6 - Organize against unethical standards, laws, and guidelines emitters It would be interesting to thoroughly investigate the organizations emitting official documents, and guidelines to be used in our industry. We will perhaps do it one day. However, such research requires specialists in investigation and a lot of patience, as essential information regarding how these organizations are managed is confidential. Also, that should give rise to a long study, which is not the purpose of the present document. However, based on the above, we can say that standards have positive results as well as dysfunctional consequences that can be catastrophic. For these reasons, people implementing them should be appropriately organized to select the relevant ones and eliminate and fight those they consider incorrect. Regarding this, we can put online some suggestions that may be helpful and be the starting point for other thoughts. 6.1 - Be ethical This is a crucial element in gaining control of standards. • Be ethical consists in not using the immoral practices described previously. This is not always easy in a world where a particular press emphasizes behaviours similar to those of the robber barons, demonizes all kinds of opposition, and some people currently in power do not hesitate to promote theories and practices directly in line with the Nazi ideology. Thus, it is easier to be unethical rather than virtuous. • To be ethical, we also need to learn not to react at the 1st degree to events as it is too often seen on job sites, in the press, and used by politicians to condition uneducated people. That includes not being sectary, not reacting when we are under emotion, favouring a no-blame policy, providing advice only on adequately documented events, and keeping a distance from events to analyze them with a clear mind. • Note that playing on several safety levels according to clients’ desires is unethical. A company should set a high level of safety adapted to its operations and keep on it. It is also unethical not to adopt safety rules that are proven more realistic and safe than those published in your company policy for financial reasons, or because your company is a member of another organization, or you are not its author. Note that what some people name “industry standards” are working habits not set as official standards and not to be considered as standards, as this term is often used fallaciously. Implementing incorrect procedures without warning those who have adopted them of their potential adverse consequences is also unethical. • Being honest is not sufficient to defend and implement ethics: We need to develop our knowledge to be able to answer unethical proposals and fallacies scientifically. That includes reading scientific and engineering documents and, thus, basing our expertise on scientific facts rather than dogma. In addition, numerous events have proven that there are situations where standards and established procedures will be inefficient, and knowledge will help people to solve the problem encountered. 6.2 - Analyse the published documents scientifically Looking for appropriate procedures is crucial in supporting the working ethic. For this reason, we must acquire the capacity to analyze every published document. Of course, analyzing publications requires being prepared to criticize them and not consider the people who wrote them as gods who never make mistakes: As it is said in the Latin language, “errare humanum est” (To error is human). The following questions can be used: • Who is the emitter of the document ? Answering such a question allows knowing whether the document is an international or a national standard or guidance, and whether its emitter defends the interests of a particular community, so its domain of application. • Is the document based on recognized scientific or technical studies ? It is essential to ensure whether the document's authors worked scientifically or in another manner. Having the name of the studies in reference and their authors allows for knowing whether these are considered references by the scientific community (in this post, the word "Scientific" applies also to engineering studies). Note that to avoid giving long lists of scientists involved in a study (some studies are made by teams of 20 authors or more), it is common to mention the name of the principal author followed by "et al.", which is the abbreviation of the Latin expression "et alia", which means "and others". The supporting documents are usually indicated at the end of the guidance or standard. • Are the document’s authors indicated ? It is an ethical practice to indicate the names of the authors of a guideline or a standard. It is what scientists do, what NOAA and many other national and non governmental institutions taken as references do. Note that when many authors are involved, or the document is a compilation of many documents, only the main persons responsible for it may be indicated. It is, for example, the case with the US Navy manual revision 7, or ISO, that publishes the names of the persons responsible for the technical committees separately from the documents (see this address: https://www.iso.org/technical-committees.html). Unfortunately, many organizations have ceased this ethical practice, considering that their name is sufficient proof of quality, which is disputable. As a result, we do not know whether the guidance has been made by competent persons, or by the personnel in charge of cleaning the toilets, or someone else. There is nothing that companies and individuals can do in this case except complain to the emitter and their government. Of course, I am more confident with documents where the writers engage their responsibility than those written by people hiding behind an administrative system. Note that such