Athletics Weekly

Insurance

News, reports and results from the UK and the rest of the world

Insurance

Postby michaelw » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:41 pm

UKAthletics make important changes to the rules for competition from 1st April 2006. The present system of Technical Officials applying to track and field is extended to road, cross country and fell. However nobody seems to be complying with it in fact I doubt that 90% of clubs are even aware of it. Yet failure to comply with the rules mean that the event is not run in accordance with UKA Rules.
Insurers are not charities. As soon as they receive a major claim they search for reasons to decline it. It is my view that insurers would have grounds for declining practically every claim that could have been made on all road, cross country and fell races from the 1st April until now. These sloppy practices regarding insurance must cease or it is going to end in tears.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Endurance Officials

Postby ronnie rhino » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:17 pm

I refer you to the replies on this thread.

Mike Welford
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby sleady » Sat Jul 15, 2006 2:42 pm

It is my view that insurers would have grounds for declining practically every claim that could have been made on all road, cross country and fell races from the 1st April until now.


So how many claims have actually been made since 1st April?
sleady
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:59 pm

Postby michaelw » Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:42 pm

No idea Sleady. I organise sporting events to help out but part of the deal does not include putting my own personal funds at risk if something untoward happens. So far as I can see this change to the Licensing Arrangements was made by altering the UKA Rules for competition with no public announcement nor any special notice to event organisers. Probably the most important people in our sport are the event organisers. They should not face personal financial risks if they give their time to our sport.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby athletic coach » Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:54 pm

Michael I cannot believe that you are still putting this forward in postings.

I have had this clarified from a number of senior sources within UKA and at county level. whilst I understand fully the concern, in these days of litigation, about insurance issues. the information was not "slipped out".

I once again take this opportunity to clarify the situation.

Information on this issue was sent to Officials Secretaries, Home Countries Secretaries and Road and Cross Country Secretaries. A couple of pages has also been dedicated to this in the next edition of the Officials Newsletter, which should be with people in the next 10 days. The rule book ( Appendix E) also contains information on the Grading of Off Track Officials.

Over the last few years I have had some very strong arguments with UKA about the way in which they conduct business and I am begining to find answering these types of attacks on their behalf rather embarrassing.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby michaelw » Sun Jul 16, 2006 8:43 pm

Athletic Coach. The rules were changed from 1st April 2006. It was not until the matter was publicised in the Fellrunner Magazine in June that anybody in the Road Running community seemed to become aware of this major change to the Rules for Endurance Events. Since failure to comply with the Rules could affect clubs insurance this seems to be a very serious failure by UKAthletics to see that Rules are properly understood and complied with before they are introduced.
I believe race organisers have been left exposed to serious financial risks due to the manner in which this has been handled.
Road and Cross Country runners concerns about the rules themselves have been placed before UKAthletics.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Endurance Grading

Postby ronnie rhino » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:07 pm

No risks before 1 Jan 2007, so lets have a sensible debate and discussion this year.

Mike Welford
Altrincham and District
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby michaelw » Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:24 am

I have read and re read the Rules for Endurance Event Officials many times. I can see no mention of any delay in implementation of these rules until 1st January 2007. In my opinion they apply to all events of any size held after 1st April 2006. 4.3 of the Rules states until 31st December 2006 all Clubs, Leagues, Schools or other associate organisations may recommend to County Associations suitably qualified persons for appointment to Level 2 status. Why would the Rules say this if they are not in force now ?
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby athletic coach » Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:33 am

I would have hoped that all clubs/counties involved in staging road races and cross country races would have noted the changes and taken the approriate action.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby michaelw » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:43 am

I completely agree with you Athletic Coach.
One further point. I have participated in two road/ trail races in the last week. The standards of organisation and care about safety in both events was impressive. One the Gibbet Hill 10K organised by Haslemere Border AC and the other the Elmore 7 organised by South London Harriers. Everybody wants safe events but I think this is best achieved by reliance on the good sense of experienced clubs and officials. Of course, the sport needs to check that officials, clubs or other organisations have sufficient experience and are competent. I believe this is best achieved through the existing permiting system rather than the introduction of another additional and seperate grading system with more bureaucracy and no doubt before too long written exams and courses for other officials in addition to timekeepers and starters.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby Power-of-ten-man » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:54 am

Hi Michael I find your words wise , sensible and workable!

Perhaps when a permit is applied for a list of suitable officials should be provided?

It would seem that UKA like many other Government quango's have this in built policy of creating high employment through the implementation of qualifications for everyone, useing health and safety as thier scapegoat!
But in reality simply nailing everything and everybody down to the floor boards
Power-of-ten-man
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:34 pm

Postby athletic coach » Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:23 am

Hi

I would suspect that 99% of clubs would know of officials within the counties.

There are a number of reasons why officials qualifications are being implemented.

1. Insurance companies need to know that standards are being met.
2. Clubs, St Johns etc have been hit by legal action.
3. To keep in line with the demands made by IAAF and other bodies.

The days of meet on Sunday morning and start the race as soon as everyone turns up are finished and fortunatley or unfortunately legal action is so simple in the UK.

