Local Sailing Club - Trial requested by the RIBnet Court - Page 2

biffer · 06 October 2009, 13:59

again if the boat is under 6m there is no code of practice, bit of a grey area, the harbour launches are commercial and they aren't coded

andyxs · 06 October 2009, 14:19

just a question then, were their 3 people in the one rib? or did the children get split up and sent to other ribs? as if they were sent to other ribs as "second men" then they would have a good case, but if for instance i was safty boating with me an crew X provided by club and i bring my smaller cousin or nephew as he shouldnt be left to his own devices should the club expect to pay all 3 of u in the boat. 1 5.5m rib dos not need 3 ppl to operate efficeintly. granted the club may find it easier just to pay this one off and sort it out rather than have their dirty laundry splashed all over the place.
I am not a fan of this kind of posting, and if i was the other side i wouldnt bother coming online.

Channel Ribs · 06 October 2009, 14:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jono Garton

I receive a request from a friend who works at the local Sailing Club asking for RIBs to hire for a week @ £150 and drivers + crew for the week @ £100 each.

It sounds to me like the club have been bitten by their own lack of planning and organisation for the event. Safety boats, drivers and crew should all be detailed... Who they are and what their abilities/training are.

NB The minimum age for RYA Safety Boat certificate is 16, I suspect that all the club's boats on the event were supposed to be manned by qualified individuals and hence over 16.

Jono, I do not think you should feel bad. You made the introduction and it was up to the parties to make sure they were happy with the arrangements.

Poly · 06 October 2009, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by biffer

again if the boat is under 6m there is no code of practice, bit of a grey area, the harbour launches are commercial and they aren't coded

Biffer, not sure where you got that from - perhaps in the past there was a "size threshold" but my understanding is that all vessels <24m (and 12 pax) which opperate commercially and go to sea are required to be coded.

But that the key words were go to sea which have a different meaning from most of us would use normally. I was lead to believe that in this "legal" sense "go to sea" meant proceed beyond catergorised waters.

biffer · 06 October 2009, 17:23

i will stand corrected but my understanding is that they don't code boats under 6m, can you imagine trying to get all that kit on a 4.5/5m boat, it'll sink, going through cat 2 codeing as we speak, it's a minefield

Bigmuz7 · 06 October 2009, 17:39

I put it to the court that the children are an irrelevance .. the club got the use of the safety boat as requested and that side of the contract verbal or otherwise was honoured. The kids went along for the ride, and probably gained very useful experiance in doing so. As the obligations to the club were fulfilled, the stingy club should get their cheque book out, and if they dont, time to cut 'em loose m'lud and sue 'em

Jono Garton · 06 October 2009, 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyxs

just a question then, were their 3 people in the one rib?

Hi Andy

Dad + Kid in 1 rib

other kid crewing in another RIB

J

Poly · 06 October 2009, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigmuz7

I put it to the court that the children are an irrelevance .. the club got the use of the safety boat as requested and that side of the contract verbal or otherwise was honoured. The kids went along for the ride, and probably gained very useful experiance in doing so. As the obligations to the club were fulfilled, the stingy club should get their cheque book out, and if they dont, time to cut 'em loose m'lud and sue 'em

The honourable genetleman is of course correct that the club gained provision of a safety boat and skipper, however it is my understanding that payment was made for this at the rate originally agreed in the contract. The evidence presented here would suggest that this matter is not under dispute. It would appear that the club required additional personnel on board a vessel to be "qualified safety boat crews" (or over 16 depending upon the evidence - but since the age restriction is implicit in the former the net effect is the same) to entitle them to the additional payment. By your own admission "the kids went along for the ride". Is it reasonable, m'lud, to expect the club to pay them for the pleasure?

Put differently -
Boat A + 2 Fully Qualified Safety Boat Crew/Helm = £350.
Boat B + 1 Safety Boat Crew/Helm and 2 kids = £450?

How would you feel as the owner of Boat A? Would you bring your boat next year? Would you bother to bring your second safety boat qualified crew or just drag your kids along ?

Given that no evidence has been presented to suggest that the club directly enterred into a "contract" with the owner of the vessel (i.e. that the club agreed the terms of the arrangement directly with the owner) then it appears that either Mr Garton or Mr S enterred into that contract as unauthorised agents on behalf of the club - and therefore perhaps responsibility for paying for the kids falls to one of those parties?

