Dive Master & Instructors... forever a pro?

[Sounder]

Many people have become DMs or Instructors at some point in their diving career, but at some point they stop paying their dues and become inactive/retire. Some agencies require on-going training to be considered an instructor, but most just put the DM/Instructor on "inactive" status until they pay their dues and insurance again.

Once an Instructor/DM, always one? Do you have to be teaching to be considered an "Instructor/DM?" Are inactive-status "pros" just "divers?" Does this opinion change based on the perceived quality of the Instructor/DM by their students, by non-students?

I can argue it both ways, but I'm leaning toward the "must be actively teaching for DMing to be considered an 'Instructor/DM', or at the very least be "active" with their dues and insurance."

This is something I've been pondering for a while - I'm interested to hear what people think on this subject (and please no agency-bashing).

[60south]

Does this opinion change based on the perceived quality of the Instructor/DM by their students, by non-students?

My certifying agency considers me to be a divemaster even though I haven't been an active one for over a decade.

My opinion of myself changes depending on the divers around me. If I'm with real professionals, I'm "just a diver". If I'm around dingbat instructors or confused newbies, suddenly I'm a divemaster again. It's automatic.

Good question.

[Sounder]

Does this opinion change based on the perceived quality of the Instructor/DM by their students, by non-students?

My certifying agency considers me to be a divemaster even though I haven't been an active one for over a decade.

My opinion of myself changes depending on the divers around me. If I'm with real professionals, I'm "just a diver". If I'm around dingbat instructors or confused newbies, suddenly I'm a divemaster again. It's automatic.

Good question.

So surrounded my competent professionals, your role is as a "diver" but if you're place in a situation where someone needs rescue, you're going to help anyway. I'd argue that whether one is an inactive Instructor or DM, they'll likely act in a DM/Rescue manner if necessary... but that they're not functioning as or speaking as and "Instructor."

Does this make sense?

[60south]

So surrounded my competent professionals, your role is as a "diver" but if you're place in a situation where someone needs rescue, you're going to help anyway.

Yes. In a rescue situation I will attempt to help, if I am needed. Whether or not I assume a leadership role depends on my perception of how things are going and whether a competent person is already in charge.

In non-rescue situations, I try to help out divers who look like they could use a hand, but I never introduce myself as a divemaster.

... but that they're not functioning as or speaking as and "Instructor."

Eee... Do you mean legally acting as an instructor or DM, or just in the eyes of the divers around you?

[Sounder]

... but that they're not functioning as or speaking as and "Instructor."

Eee... Do you mean legally acting as an instructor or DM, or just in the eyes of the divers around you?

I don't think there is an argument for fraudulently representing yourself as being able to teach & certify people when one is not "active" with their agency. I'm more looking at perception by educated divers, including Instructor/DM peers, of whether someone is always an Instructor/DM even if they're inactive and not functioning in that role.

Should someone who at one time an Instructor/DM but who has become inactive identify themselves as "an Instructor/DM," "a former Instructor/DM," or "a (generic) diver?"

Example: I am presently an active Dive Master, however if I were to go inactive I would make it clear that I am inactive if I was ever discussing my DM training and inactive certification.

[Pinkpadigal]

My agency makes it clear...if you go on inactive, you can reactivate, but after a number of years, paying dues and insurance isn't enough. Retraining is required. Also, if you step away from teaching, many dive centers, will require retraining and refreshing of standards and systems before you can step into that role again.

As an inactive dive professional, that is still diving, means that while you no longer teach or lead groups, you also are not up to date on the latest information with your agency. However, does it make you less of a diver? I don't think so. However, how you dive and your role will change over time. I think that will dictate how you see yourself, more so that how others see you. Regardless, you are still a rescue diver and in an emergency, you would still help.

[dwashbur]

Speaking as one who actually is an "inactive" DM (haven't paid my dues in a year or so and never did buy the insurance), I don't consider myself a "professional." To be honest, my DM training didn't do much for me. My rescue training has been much more useful, and I've used it 3 times, most recently with my own wife as folks will recall. My whole becoming-a-DM experience is kind of a sore spot for me so I'm probably not a good one to use as a common example, but when we have other divers with us I usually take the leadership role - I like to call myself the designated worry-wart - but don't mention my DM status even though I still have the card. When I go on a boat or in some other group situation where I need to present a card, I usually use my AOW card, and only reveal that I'm rescue certified when it becomes necessary, and have not had any occasion to identify my self as a DM. I prefer to stay low-key and help when and where I can, because in my particular situation certifications don't really mean squat. I suppose technically I'm still a "pro," but in practical terms I'm a fellow diver who has the training to help you if you need it. That's good enough for me.

Others' mileage may vary, obviously I speak only for myself.

[CaptnJack]

These types of relationships are quite simple and they're not established by C-cards, agencies, dues, or insurance companies... To "hire" someone obviously has some mutual obligations that go along with that. But if you didn't hire an instructor, don't expect to be taught.
If you are a paying student, they are you're instructor.
If you are being professionally guided off a boat (or shore), they are your divemaster.

