good enough.

 

[Uricanejack]

and those were for internal positions for internal qualification.

Internal, I suppose the Navy having responsibility for its own requirements is internal. They have been doing it since before the Days of Horn blower. So presumably it works quite well. Officers, Masters and Mates always had to pass professional exams to prove competence. Certainly long before most other organizations. Our current civilian system was originally based on the Navy’s.

 

[Never Grumble]

It proves the point that examiners can qualify candidates if they know them......and they are good enough.

But isn't most of this done through a hierarchical structure. At least in my day it was. And potentially fighting alongside someone there was a vested interest in making sure those who were passed reached the required standard.