PS I think the club are very niave calling it "wages" in their email.
PPS I can think of no better way to stop it "snowballing out of control" than posting it on the web!

Poly · 06 October 2009, 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by biffer

i will stand corrected but my understanding is that they don't code boats under 6m, can you imagine trying to get all that kit on a 4.5/5m boat, it'll sink, going through cat 2 codeing as we speak, it's a minefield

I think that is down to the practicalities / ecconomics of coding (and recovering the costs of coding / equipment through charter) with very small boats; rather than an absolute rule. In reality most smaller boats don't leave categorised waters and so either don't need coded or possibly are regulated under some different set of rules?

fred bolton · 06 October 2009, 18:31

Surely the onus is on the Club to ensure that all safety boats meet the required regulations whatever they maybe. The club should have ensured that no under 16s were on any of the safety boats as their rules don't permit this, therefore they can't have it both ways ie allowed on the boat and then not be paid. The other question is what are the requirements for safety boats ie Helm and X Crew? Were the kids excess crew?.
I would have thought a great British compromise of 50/50 should apply in this case and each party learn from this years mistakes and look forward to having willing help next year

Poly · 06 October 2009, 18:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by fred bolton

The club should have ensured that no under 16s were on any of the safety boats as their rules don't permit this, therefore they can't have it both ways ie allowed on the boat and then not be paid.

J S's message would suggest that they did and used the boats with kids for a different activity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by J S

There was a total of 14 boats all with qualified crew the boats the kids were on was in addition this. The kids helped out and provided a useful service.

fred bolton · 06 October 2009, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polwart

J S's message would suggest that they did and used the boats with kids for a different activity?

So they weren't acting as safety boat cover? Why then did Dad get paid Safety boat fee? Seems to be a mish mash of bad communication.Still say they should meet each other half way.

chewy · 06 October 2009, 19:10

Should get them kids sent here, get them trained up and make some more money:

http://rib.net/forum/showthread.php?t=32570

PeterM · 06 October 2009, 19:19

My opinion for what its worth ......

So ignoring the technical correctness etc as its clearly a minefield - they should be paid even if its simply on moral grounds - even if its a lower rate , but to simply to simply not pay is wrong.

Bigmuz7 · 06 October 2009, 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polwart

Boat A + 2 Fully Qualified Safety Boat Crew/Helm = £350.
Boat B + 1 Safety Boat Crew/Helm and 2 kids = £450?

How would you feel as the owner of Boat A? Would you bring your boat next year? Would you bother to bring your second safety boat qualified crew or just drag your kids along ?

So is the issue that 'qualified' men were charged for, but children were provided ?

chewy · 06 October 2009, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackroady

My opinion for what its worth ......

So ignoring the technical correctness etc as its clearly a minefield - they should be paid even if its simply on moral grounds - even if its a lower rate , but to simply to simply not pay is wrong.

You lot down South have too much money.
I see it as though the crew and service that was meant to be provided couldn't as the crew wern't old enough to hold the relevent qualifications.
What happens if someone else had a kid on board which was just along for the ride, should they get paid too?
How old were the kids and at what point wouldn't you pay them?

J S · 06 October 2009, 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polwart

J S's message would suggest that they did and used the boats with kids for a different activity?

The boats with the kids on were used in a safety boat capacity but may not have provided the same level of cover as some of the boats with Highly trained crew. But still did everything that was asked of them by the club.

James

chewy · 06 October 2009, 20:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by J S

The boats with the kids on were used in a safety boat capacity but may not have provided the same level of cover as some of the boats with Highly trained crew. But still did everything that was asked of them by the club.

James

Did "wages" reflect this?
Just seems like one big mess to be honest.

Jono Garton · 06 October 2009, 20:54

The club simply requested-

Ribs - £150 for the week

People - £100 for the week / £20 per day and lunch

No mention of qualifications / ages / ability

chewy · 06 October 2009, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jono Garton

The club simply requested-

Ribs - £150 for the week

People - £100 for the week / £20 per day and lunch

No mention of qualifications / ages / ability

So you happily send un-qualified crew if the club doesn't specify qualified. Surely you realised it would be for Safety boat cover?
Bit like asking for a taxi driver and cab and getting a cab and a twelve year old, you didn't say he had to have a license....