I have just spent a happy hour checking the paperwork for an activity tomorrow. As a humble volunteer it is my task to check that the forms are all in order. I have another heap of them to check for another activity on Sunday. Some of the cadets are going on both activities, so I am checking the same information twice.
Since the TG21 (and TG23) has no expiry date some of them will have been filled in months ago when the activities were first mooted.
One of the cadets has promised to bring a form to parade tonight, one other looks like arriving with it at 0755 tomorrow morning. I am, presumably, expected to check that by the roadside before driving the minibus.
I am a volunteer who will not only lead the activity, but I am also a minibus driver for the day. To those jobs add clerk. I repeat I am a volunteer.
I am sure putting everything on one piece of paper looked very efficient to the people who originated the form, but the truth is the only thing on it that is activity specific is the parents permission. All the rest could be an annual or quarterly completion, checked once, with the originals held on file and either photocopied or (a bit modern here) held on the squadron server. Remember, the TG21 has no time limit already, so going out of date is not an issue.
The upshot would be that I would only have to check a parent’s permission for each activity and could get on with all the other volunteer tasks of the day.
If you need someone to re-draft the form(s) I will offer to do it. Oh, I forgot, I am a volunteer and not nearly important enough.
Just off to collect the minibus because there isn’t time tomorrow morning.
It comes home when you repeat an activity and issue more forms because it’s on a different day, then a parent pops in to ask why and you say it’s policy and they give you a quizzical look. When our kids were at school all we used to do was return a slip saying yes we allow them to go, with the appropriate wonga, unless it was week or similar and we added extra contact details. This hasn’t changed at our kids old school.
Of course all of these have to be printed, which unless someone has a thin air printer means paper and ink.
I remember the days of block permissions for a campsite / area, put in in March for the summer. But now we have SMS we have to do one for each weekend / occasion and I thought it was meant to mean less admin, but a once off form was less admin and faff.
I think you might be missing my point. I am not suggesting block parents permissions, that ship has already sailed however silly it might seem.
What I am suggesting is that the bulk of the form(s) with all the health, religious and dietary stuff is good for a year, or whatever time limit fits. That is held on file and copied as required which means it only has to be checked once.
A second, simple form just has the activity specific permission. Easy to fill in and more importantly check; permission is either given, or you don’t get the form. Simple and easy to check.
As for the paper and ink, surely not a problem. In any case you make the form downloadable and the cadet prints it at home.
Another advantage is that is down to the parent to check if any medical condition is relevant before signing.
To be honest, I am not qualified to check that any medical information is relevant to what we are doing and to give it to me is just a way of moving responsibility.
What you want is possible as you can print pre-filled tg21 forms from an sms activity, it hugely realises on the fact that all sms. Details are spot on
If the school asked us to download and print their form, my printer would be need some ink or stop working. I would expect a similar response from parents if I said download and print one of our forms.
I agree we shouldn’t need anything more than a permission slip. We used to get a form at the start of each academic year (primary and secondary) to update details and we shouldn’t need anything more unless something dramatic happens, which I think we may be aware of.
shoot me down for being innovative, but is this not what a F3822 has??
I recall as a cadet it was my “passport” to attend events. it holds NOK details, medical details and space for allergies and notes.
no “three-ait” no permission to attend it was as simple as that.
the CC/TG forms, offer nothing but a paperwork burden for the volunteer and cost implication in time and printing for all…
and while on the subject WHEN will we have clarification which events require TG forms??
Having been on the end of a critical incident, those forms ARE needed and are valuable. Both to help with the immediate response then to cover A my bum and B the corps bum. A lot of people never have to deal with something like this in their time but when you do…
However having said that I would like to see a change in policy where it is dependent upon the distance from the location of the squadron/cadet. For example, if you are more than an hour and a half away you will need a full form. If you are within that distance then you just need a permission to attend slip
I wasn’t suggesting that the forms were not useful, just that most of it doesn’t need filling in EVERY time.
The one problem that I can’t get an answer to is if a cadet promises to bring the form on the day (even though that means me checking it at the roadside in the rain) and then doesn’t bring it. Do I deny him access to the minibus and leave him at the side of the road with his parents thinking he is safe with us for the day, or take him without the form?
Not sure this is relevant to TG21s. However, to answer your question, the paperwork load on adjutants and training officers is now so high you can’t get people to do the jobs and there is no proper IT to help either.
Tell him he is a throbber and leave him on the side of the road. Without a TG21 it is too risky to take him. You could get into lots of trouble without the right paperwork.
So I leave a twelve year old at the side of the road, possibly miles from home on a dark and rainy morning with her parents expecting me to look after their daughter for the day. AND THIS IS CHILD PROTECTION?
I would rather that I took the “lots of trouble” than do that.
Firstly how can the parents think that you are taking care of said cadet if they haven’t provided you with a consent form? If you don’t have a consent form then you do not have the parents consent to take them on the activity. If you are so concerned about this issue have a hard cut off and don’t accept forms on the day.
Secondly on the wider issue of consent and consent forms, one of the major things flagged up in coroners court following the fieldcraft incident is parents not being given sufficient information upon which to base consent. (This is being pushed heavily on the courses being run at windermere at the moment). The number of times I see letters for camps & courses which contain no details as to what is going to be taking place (remote Supervision etc), how can we be said to have obtained consent for a cadet to take part in an activity when we aren’t explaining to parents in simple terms what the activity is.
But perhaps the parents did, or thought they did, or maybe didn’t care. They are not all the type of parents you and I are. In any case they signed a form of consent in the 3822 which they (being normal human beings) probably think is enough.
Yes, you can be hard and not accept forms on the day. I generally want them in advance, but the World isn’t that black and white. I agree I probably wouldn’t take a cadet up a mountain without, but what if we are only going to the RAF Museum and the cadet swears blind that he gave you the form three weeks ago and has been on holiday since. You are still in the fix of having accepted responsibility for the cadet for the day (because he is there). Maybe the trip to Hendon is less risky than a twelve year old abandoned for the day.
As far as informing the parents of details is concerned, our activities are described on the same page on our website as the on-line sign-up and are available to parents.
Anyway, my original post was saying can we separate the permission from the parents (which is activity specific) and all the other stuff about diets and doctor’s names. That might lead to clarity in both directions.
It is relevant in as much that a 3822 and a 3822A is only as accurate as the day they were filled in by whom ever. Things can change within a cadet’s career.
So completing a TG form and holding until required could lead to records being incorrect when actually needed. So who is at fault, the cadet not updating his/her 3822, parents not completing a TG form or the staff for not checking that details on TG form as still accurate.
I wouldn’t want to be the one holding the baby if something went wrong just because of the workload.
I’ve just had an old friend around for tea. He is a senior teacher at a major school in the private sector. I do mean major. He is also their D of E man.
I told him about this thread and, interestingly, he reaction was that parents written permission did not, in law, count for very much. The fact that the child was on the activity and the parents had been given the opportunity to know the content of that activity was sufficient. Signatures are not necessary. The main consideration was that you made your best efforts to keep the child safe.
This school charges more per term than many of us get as a salary, so I am sure they employ good lawyers to advise them. They don’t just go to North Wales for D of E, northern Italy is more likely and, for all I know, the Hindu Kush
