THSCC Forums

I figured my IBTL wasn't much of a contribution, so I skimmed over this thread so I could comment.

I hate to be that guy that says "you are both right" and it appear to be a way to resolve a dispute, but... I think you are both somewhat right.

When I skimmed, I didn't see the word "negligence" mentioned. We don't want to be negligent, but we also don't want to assume all responsibility either as that is a significant burden. If we feel that all officers and/or event staff (however you want to define it) has some level of responsibility with respect to safety, but at the same time, we can agree that they are not expected to prevent any and all issues (i.e. banging head on tire iron), then I see no problem with making this the only job for a single person. Note, I didn't use the phrase "responsible for everyone's safety".

This is also why we (as a club, event staff, or a single "safety officer") could not create a list of do's and don'ts that cover all situations. That is why I can see a short list (as we already have today) that covers common issues. At some level we have to expect that "common sense" will prevail. And while I am not an attorney, I would hope that the concept of "good faith effort" plays into this somewhere.

In short, I would hope that we can/do make a "good faith" effort to ensure safe events. That we can/do expect club members/event staff/officers to look out for the safety of others and that in the event something goes wrong, we hopefully have not acted in a "negligent" way.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

Mike, I had started to write my post above before the last few posts came through. So to your point above, I have to say I disagree. I don't feel it's as black and white as you paint it. And in fact we already don't treat it that way.

I am not trying to put words in your mouth, but the quote above to me sounds like "if you can't do it right, don't do it at all". Providing an absolute 100% solution in just about anything is impossible. What is the quote about death and taxes? Anyhow, I think that we (as a club) should not (not that we do) throw our hands up in the air and say "enter at your own risk" AND then proceed to ignore safety issue. We already make an attempt at running safe events, so we are already acting in a way that is contrary to what your arguments are making (or at least how I am reading them).

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

Mike, you accused me of "making assumptions" and I didn't think I was. Now I think maybe we ALL are, because I feel the same way about YOUR arguments.

I don't think anyone was trying to say we need a safety officer who is responsible with keeping an event safe in every way. The "safety steward" in the SCCA has a few things she is supposed to look for specifically, and is the reporting body to which safety inquiries are directed. End of story. They may have some more "power" than that, but I don't think it's much. That all goes back to other folks.

That "position" within THSCC seems to just be all the event officers themselves, really. What Jake was probably suggesting, and something that I can't see is a *bad* idea legally, is probably a worker position that would check a set of things. Fine, don't call them "safety officer", call them "paddock monitor." That person might just cruise the paddock looking out for people working under cars with no jackstand, driving too fast in the paddock, etc. That person would be tasked with warning "don't do that" and if the person doesn't stop (or worse, argues), then they get reported to event officers.

Now, I'm not saying we SHOULD do that. I'm just saying that's not an unreasonable request, and if defined well wouldn't be any legal exposure. In fact, it would be the opposite. But even if you don't agree with THAT, I think the common ground is there on your previous post about John Doe. The only thing I would add is that if Joe Blow is SEEN by someone banging his head and can be asked not to do that before he cracks his skull, event officers should be comfortable and willing to do that. They should also feel empowered enough to ask him to leave BEFORE he cracks his skull, if possible.


--Donnie

_________________
My Blog

You know what Richard, I think you have convinced me. See, I was imagining how this task of creating a Safety Officer would actually play out when trying to be implemented by the officers of the club. If I was an officer, I would be looking at the job of defining or actually filling that role as a monumental task filled with lots of serious what-if scenarios. Of course if the club wants to do this with anything less than a 100% plan, and if there are people willing to take the slot and the associated risk of wearing the title Safety Officer, then by all means, have at it. I was just expressing my opinion of the difficulties in implementing it and the risks exposed by doing anything less than a complete job.



Which argument exactly? We do take safety seriously, and already have officers and event chairs that look over event safety at every event. And I just proposed (or at least supported) MANY improvements to safety in my prior post.



You should note that in fact the club DOES NOT have all of these ideas defined, and I absolutely think we should. So which argument is contrary to what we already do? I think I was the first to point out that we do indeed already have a way of dealing with this.



Reposted for clarity.

_________________
Mike Whitney
whit32@gmail.com, 919-454-5445
V10, V8, V8t, I6, I6, V6, F4t, I4, I4, I4, I4, I2, 1, 1

that would be my position within this club thank you Mr. Allen. and i haven't even read this entire silly thread yet.

i'll get back to ya'll if i need to flip-flop later on.

_________________
BenchWarmer Motorsports

another one of those damn LeMons heads

just another Chump

we are an Autocross Club Dammit............

Best comment of the whole thread.

_________________
2002 MCS, 2003 MCS Track Rat, 2003 Generic White Yukon, 2003 BMWk1200rs, 1973 CB350F, 02 996. 08 Cayenne Turbo
http://www.clinehallagency.com

I agree with what you are saying here. And while I know you are looking at it from the perspective that if this was to happen, it would (or would be perceived to be) a job that requires the club to take additional (or all) responsibility for safety. If we were to take on significantly more responsibility, then it is a liability issue that might not be worth the trouble.

You mention trying to come up with a 100% plan. While I am saying that is impossible, it doesn't mean you shouldn't also do what you are saying which is to run through lots of serious what-if scenarios. I agree with doing that as well. But you have to realize from the start that you can't plan for everything.

Where we disagree is in where the real and perceived responsibility lies. I feel that something like this could be done without the club taking on any additional liability. In fact, I would argue that without the club looking at safety issues (we do, but lets say we didn't) that our liability would be higher (see my "negligent" comments above). And with the fact that the club already does much of what we are discussing without it being wrapped up under a single title, much of this conversation is confusing to me.

With all of this being said, I am just participating in a discussion. Mostly in fact because I tend to try to be a peacemaker and felt you and Donnie actually in some ways were not that far apart and I felt maybe I should point out those facts vs. letting this turn into a battle of personalities. Who knows if I accomplished that or not. I personally don't have a strong opinion as to if we "need" a safety officer. I think the end result is important (safe events, lower liability risk to the club), but I think that can be achieved in many ways and having a single "safety officer" is not the only solution.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

I've never really noticed you acting offended, though. Just poking fun at people/ stirring the hornets' nest. You have to intentionally misinterpret AND act offended by it to qualify as a Hannity-wannabe.

Totally random, but does anyone remember that Faces of Death video with the guy that broke into the junkyard to steal brake/suspension (?) parts off an old clunker and ended up with a detached leg when the brake rotor stammed down after the car wasn't properly supported? It was fake as could be, but when you're 14 you believe and are amused by some crazy stuff.

I warned it was random, but, man, that image is something I've never forgetten, especially when I got under the ITR for a rear mount replacement (not for claustrophobics!) or anything else I couldn't do with ramps like Vincent mentioned. I friend of mine told me he always gives the car a little nudge once it's on ramps as a precautionary measure.

Even when I change tires in the 103 degree heat index, I try to never get lazy and sloppy.

I think Jake's made a good point (aside from the legal aspects and viewpoints) - be careful and use whatever common sense you have!

There is one problem.

I tried the "Nudge" thing when I was siding my house. I needed to side the dormer which of course was on the side where the ground slopes. I put up the ladder and braced it, then "nudged" it to see if it was stable. As I got to the edge of the roof, I felt the ladder going down as I was going up - looked like a cartoon me climbing up a ladder that was sliding down. I was lucky, I jumped the 20 or so feet and rolled and didn't end up AXing with hand controls or worse.