I was at a race for life the other month and although the temperature was in the 30's there was no water for the 5k run. Children as young as 6 were running, runners were flaking out every where. two first aiders were at the finish, myself and some others took over the finish and got some water fromspectators and helped out.
A club run would have been stopped.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby michaelw » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:19 pm

The days of meet on Sunday and start when everybody turns up finished some years ago.
All permitted events must comply with the BARR Permit Standards. Permit Standards 23a and 23b state "Drinks Stations will be provided on Course for the duration of the event, being in accordance with UK Athletics Rules ie for events of 10km or greater, drink stations will be provided at intervals of not more than 5km/3m" "Drinks will be provided for the entire field at the end of the race."
The fact is that races organised by clubs already have high safety standards. I understand the Fell Runners have received concessions on the new Rules because they have their own safety standards. Why cannot the Road and Cross Country Running Clubs also have the same concessions- they also have their own safety standards.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby michaelw » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:48 pm

Also BARR Permit Standard 30 states that the maximum permissable distance for under 9's is 2K.
I do not know the insurance arrangements for the Race for Life Series. Presumably since the event appears to breach the BARR Permit Standards it could not be insured under the UKAthletics Policy.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby athletic coach » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:06 pm

nearly, all if not all, charity runs do not have permits as they are insured under their own policies and are nothing to do with UKA or any other organisation. It is the same as the other regulations about age and distance.

I have run in many road races and there are some good club run ones and some bad club runs. I remember doing a half marathon where the club also ran a marathon in tandem with it. I came down to the last 1k and turned right to get to the finish, the marathon runners ran straight on, however the marshalls had gone fro a quick drink and I saw a lot of 1/2 marathoners doing extra miles.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby athletic coach » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:06 pm

nearly, all if not all, charity runs do not have permits as they are insured under their own policies and are nothing to do with UKA or any other organisation. It is the same as the other regulations about age and distance.

I have run in many road races and there are some good club run ones and some bad club runs. I remember doing a half marathon where the club also ran a marathon in tandem with it. I came down to the last 1k and turned right to get to the finish, the marathon runners ran straight on, however the marshalls had gone fro a quick drink and I saw a lot of 1/2 marathoners doing extra miles.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby michaelw » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:41 pm

I have run in well over a 100 road and cross country races. Apart from the occasional time when runners have gone off route due to poor sign posting they have all been well run. I am just extremely grateful to the clubs and club members who have put on these events and enabled me to have so much fun.
I fear that the enjoyment of future generations of road and cross country runners will be spoiled by what I see as unnecessary Health and Safety demands.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby michaelw » Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:33 am

UKAthletics have now published on their website amended Rules for Endurance Event Officials Grading. These amendments take account of all ABAC's concerns. I thank UKAthletics, Liz Patrick and Bryan Smith for their very prompt attention to this matter which was of great concern to road and cross country runners.
Michael White Secretary ABAC
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby Power-of-ten-man » Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:05 am

To err is to be human, to forgive is not insurance company policy!

Glad that is sorted out, what a shame such changes are not put on their web site straight away!

UKA site should not be used just for propoganda reasons!
Power-of-ten-man
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:34 pm

Postby sleady » Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:44 am

jennifer eccles wrote:UKA site should not be used just for propoganda reasons!


But then neither should this site either....
sleady
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:59 pm

Postby Power-of-ten-man » Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:28 am

There is no right of reply on the UKA site, on here people likje you can a have free snipe when it suits!
Power-of-ten-man
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:34 pm

Postby sleady » Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:01 pm

jennifer eccles wrote:It would seem that UKA like many other Government quango's have this in built policy of creating high employment through the implementation of qualifications for everyone, useing health and safety as thier scapegoat!
But in reality simply nailing everything and everybody down to the floor boards


Sniping? That would never happen... :wink:
sleady
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:59 pm

Postby Power-of-ten-man » Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:39 pm

This was a simple expression of an opinion not a reply to anyone, I was not quoting anybody.

I think what you do is sniping, and through practice you have become rather adept at it..the sharp tongue grows keener with use!
Power-of-ten-man
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:34 pm

Postby sleady » Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:04 pm

One mans sniping is another mans expression...
sleady
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:59 pm

Postby Javelin Sam » Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:14 pm

The middle of the Track and Field season... and a topic about insurance is the only one generating any responses...

you lot need to get a life....
Javelin Sam
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Essex

Postby michaelw » Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:43 pm

Well maybe but the question of qualifications for officials at road and cross country events is very important.
But the really big news is that ABAC and UKAthletics worked together to identify the changes to the original rules that were needed and then they were amended.
UKAthletics have thanked ABAC for their assistance and look forward to working with them in the future.
ABAC have access to vast experience in coaching, club management, road and cross country running, event organisation and officiating. If they can work together for the common good of the sport then perhaps we can have a better sport for all.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby athletic coach » Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:22 am

It is pleasing to see that UKA are listening to the clubs and changing the rules.

What changes were made?
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Postby michaelw » Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:49 am

The major changes were
1 The provision that starters and timekeepers should attend a Health and Safety course and pass an examination paper were deleted
2 The provisions regarding Fell and Hill Running and Race Walking are now left to their respective associations
3 For Level 3 Officials the requirement to pass an examination paper has been dropped
ABAC know from their feedback from clubs that many of those who assist their clubs to organise road and cross country events would not be willing to attend courses and to sit exams.
michaelw
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:50 pm

Postby Power-of-ten-man » Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:08 pm

Well done michaelw, abac have done the business, power in numbers eh, come on clubs all sign up to ABAC and lets make some real changes!
Power-of-ten-man
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:34 pm

Postby athletic coach » Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:41 pm

As the concern was the insurance companies, if their is a problem with any races then the onus will be on the organisers to satisfy the insurance companies that the appointed officials were/are capable of running an event. With the increase in the number of (prominent) fatalities in road races insurance groups are very wary of road races. By awarding official status purely on recommendation could come back and hit the road runners very hard.

If you remember a while back a road runners father was suing the St Johns ambulance brigade because of the death of his daughter. It is very sad that we are increasingly being hit with more officialdom but sometimes it is to protect us.



The fell runners are saying that the changes to them is because of negotiations they have been having.
athletic coach
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: moved north

Next

Return to Current events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron

 

Athletics Weekly Limited © 2010. Terms of use

Design by The Church of London