What do do about members group refusing to follow nat policy

Anything relating to the clubs associated with Cycling UK
JohnW
Posts: 6425
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby JohnW » 11 Nov 2012, 9:48am

thirdcrank wrote:So, in the context of the thread title, you seem to be suggesting that there's not really a "nat policy" to follow. :?


Yes, I believe there is, but it's pre-charity, as fer as I know not yet finalised, parts of it are new and it all seems to be currently under review - that may be old news now, because it was in draft form the last time I heard anything (last week). But in any case, "Child Protection" is very specific, covered by law, and in some ways a profession in itself.

We shall know eventually, and individuals can make their own decisions, but as for "monitoring" of other people........well, we'll see.

drossall
Posts: 4987
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby drossall » 11 Nov 2012, 4:15pm

rootes wrote:times must have change quite quickly. I'm mid 30's now when I was at Secondary school as a 5th year (15/16yrs old) we were allowed to go mountain biking on our 1/2day sports session and take 4th and 3rd years with us - all without teachers.

20 years before that, we were allowed to go road cycling for 6th form sports, which is how I did my first trip up the Cat & Fiddle.

thirdcrank
Posts: 29644
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby thirdcrank » 11 Nov 2012, 5:04pm

rootes wrote:times must have change quite quickly. I'm mid 30's now when I was at Secondary school as a 5th year (15/16yrs old) we were allowed to go mountain biking on our 1/2day sports session and take 4th and 3rd years with us - all without teachers..

as for the OPs issue - I would get your lad to join another club perhaps a decent local road club / mountain bike club.


Things have changed and fundamentally. I've mentioned volunteering to help with reading in a local primary school. I did this one-to-one, listening to children reading, encouraging them and to some extent befriending them. As everybody who works in schools will know, there are all sorts of policies to prevent allegations of misconduct. One is that an adult shouldn't be alone with a child in a closed room. Fair enough. I generally did my volunteering in the open parts of the school just outside a classroom. When I was in my third term as a volunteer - in the Summer - there were a couple of times when the weather was hot and one of "my" children suggested we might read outside. We sat on a form on the playground, clearly visible to everyone. After this had happened a couple of times without problem, I read something which made me realsie I should not have been doing it, since nobody could hear what I was saying to each child. To put it bluntly, I might have been grooming them.

I had a word with the headteacher PDQ and he said he was happy to authorise my continuing using the playground in that way since he had had almost a year to be satisfied that I was acting in good faith.

I suspect that many, probably the majority of club cyclists would see the main problems of looking after children as being to do with road safety and perhaps inadvertently losing them, especially "off the back." Child protection is much more than that and a CRB check on its own means little. Once you start writing rules to prevent allagations of misconduct, a group ride on open roads presents a lot of problems.

JohnW
Posts: 6425
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby JohnW » 11 Nov 2012, 6:31pm

thirdcrank wrote:.........After this had happened a couple of times without problem, I read something which made me realsie I should not have been doing it, since nobody could hear what I was saying to each child. To put it bluntly, I might have been grooming them.................I suspect that many, probably the majority of club cyclists would see the main problems of looking after children as being to do with road safety and perhaps inadvertently losing them, especially "off the back." Child protection is much more than that and a CRB check on its own means little. Once you start writing rules to prevent allagations of misconduct, a group ride on open roads presents a lot of problems.


And there you have it thirdcrank - there you have it. We must not be naive.

You're right - my worry was the matters of ".........road safety and perhaps inadvertently losing them........". that and the problems of what to do in the event of bad behaviour and disobedience - the term "children" can include youths of 15/16 - say no more.......

The "other" matter hadn't really occured to me........it was my daughter who is a teacher that flagged this up, and on taking a bit of advice (not legal or learned advice - just advice from someone for whom "Child Protection" is sometimes a responsibility) I thought - ".....I'm not doing this........".

The fact of being ignorant of all such matters, in the legal sense, was part of my decision making process but I just want to ride my bike and share the simple pleasure with others. There are such stupid things that happen.