For the rest of us, they're just divers or buddies as the case might dictate.

[gcbryan]

I don't get the question. It's not like being a dive master or instructor is like being a retired doctor or something. Is this a status question? What kind of status is there in being an instructor or DM? Is this legal liability? I think that's an overrated concern.

What is the real concern?

[Aquanautchuck]

I still think of myself as a DM even though it has been a few years since I renewed my insurance. I do think but do not voice there is a difference between a person that just got the cert verse a person that was or is a working DM. I did it several years and feel that it changed me forever. I only time I do not really watch my buddy through a DM's eyes is when I am diving with instructor friends and we are just doing a fun dive off the Scuba Kat. I do mention when needed that I am an inactive DM.

And to mention a point that is rarely brought up and one I struggled with before I decided to become a DM. As a few of you know, I am a insurance broker. This means I always look at stuff through a risk analysis pair of eyes. I have always felt that when you become a DM or higher you are a Professional and will always be one. So I think you could always be held liable for your actions or inactions. Just my 2 pesos worth.

Good question Doug.

PS: Dang, Little Sounder is getting big.

[Aquanautchuck]

I don't get the question. It's not like being a dive master or instructor is like being a retired doctor or something. Is this a status question? What kind of status is there in being an instructor or DM? Is this legal liability? I think that's an overrated concern.

What is the real concern?

I think it is one of those questions Sounder just throws out there to see what happens. Then he will stir the pot every so often.

[Diver_C]

I don't get the question. It's not like being a dive master or instructor is like being a retired doctor or something. Is this a status question? What kind of status is there in being an instructor or DM? Is this legal liability? I think that's an overrated concern.

What is the real concern?

I think it is one of those questions Sounder just throws out there to see what happens. Then he will stir the pot every so often.

Yeah, he's got hyperactive NWDC keyboard disorder.

[ArcticDiver]

Many people have become DMs or Instructors at some point in their diving career, but at some point they stop paying their dues and become inactive/retire. Some agencies require on-going training to be considered an instructor, but most just put the DM/Instructor on "inactive" status until they pay their dues and insurance again.

Once an Instructor/DM, always one? Do you have to be teaching to be considered an "Instructor/DM?" Are inactive-status "pros" just "divers?" Does this opinion change based on the perceived quality of the Instructor/DM by their students, by non-students?

I can argue it both ways, but I'm leaning toward the "must be actively teaching for DMing to be considered an 'Instructor/DM', or at the very least be "active" with their dues and insurance."

This is something I've been pondering for a while - I'm interested to hear what people think on this subject (and please no agency-bashing).

Why make it complicated or attach some ghosties to the question? Ask the agency that certified you. If they consider you a "pro" then you are and you need to act accordingly.

This isn't a matter of ego as some posts infer. Neither is it directly a matter of proficiency or skills. Nor do the opinions of posters tho this thread have any bearing on the subject. It is a matter of legal status, responsibility and liability. Only the agency under whose flag you operate can answer that question.

Ask your certifying agency and then let us know what they say.


You stirred the pot with a question that made no sense to ask and this is what you got. Happy?

[enchantmentdivi]

I have always felt that when you become a DM or higher you are a Professional and will always be one. So I think you could always be held liable for your actions or inactions.

Yup, you hit the nail on the head. Correct. Unfortunately.

[Sounder]

This thread isn't pot stirring - if you think otherwise, please feel free to refrain from participation. My feelings won't be hurt.

Let me phrase it in a another light: If I am an inactive DM/Inst, and there is a conversation related to DM/Inst duties, would active DMs/Insts find it insulting if I approached the subject as a peer saying something to the effect of "we, as DMs/Insts, need to do X and Y..." as though I'm still active? I'm sure there are nuggets of wisdom which inactive people can share, but without actively teaching/DMing I think it could be considered insulting to active pros if some is speaking from a peer level when they're not presently teaching/DMing.

Do others share this perception?

[Sounder]

...In other words, IS it status thing? For people who take pride in something (whatever that is), they put effort and resources into keeping current. In many circles, if someone approached them as a peer when they're not, it'd be very insulting to those keeping current.

My question relates to a conversation I witnessed in which an instructor WAS offended that an inactive/former instructor was speaking to them as a peer.

[BDub]

Personally, I've never put much weight into cards.

Specific to your question, I really don't care if someone is active or inactive. How much weight I choose to put into what they have to say typically depends on their experience. Anyone can get a DM or Instructor card.

At a "peer level" I'm going to listen to what the DM or Instructor who is inactive, but has a lot of experience working classes, has to say more than someone who took the training, got their card, then never taught or worked classes, but is still active.

[Grateful Diver]

My question relates to a conversation I witnessed in which an instructor WAS offended that an inactive/former instructor was speaking to them as a peer.

Depends on what was said and how it was put. But I see no reason to be offended. And what do they mean by "peer"? Teaching scuba ain't rocket surgery, and you don't need a freak'n PhD. I know quite a few "non-professional" types who are extremely knowledgeable ... and I know instructors I wouldn't trust in a swimming pool. It's not a status thing ... it's all about what you know, and your ability and willingness to impart that knowledge to others.

