Deep breath.....
Lets use this thread to make recommendations or create a wish list of changes we would like see made to the sanctioning / insurance process. I think there are a bunch of good ideas buried in the "stupid people" thread... so I expect a little bit of cut and paste will be in order. Please educate yourselves by reading the relevant documents.
Peace, love, and positive buoyancy.....
Additionally, It would be nice if Safety Plans could be in the form of a template filled in by the event safety personnel.Dave,
Attached is a copy of the USA Swimming Open Water Sanction Application template, with safety plan. I initially thought it was over-kill, until I filled one out and found it to be very well done. I’d be interested to hear what you and other event directors think about USMS moving to this type of more comprehensive template.
I think USMS should explore a way to vary the limits of the insurance they provide to sanctioned event hosts. Some hosting clubs carry their own insurance, and much of the USMS limits are redundant. This might be a way of reducing the sanctioning fees???The problem we run into is that limiting the insurance we provide events hosts increases USMS’s exposure. For example, a there was a liability claim, the claimant would most likely name the event host, club, LMSC, USMS and anyone else they can as parties to the suit. USMS limiting insurance to $1,000,000 means that if the claimant is awarded $3,000,000 then the other $2,000,000 will be paid by the named parties and not the insurance company. And a judge might split the amount based on depth of pockets and not on specific involvement. USMS is not in a position to be a party to this risk.
Additionally, It would be nice if Safety Plans could be in the form of a template filled in by the event safety personnel.Dave,
Attached is a copy of the USA Swimming Open Water Sanction Application template, with safety plan. I initially thought it was over-kill, until I filled one out and found it to be very well done. I’d be interested to hear what you and other event directors think about USMS moving to this type of more comprehensive template.
I think USMS should explore a way to vary the limits of the insurance they provide to sanctioned event hosts. Some hosting clubs carry their own insurance, and much of the USMS limits are redundant. This might be a way of reducing the sanctioning fees???The problem we run into is that limiting the insurance we provide events hosts increases USMS’s exposure. For example, a there was a liability claim, the claimant would most likely name the event host, club, LMSC, USMS and anyone else they can as parties to the suit. USMS limiting insurance to $1,000,000 means that if the claimant is awarded $3,000,000 then the other $2,000,000 will be paid by the named parties and not the insurance company. And a judge might split the amount based on depth of pockets and not on specific involvement. USMS is not in a position to be a party to this risk.