I've heard of a local authority worker who found a lost child in his town one lunch-time. He told the child he'd phone for a policeman and he'd (the policeman) would be able to help. The police station said they'd send a policewoman and get a social worker along. The worker siad to the child, something like : ".......they're going to send a nice police lady, who'll help us find your mummy and daddy.....". The WPC arrived and the radio messaging began. The social worker arrived, who turned out to be a higher ranking worker than the LA worker who'd discovered the child. The child said to the social worker that the man who'd found her (the child) had promised to find her mummy and daddy. The WPC and colleagues found "mummy" and an emotional reunion took place on the street of the town.

The bloody social worker caused the LA worker to be brought before a disciplinary board because he'd said the words "mummy" and "daddy" - because it wasn't the local authority's policy to differentiate between children from complete families and those from one-parent or otherwise broken families.

The child's "daddy" brought a bunch of flowers into the local authority office to give to the worker who'd initially found the child (flowers because he'd not initially realised that this person was male). The LA worker wasn't allowed to accept because it vcould have been construed as a bribe.

Pah!!!!!!

User avatar
fatmac
Posts: 53
Joined: 5 Oct 2011, 7:42pm
Location: Surrey/Hants Border

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby fatmac » 28 Feb 2013, 1:41pm

Late to the debate, but I think I signed a form stating that I would not have children on my rides.

I lead rides voluntarily, if someone, even the club, tells me that I have to take other peoples children, then I will no longer lead any rides, full stop!

If parents want their children to go on a ride then supply a guardian if you can't go yourself.
Linux since 1999

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14104
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby gaz » 28 Feb 2013, 2:54pm

JohnW wrote:Yes, I believe there is, but it's pre-charity, as fer as I know not yet finalised, parts of it are new and it all seems to be currently under review - that may be old news now, because it was in draft form the last time I heard anything (last week). But in any case, "Child Protection" is very specific, covered by law, and in some ways a profession in itself.

We shall know eventually, and individuals can make their own decisions, but as for "monitoring" of other people........well, we'll see.


I'm glad this thread has been resurrected.

The links to CTC's Child Participation Policy earlier in this thread were to the old version of the CTC website and no longer connect. The same Child Participation Policy is now on the new web site.

However it's been joined by Policy and Procedures for the Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults. This is dated March 2003 but I've never come across it before. It's a document from British Cycling, providing an umbrella policy for many other groups including CTC. The links from CTC website can be found here.
Welfare Officers 1.jpg
Welfare Officer


JohnW wrote:To cut what would be a very long story short - and this is as I understand it - and with the caveat that final proclamations and utterences haven't been made and full and final policy resolved, printed and published - I repeat "as I understand it" the welfare officer's role seems to be going to include Child Protection and Protection of Vulnerable Adults. On the basis that the rules haven't been finalised or advised in final form to the sections/DAs (I believe the politically correct term is "Member Group") I accepted the nomination for "Welfare Officer" on the basis that it included all the the other aspects of the role (when eventually the full and final proclamation is know)but not including the Child and Vulnerable Adult matters.



So the role of a Local Member Group (DA) Welfare Officer in Child Protection has been clearly established since March 2003; final policy, printed and published.
Missing, presumed fed.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14104
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby gaz » 28 Feb 2013, 7:16pm

Also now in the Member Group Policy Handbook 2012. This document has been edited today.

• Welfare Officer

The duties of the Welfare Officer are as follows:

o to be accessible to members to help them in addressing issues such as complaints against individuals; the protection of vulnerable adults and children; and issues of discrimination;

o to monitor compliance with policies related to this area, such as CTC’s Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults Policy and CTC’s Young Person’s Participation Policy. Welfare Officers should familiarise themselves with CTC’s Complaints, Disputes and Disciplinary Procedures in the event of any disputes;

o it is recommended that the Welfare Officer role is not fulfilled by the Secretary.


My highlighting in the next section.

Appendix 1: CTC Policies Applicable to Member Groups

From time to time, CTC Council may produce policies which affect the practices and procedures of Groups. In particular, Council policies set out the requirements of Groups to conform with external regulation, contracts or statutory obligations. It is mandatory for Groups to be aware of such polices as are in force and to have set local rules and policies that meet the requirements of such policies. Additionally, Council may offer guidance on best practice in interpreting and meeting the requirements of such policies.

The Secretary must ensure that Group officers are aware of any changes to these policies.