practices can be the beginning of toxic publications. • Is the guideline or the standard an initial publication or a revision ? The revision number and the main changes made to the original document should be indicated on a page at the beginning of it. Also, I suggest keeping the previous versions in a data bank to be able to analyze the evolutions. It is the reason there is a section called “Historical diving” on this website. • Does the document been discussed by representatives of professional organizations ? This point allows to see whether the document is the result of a consensus or has been imposed. The same evaluation is applicable for evaluating guidelines emitted by associations. Usually the external participants are mentioned in the presentation of documents where the names of the authors are displayed. • Is the document logically written and comprehensible ? Many guidelines are not adequately written. Among the mistakes frequently encountered we can note: - Approximate definitions. That usually indicates that the authors do not entirely know the topic discussed or are not familiar with writing documents. - Exaggerate use of acronyms is often linked to the education of the writers, particularly young people who are influenced by communication through social media and merely their teachers. They are also often the fact of ex-militaries who have been educated this way. However, they are often used to downgrade the reader (meaning "I speak the language of gods") and can be assimilated into a superiority complex. Note that many documents are today covered with acronyms that are not explained, so the reader is struggling to understand what the document speaks of. In the old time, the use of abbreviations was limited to a few complex words repeatedly used, and too frequent use was considered a grammar mistake. You can see through my documents that I have kept these good practices. - Texts outside the topic indicated by the title are mistakes that consist in discussing a problem that is not the one indicated in the title, so not the purpose of the document. This mistake is often made by people not familiar with how to write documents or obsessed with particular issues. - Of course some of the fallacies described previously may be inserted in the texts and it is sometimes difficult to isolate them. • Gap with the guideline or standard currently in force ? This point is already partially discussed. When a new standard or guideline is published, it is essential to check whether it provides better safety or efficiency than the procedure in force. This is the complementary process of text evaluation. This evaluation also allows evaluating whether the new document can be adopted or whether the policy currently in force is still above the safety or efficiency proposed by the new document, which is not adopted in this case. • Is the guideline or standard easily applicable, or does it require some time to be implemented ? A new standard or policy may oblige to change work methods or invest in new equipment. The impacts of these changes must be analyzed to decide whether the company can implement these changes quickly or whether other options are more suitable for the company's possibilities. Note that it has become a trend from some guideline authors to impose new expensive equipment or certification processes without considering whether the companies have the resources to buy or implement them. That can sometimes be refuted, as such requirements may be in place to favour a few wealthy companies to the detriment of others or merely one or a few equipment manufacturers. • Point of contact of the emitter ? The emitter should provide a point of contact (Address, Email, phone number, etc.). However, in my experience, this point of communication often does not work. • Value for money ? As indicated, many guidelines and standards are sold at prohibitive prices. Providing such evaluation may incite the publisher to reconsider his commercial policy. That may also prompt small companies or individuals to select another system of sourcing than the classical one - For example, the recourse to public libraries. 6.3 - Be appropriately represented to defend your point of view Companies and individual workers should ask whether their interests and point of view are taken into consideration by people emitting standards and guidelines. For example, some organizations are said to represent the interests of contractors. However, despite their propaganda, they do not defend the interests of the individual workers, and the guidelines they provide, even though they may result in some protective measures for their personnel, are not designed to protect all the interests of their employees. Thus professional syndicates seem to be better structured to protect the interest of individual workers when politics do not influence them. Also, the companies members of professional associations should interrogate themselves about the real support these organizations really provide. For that, we can use the following questions: • Does the organization emits guidelines? If yes, what are their average technical level, writing process, and the organization's policy regarding their implementation by the members ? There are numerous professional associations or similar whose primary function is to develop the activities of their members; some publish guidelines, and others do not and base their actions on other aspects. When the organization publishes guidelines, it is essential to analyze their technical level. However, being a member of an organization producing fewer guidelines or lower technical documents than another is not automatically disadvantageous. What is essential for a company is to organize technical support to ensure that its personnel is adequately skilled and become a reference