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.
7 - To conclude this short analysis
Although laws, standards, and guidelines have usefulness which
has been shown widely and have been a driving force for progress
throughout history, we can see that they can also be diverted to the
profit of a few people we have named "Unethical pressure groups".
For this reason, any entrepreneur, employee, and freelancer should
take action to ensure that these documents benefit the entire
community, do not have the potential to create inequalities and
conflicting situations, and are easily applicable. We have seen that
this process is not the easiest, as it requires honesty, involvement,
concertation, and also projection in the future. In addition, it requires
understanding the techniques the "unethical pressure groups" hide
behind, and being able to implement appropriate methods to detect
and fight them, such as the systematic evaluation of the documents
published, as well as the selection or creation of organizations
adequate to defend the interests of every company or individual so
that every opinion is taken into account and everyone feels
adequately represented.
Regarding this critical point, the evaluation of the practices in force
in our industry makes it clear that medium size companies, small
contractors, and individual workers are poorly defended. That
creates an obvious imbalance with influential groups and is
inconsistent, considering that these unrepresented companies and
workers paradoxically are the majority of people who contribute to
developing this industry.
Therefore, something has to be done to obtain a more realistic
balance, as the market rules can only work when there is equality
between the offer, the demand, and the various actors.
Hence, it is also essential that states reinforce their role and become
more vigilant regarding protecting the disfavored companies and
their citizens. Of course, this is against the dogma of a single
culture and market when there is equality between the offer, the
demand, and the various actors.
Hence, it is also essential that states reinforce their role and become
more vigilant regarding protecting the unfavored companies and
their citizens. Of course, this is against the dogma of a single
culture and market directed by a central institution and the financial
power of the actors. Opposite to this precept, which is profitable for
only a tiny fraction of the population, states are the legal
representations of the various human communities, and this
diversity is fully compatible with the principle of national and
international standards if these are based on consensus and aim to
protect people without the intention of making profits, imposing an
ideology, or favouring one community to the detriment of others.
Thus, instead of having a unique organization emitting standards
and guidelines, it is wiser to have several institutions capable of
emitting such documents that can be compared to result in a
consensus of the various communities involved, and, thus, ensure
that their well-being and future are not in the hands of only a few,
and that megalomaniac behaviours of some are prevented.
In addition to the above, and opposite to these people who think that
everything must be standardized and legislated, it is more suitable
to publish a reduced number of well-written standards and
guidelines, based on ethics, common sense, expertise, and scientific
research, than post a lot of less relevant documents that finally
conflict each other and do not provide meaningful information, as it
is, unfortunately, currently the trend with several organizations.
Of course, the publication of mandatory documents must not be the
source of profitable business: From an ethical point of view, national
and international standards and laws should be accessible free of
charge to everyone. Thus not sold at the excessive prices currently
often encountered.
About standards (continuation)
Click on the octopus
to return to the
begining of the article