Policy________________________________________________________Version____________Date last modified
Data Protection Policy___________________________________________1.1______________08/02/2007
Complaints, Disputes and Disciplinary Procedures:
Codes of Conduct for CTC Councillors, CTC staff, and CTC volunteers_________________19/10/2007
Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults_______________________________________03/2003
Young Person’s Participation Policy_______________________________1.0______________07/2003
Volunteer Registration___________________________________________2.2______________09/2007
Law and Liability for Cycle Activity Providers_______________________3.0______________06/2006
Health and Safety Policy_________________________________________1.0______________22/03/2007
Equal Opportunities Policy_______________________________________1.0______________05/07/2008
Incident and Accident Reporting_________________________________1.0______________03/2007

Date Index last revised: June 2012


At 11 June 2012 (and probably later) the CTC website was still showing the old policies as linked in various posts above. The pages have been archived, links to the old policies can be found here. The Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults policy was not linked. :shock:

In view of my highlighting I cannot understand the claim, apparently made to JohnW in late October 2012, that policy was not finalised.
Missing, presumed fed.

Keith
Posts: 97
Joined: 9 Feb 2007, 11:31pm

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby Keith » 6 Sep 2013, 11:33am

IMO CTC's position on child protection, viz participation of unaccompanied under-18s in club rides or events, is a mess and needs refreshing far more urgently than our brand (but that is another subject).

I haven't had time to read the more recent comments on this thread (though it is a thread that I have been watching for two years) but as a member group secretary I am at the moment having to spend a considerable amount of my time dealing with this subject.

The child participation policy referred to in recent posts (http://www.ctc.org.uk/events/support-fo ... procedures) is now ten years old and must be due for a review. I am not expert in this field, but to my mind, common sense says that if a child, previously unknown to anyone in a group of adult cyclists, turns up for a ride, with or without a signed consent form, there are quite a few things that need to be known and understood by both the child, the parents and the ride leader before that child is allowed to participate in the ride. In practice, since I have received no requests for a parental consent form in seven years, I would be very surprised of a youngster did turn up with a signed form. The guidance says that, without the form the ride leader should try to contact the parents by mobile phone and discuss the suitability etc., and if he feels that he has received verbal consent, the child can go on the ride. That's totally unrealistic; there are too many things that need to be explained to the parents (it HAS to be a written explanation to ensure that all the relevant points are covered and that there is no subsequent arguement about it) and there simply isn't time to go into this properly at the start of a ride, when the leader is concerned with getting his group on the road, and trying to keep to a schedule. It's not fair on ride leaders to expect them to take on any responsibility to a youngster who has simply turned up at the start.

If we allow an unaccompanied youngster to join a club ride then we also accept a responsibility to get them back safely - but to where? Home, or the start? Most of our rides don't return to the start, as people go their separate ways after lunch or tea. Someone then has the extra responsibility of seeing a youngster that they don't know safely back to a point where they can be either turned over to parents, or allowed to continue alone. This potentially raises CRB issues. If the youngster has a mechanical problem, who fixes it? What responsibility are they taking upon themselves by doing so? If it can't be fixed, what arrangements are made to see the child safely home? If there's an accident, who informs the parents? There are simply too many issues that could arise that we are not equipped to deal with and it's my view that we should only allow under 16s on rides if they are accompanied by a responsible adult who will deal with any problems (ok, probably with the assistance of others in the group, but it is the responsible adult who ultimately makes any decisions). We would still need a signed parental consent form.

I have asked for further guidance from National Office on this but at the time of writing this I am still awaiting a reply (which is fair enough). However, it leaves me in a position I do not want to be in, of not being able to give authoritative advice to our ride leaders since the only standing instruction is 10 years out of date and not fit for purpose. I have to say that it isn't really debate that I want on this, it's a clear, fit for purpose policy from CTC at national level, applicable to all member groups.

User avatar
fatmac
Posts: 53
Joined: 5 Oct 2011, 7:42pm
Location: Surrey/Hants Border

Re: What do do about members group refusing to follow nat po

Postby fatmac » 29 Jan 2014, 4:52pm

As a previous ride leader, I would not accept a junior on any of my rides unless they were with a parent.
HQ decided that all ride leaders should accept juniors, so I stopped leading rides.
I am/was a 'volunteer' - not an 'employee' of CTC - this is/was my perogative.
Linux since 1999