ISAA Membership

There is plenty of clarification can be provided but I'll repeat, the ins-and outs of the various issues should not be made available to the public at large in the same way that the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members.
The policy is live but it is to be implemented incramentally. If you want exact timelines ask your club rep that was at the meeting or contact the national vetting officer. It is for everyones benifit that everything is not made available on the net as it lends itself to risk of people finding loop holes and exploiting them. At least if this process is conducted in private the issues can be resolved without embarrasment.
I'm not saying don't post your quieries just don't expect answers.

As for the colleges Dermot is correct make sure they are aware of what is going on. I've met with my college and it was very productive. If you have any college specific questions send me a message and I'll have them answered when we meet with the IAAA

Sparks wrote: »

That's rather smelly.
If the process applies to the public at large, it should be detailed to the public at large.

It doesn't apply to the public at large. It applies to IAAA members and volenteers in the IAAA clubs

the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members.
- Hmm, I'm not sure the IAAA would be allowed to not give the details of the process to members. You can't demand people take part in a process and then refuse to tell them what the process is. The flow of information (who and where) and the basis for the decisions (what facts will count against you in the vetting), are things that people should be able to demand before the process begins.

It is for everyones benifit that everything is not made available on the net as it lends itself to risk of people finding loop holes and exploiting them. At least if this process is conducted in private the issues can be resolved without embarrassment.
However making information public, allows more people to indentify the loopholes and help you fix them. What happens when you don't, is that the limited number of people involved can only see some of the loopholes, and all further loopholes are only solved after they have being exploited. Its ye're call, but not making something public because of the fear of loopholes or embarrassment is a really poor argument. The goal should be to make the system as robust as possible, you should want embarrassment and loopholes pointed out, each means you have learnt a way to make the system better.

I'm not saying don't post your quieries just don't expect answers.
I don't like the non-disclosure, but its fine, its ye're call. You can see my questions a few posts up, ye don't need to tell me the answers, just so long as your happy ye have solutions to all those questions. I could probably think of more questions if I saw the full details, but the above should cover most of the general concerns.

Panserborn wrote: »

Do the fuzz keep that specific info as part of the disclosable file, or is the file to be disclosed just criminal records. I can't imagine (and hope not) that they would give security details like that to another individual. I'm hoping the file that goes out is like, 13yrs old - stole apples from farmer Hogget and whatnot. I hope.

Unless we hear otherwise, we'd have to assume that it will be a complete uncensored file, containing every interaction you've had with ANY government agency. Arrests, Passport details (info on your travels?), Drivers Licence details (Points + Offences), Taxes? (or tax offenses anyways), Rifle licence details, what else, hmm perhaps similar information on your parents, siblings. Any police investigations that included you in any way. Full transcript of any statement you gave to police. Police reports for Insurance claims. Court cases involving you. Anything you can imagine is possible until it this is cleared up by the IAAA.

Which reminds me, what are the details on how long the IAAA will need to mantain these records, 5-10 years? And how about Freedom of Information, people being able to request copies all files mentioning them with 30days etc.

The reason for this was explained at the meeting ask your line manager
I'm just not convinced its legal to withhold information on a process from the people taking part in the process. But it depends on the exact details that your withholding. I understood what you said to mean that the new member would sign the forum and would be given no information on what happens to their confidential files or what information is used to decide if someone passes or fails the vetting process, or how to appeal the process if they fail, or be able to see if the process and appeal is fair and impartial. You might mean something different.

Worst case senario something is discussed here and the solution and prevention and basis for decisions are laid out here. Now if this scene plays out in reality and the solution proved to be inadaquate and now even if the person who advocated the chosen solution was not involved in the incedent the blame can be shifted away from the IAAA and leave this very person exposed.
Not even remotely true i'm afriad. This process is being setup and run by the IAAA and the College Clubs, they decide it and implement it. They get all the blame when things go wrong. However if a problem/solution is pointed out here alerting the IAAA/Clubs to it, and a problem then occurs somewho related to the problem/solution (like the solution implmented didn't cover the announced problem perfectly), then the IAAA/Clubs get even more ****ed over, its an even bigger screw up for them. Blame falls fully on those who get to make the decisions and implement them.