in its domain of activity. This technical level can be obtained by channels other than the organization that may prefer publishing only basic guidelines, freeing its members to to decide for the others. The policy for implementing the organization’s guidelines can be authoritarian or soft. Note that it is often linked to the technical level of the documents, as suggested above. Note that I am naturally suspicious of people imposing things in an authoritarian manner. • How is the organization managed ? Professional organizations are usually managed by committees, each in charge of an aspect of the organization's goal. A yearly general assembly is commonly organized to validate the work made by the committees and name their members and the members of the organization's management board. The members of these committees and the board can influence the policy of the organization. Also, the way the elections are organized is essential. For example, some international organizations consult their regional cells for the election of the technical committees and the management board members, while others do not. In this case, the members must go to the annual general assembly. A problem encountered with international organizations is the non-availability of members not based in proximity to the place where the general assembly is held due to long travels that can take several days. That often results in committees composed of members based nearby the organization's headquarters and employees of multinational companies. Thus, regional mid and small-size companies may not be represented, which may result in undesirable guidelines imposed on them. That can be compensated by general assemblies and committees organized cyclically in the various parts of the world where the organization operates. • How are the organization's personnel engaged and managed ? Another essential point is the control of the personnel engaged in supporting the professional organization's activities. The reason is that it has often happened that sportive, financial and professional associations fall under the control of their employees to the detriment of their members. The process is broadly the same: People are recruited to manage the association's everyday activities, that the members have no time to do it due to their primary business activity. Then, step by step, the employees gain control of all the aspects of the association, whose members gradually lose control because they focus on their company activities and have only limited time to dedicate to the association. Finally, the policy of the association is set up by the employees who organize to perpetuate their position. That usually results in nonprofit organizations going astray, as they become hidden commercial structures, for which the primary purpose is generating wealth to secure their employees' high salaries and desire for power (in such cases, the employees have created an unethical pressure group). Of course, the guidelines of the organization may not comply with those needed by the members and also be decreased in quality for the reasons explained in the previous points. This problem is one of the most difficult to control by people involved in other essential businesses than those of the association. A solution commonly used is to limit the duration of contracts of the employees and, thus, organize a turnover. • Does the organization provides a range of logistical support to its members ? Such support often depends on the nature of the organization. A lot of organizations provide logistical support such as insurance at preferential rates, appointed lawyers, technical advising, recruitment organizations, favourable prices by selected equipment and service providers, etc. Such additional services are often advantageous for the members of an association. It is often encountered with agricultural cooperatives (also known as farmers' coops). For remembering, a cooperative is an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and democratically controlled enterprise. The juridical services proposed can be helpful for expressing points of view and defending the members from legal attacks. • Is the organization fighting for its members ? This is a crucial question. It has often been seen associations and syndicates that were not fighting for the people they were supposed to protect. Cases of prevarications are numerous where syndicate representatives work for persons whom they should protect the members of their syndicate. We can consider such events as corruption, as the motivation for such behaviour is usually money, but that can also be political ideas. It has happened that such persons were the origin of associations operating against the interests of their members. Another form of organizations not defending their members is linked to an inappropriate policy imposed by some members on the other members. For example, the assumption that being fully collaborative with clients' organizations and implementing all their desires will be positive for the association may have undesirable consequences on its members, as they are unprotected from the abuses of their clients. Worse, noncollaborative members may be charged by their organization and demonized in case of conflicts. Thus, being in a situation where they get inconveniences and disagreements. • What is the advantage of being a member of this association ? Commercial companies usually become members of professional associations to retrieve advantages that will allow the company to increase its business. Also, in some cases, companies become members of professional organizations because they are constrained to do so by their clients, which is illegal. Based on the elements previously discussed, people should analyze the advantages provided by an organization and