As most of you know, I've recently gone inactive from scuba instruction. I still have a perspective based on my years of teaching and DM'ing that can be of value to someone who may be active, but who hasn't had those experiences yet. On the other hand, as someone else pointed out, if it's a question of agency S&P's ... those change over time, and an inactive pro may not be aware of the changes. One should always engage in those conversations with the caveat that they are, and have been, out of the field for a while.

Just be honest with yourself and those you deal with. Knowledge is valuable, and is gained as much through experience as through professional development. I see no reason to get offended about someone's status ... but I MAY take exception if they misrepresent who they are or what they know ... especially if they do it with an attitude that's dismissive of those who may disagree with them.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Sounder]

Well put Bob (and FWIW, Bob wasn't part of the conversation which sparked my question).

Reflecting back on it, there definitely was a sense of "I'm an expert" coming from the inactive instructor that the active instructor took issue with. Perhaps it was a case of not WHAT was said, but HOW it was said and then was expressed with frustration that the inactive person isn't an active instructor and hasn't been one for quite a while. Once the inactive instructor had left, the active instructor's reaction was along the lines of "don't tell me what 'we' should be doing and how 'we' need to change X and Y, because there is no 'we' here - he/she is not an active instructor, and hasn't been one for quite a while."

I got the sense that this was the expression of frustration that has been building for some time regarding this issue.

[CaptnJack]

I got the sense that this was the expression of frustration that has been building for some time regarding this issue.

In other words, there was a lack of respect (both ways) and one or both people were using "badges" as a means to give themselves some sort of authority. (inactive old timer offering "help" to the newer but active instructor by the sounds of it). The resulting resentment really didn't have anything to do with being current/active or not. I think that really good instructors are open to ideas from inactive pros, "peers", other agencies, past students, other divers, and even non-diver educators all regardless of the cards they hold.

[selkie]

Unless it is something that needs correction on the spot for safety, all counseling should be done in private and you should never have been privy to this conversation. In a leadership role it is never advisable to correct a peer or subordinate leader in front of others unless your aim is to humiliate and be counter productive or immediate safety is involved. However, even as an inactive instructor is there another relationship involved i.e. shop owner vs. employee? I don’t actually want to know the answer to that question. I just feel that counseling or advice should be given in a way that will be productive. In public more ego and reputation is involved by both giving and receiving parties thus resulting in counter productive public displays (read pissing matches). After being counseled in private, a leader can weigh the credibility of the source and pass on or not the information. The leader can even pass on to subordinates in private the lack of credibility they attribute to the source. Sounder the picture you are painting (granted this is only through your lens) is unprofessional leader ship by both parties no mater what the industry happens to be.

Just thought I would add my 2psi

[Sounder]

Unless it is something that needs correction on the spot for safety, all counseling should be done in private and you should never have been privy to this conversation. In a leadership role it is never advisable to correct a peer or subordinate leader in front of others unless your aim is to humiliate and be counter productive or immediate safety is involved. However, even as an inactive instructor is there another relationship involved i.e. shop owner vs. employee? I don’t actually want to know the answer to that question. I just feel that counseling or advice should be given in a way that will be productive. In public more ego and reputation is involved by both giving and receiving parties thus resulting in counter productive public displays (read pissing matches). After being counseled in private, a leader can weigh the credibility of the source and pass on or not the information. The leader can even pass on to subordinates in private the lack of credibility they attribute to the source. Sounder the picture you are painting (granted this is only through your lens) is unprofessional leader ship by both parties no mater what the industry happens to be.

Just thought I would add my 2psi

It wasn't that kind of conversation. It was just a simple discussion of "dive stuff" but the problem was that the active instructor was insulted as the inactive instructor was trying to identify with them and talk from the stand-point of being an active instructor even though they are not.

[CaptnJack]

It wasn't that kind of conversation. It was just a simple discussion of "dive stuff" but the problem was that the active instructor was insulted as the inactive instructor was trying to identify with them and talk from the stand-point of being an active instructor even though they are not.

I know doctors (and lawyers, and scientists and others) who would be incredibly insulted if you didn't refer to them by title. And others with similar degrees who could care less. This sounds like a similar issue.

[Grateful Diver]

... or perhaps a case of "I've been an instructor for XX years, and know better than you" ...

Had a few of those conversations over the years ... mostly with someone who decided years ago that there was nothing new to learn about scuba diving ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[ArcticDiver]

Accepting that this isn't pot stirring and is a genuine inquiry the following that happened when I was a teenager working a summer job may pertain: I had just been "advised" by an old timer on how to do my job. The old timer wound up his advise by telling me he had 20 years of experience and knew the right way. My foreman came by and said: "XXXX has 1 year of experience 20 years ago and has repeated it 20 times".

So, if a person ain't currently certified and current on skills and procedures don't butt in unless asked. There are legal and interpersonal considerations that mandate a clear line between Being and Not Being. That is a whole different thing that being confronted with a life or property emergency and then using experience and left over knowledge to rescue the situation.