For people who seem averce to their records being relased I don't know why you'd sacrifice your annonimity in the decision making process.
Hmm, if you talking about annoucing the names of the people making the decisions, then your misunderstanding, thats not important information, it has nothing to do with the process, keep it hidden all you want. Rather its the process and appeal process that needs to be detailed. As in using job titles to describe how the information is being moved about.

The 4 previous comments are exactly the kind of conjecture which would convince me not to post all the in formation up here. Grow up, wake up and stop being so narrow minded.
To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting. When it is introduced in Archery, even though the vetting is for a different reason the college will make no distinction between them and people can be refused.

Private Ryan wrote: »

The 4 previous comments are exactly the kind of conjecture which would convince me not to post all the information up here. Grow up, wake up and stop being so narrow minded.

You had stated that: "the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members." Then tenacious-me said that "The club line managers have an information pack that they are showing to each of the people in their club that have to be vetted", which indicates that information IS being given to members. My 'narrow minded' post was "So members aren't being refused information then ... ??? ". Basically asking where the contradiction was coming from.

Private Ryan wrote: »

To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting. When it is introduced in Archery, even though the vetting is for a different reason the college will make no distinction between them and people can be refused.

- Thats good. Did you check with them that if someone fails a vetting does and can the archery club tell the college that there person has failed the vetting because they are considered dangerous to children? College might like to know, but we might not be allowed to tell them.

---

Ryan, your getting arkward and somewhat frantic posts in this thread because noone is giving a clear indication of how things will work. At the moment it seems like the whole process is being made up as it goes along. Which I don't think is the case but it is a consequence of the dribs and drabs of information being released. Basically can you do something like this, a step by step process of what happens when a new club joins the IAAA and needs to start doing this vetting process.

- New club tells the IAAA they want to join.
- IAAA gives the club and information pack on the various archery requirements, membership fees etc to join. Also gives the club an information pack detailling the vetting processs.

- The vetting process info pack contains the following.
-- Who will be required to be vetted and when. (Like, Officers within 2 weeks, Senior members within 4 weeks and all Beginner or new members within 6 weeks of joining the club.)
-- Explaination of the flow of info like:
---Permission form received from individual by club vetter, who gives it to national vetting officer, who talks to guarda and gets the file.
---National vetting officer then views the files and makes a Yes/No answer. Files are locked away in storage along with reasoning behind the National Vetting officers decision for 10 years.
---The decision is passed to the club vetting officer, who then tells the individual. If the answer was Pass, then the person continues in the club as normal.
---If the answer was Fail, then the person leaves the club, or appeals. To appeal the person fills in the Appeal form and then gets to meet with the National Vetting officer (within 2weeks) to discuss the reasoning behind the Fail (who else will be at this meeting?(club vetter should be and problably someone independent also).
---If this appeal meeting results in the Pass then the person continues in the club as normal.
---If the appeal meeting results in another Fail, then the person should be able to appeal to some national league body, ombudsman or one of the courts(you will need to indicate what the next steps for the person are, including contact numbers and addresses of who he goes to).

-- Sample forms that people would fill.
-- List of information the guarda files will contain when sent to the National Vetting officer.
-- List of key factors used to make a Fail decision. The arguement against telling people this is that if people know they might make excuses to not fill in their form because they know they will fail. But that isn't a proper excuse, clubs will give everyone deadlines on returning their permission forms and will need to enforce that rule. If a persons permission form has not being recieve the day of their deadline then they must be refused attendance to the club until it is recieved. You can't withhold the info because you think the clubs will be weak in enforcing deadline dates.
-- Would be useful to have a sample case using fake names and forms to show exactly how one of these vettings works.
-- A FAQ detailing answers to most main concerns, privacy, fairness, etc, basically the information for these will be in the main explaination of the process but just doing a FAQ format to be easier on people to understand.
-- Probably need a separate Info sheet for college clubs detailing typical extra things that they would have to do, as such clubs are also subject to their colleges, not just the IAAA. Probably require clubs to get their Colleges support (in writing), and fully explain the process to the collges.

- Once a new club has being given all this, they look it over, decide if they want to still join the IAAA. If they do they sign whatever acceptances they need to and start implementing the proceduces like vetting.

Ryan, You don't need to post the actual information pack info here, but you should be able to post the explaination of what it contains. Bascially something that is almost the exact same to what I have just posted above, just edit it to reflect what is being actually done.

Dermot