whether the company should become a member. Of course, the analysis should be performed ethically and eliminate all forms of propaganda. In fact, organizations using massive propaganda should be classified as suspicious. • Are there similar or complementary organizations ? Company managers should take appropriate measures to be suitably represented. That may consist of looking for equivalent organizations of the one evaluated or creating a specific structure adapted to the needs of the company and able to discuss standards and guidelines with the various national and international bodies. Of course, that requires finding other members, which may be a long process! However, it if looks like it is necessary; it can be the key to a better representation. Also, we must understand that it is not forbidden to be a member of several organizations. It is also important to be detached from any. Individual workers should ask themselves similar questions. Note that no syndicates are internationally representative of the interests of workers in the diving and ROV industry. Some worker's associations exist in the Scandinavian countries that tried to impose their standards on the diving industry. However, according to the documents provided, their ideology regarding standards is to set unique guidelines based on NORSOK standards which they review. Sorry to say that this would result in a lack of research and the beginning of a monoculture based on only one approach, so the opposite of what I said in this post: Again, the future of humanity is in its diversity! Thus, what these organizations propose for international standards is unacceptable. Therefore, a more suitable structure has to be created. This structure could reference organizations such as "the Companions", initiated by the builders of cathedrals and castles during the late medieval period and which expanded from France to the rest of western Europe. Describing this system in detail would be lengthy and is not the purpose of this post. However, we can say that Companions' organizations have been the origin of most standards used for building activities in these countries and are still involved in such processes. This system, which was one of the 1st organized means of defense for workers, far before syndicates, leans on high expertise acquired through a network of establishments managed by master companions, where the apprentice learns work methods from various regions, and the solidarity of its members. 6.4 - Ensure that states control or regain control of the activities considered I have already said that unethical pressure groups often impose their desires because of poorly organized opposition, in addition to states' lack of interest in the activities considered or the lack of power of governments. However, some states impose their point of view, laws, and standards so that even though they are consulted, all pressure groups are obliged to follow the procedures in force in the country. It is, for example, the case of Norway regarding diving activities. That doesn't mean that their rules and point of view are always the best. Some are selected in our handbooks, and others are not. However, they have the merit to be more stringent than many and remember pressure groups that the working practices in the country depend on the government in power by the will of citizens and are the same for everybody. We can consider that this is an example that governments and their administration can control the activities in their country and that it is not inevitable that non-governmental organizations take power in place of the legal government of a nation. Thus efforts must be made to ensure that governments are sufficiently organized and helped to perform their mission as they should. That is, of course, linked to elections and nomination processes. Also, governments should pay particular attention to protecting small and young companies, which are usually the more fragile. Regarding this point, in 2017, I made a report for a major multinational company where I concluded that they should consider the small companies working for them at the same level as those operating at the global level and eventually help them to progress; otherwise, these small structures will disappear in the profit of the strongest, which will result in an unbalanced offer of services with only a few companies arranging together to impose their standards, prices, and working conditions to their clients. Based on this fact, it appears logical to consider that something must be done and that the states remain the better judges of equitable practices for a balanced market if there is a dense network of relevant opinions on which they can lean. Note that laws, and standards published by states should be easily applicable, consistent, and accessible to everyone working in the activity considered. When, for some reason, it is impossible to implement what looks to be the most pertinent rule and a less safe practice is to be kept in place, that must be indicated in the document so that the reader understands why. The problem of governments regarding standards is that it is always a paradox to decide whether a suitable standard the community is not ready for is to be published or whether its publication needs to be delayed. One of the reasons they take into account is that a too stringent norm may result in many companies stopping their activity due to a lack of resources. It is, thus, not wise to remove people from their means of life under the pretext of protecting them, as there is a risk of plunging them into miseries, which is not the objective of the standard. In addition, to support the activities of their government, the network of opinions must be sufficiently ethical to document and indicate some illegal behaviours to the authorities.