Paid Marshals

[Dave Brand]

The latest edition of the MSF newsletter, 'The Marshal' carries an article entitled 'Circuit Supplied Staffing'. The gist of it is that Robert Fearnall, Donington's CEO, is proposing that the circuits employ their own teams of circuit personnel, rescue/fast intervention/recovery & medical vehicles which could be hired by clubs to service their race meetings.

He states that 'a minimum required number of personnel & vehicles would be agreed with the organising body & insurers......'

He does graciously concede that volunteers would be allowed to work alongside his 'Circuit Personnel & Services'

Fearnall does stress that this is just a 'thought starter'......so what are your thoughts?

[sss]

great idea, 30 grand starter salary plus benefits and a pension, where do i sign up

[Tim Falce]

This could be good way for the circuits to bump the prices up even more.

[stroller]

'a minimum required number of personnel & vehicles would be agreed with the organising body & insurers......

I would assume also at an extra rate onto the Circuit Hire fee - which would no doubt have to be passed onto the competitor!!!

[QuickBrownFox]

Would someone be kind enough to re-type the article in here before people start making assumptions - there are some good points made in it, and I feel it would be wrong for any of us to pass further comment on it without actually reading it in full.

[Dave Brand]

Originally posted by QuickBrownFox
Would someone be kind enough to re-type the article in here before people start making assumptions

I'm not sure of the copyright implications of that. Every marshal should get a copy of 'The Marshal'; anyone else can download it in PDF form at:

http://www.blencolour.com/motorsport...4%20%20Nov.pdf

Warning: it's a 1.3MB file!

[Beardy359]

It may be argued that this is an inevitable response from the circuits. Faced with a situation where they can no longer-for whatever reasons-rely on volunteers, they have taken a business position which will protect their interests.

Some may argue that the same result could have been achieved by simply treating the volunteers better, but the fact remains that they are volunteers and are under no obligation to attend any particular meeting. To propose a "professional" ( in the sense of paid ) core of safety personnel is simply a way to guarantee that race meetings go ahead. It would also enable mid-week meetings to be run, thus increasing income to the circuit owners.

To suggest that large business undertakings rely on volunteer labour to cover most of their main earning opportunities does not make sense. For a while now we have been asking what the response to dwindling marshal numbers would be, now we know.

[Brushpusher]

Circuit supplied staffing?

If you want to hire a studio to record your attempt to break into the Top 10, you can do so either ‘dry’, and bring in your own people, or fully crewed with enough people supplied to make it all happen. Similarly, when you’ve hit the charts and want a plane for your world tour, you can hire one either ‘dry’, and just get the plane, or ‘wet’ when it will come fully crewed.

At the moment the same choice does not apply if an organisation or club hires a race circuit for a meeting – it will be a ‘dry’ hire, at least as far as marshals are concerned. However at least one circuit, Donington, is considering changing this system.

Why?

Because, as Robert Fearnall, Chief Executive of Donington Park Leisure, points out, there is increasing pressure on venues to maximise their revenue and that means using every bit of their uses permitted by local planning permissions. He says:

“The increasing costs of operating a venue mean we have to look at how we can operate to maximum potential and if that means having to look at different ways to achieve the end result, then so be it. Therefore, if a circuit has planning to operate its race days from 0900 to 2000 then it has to try to find a way to do just that. But no-one can expect voluntary marshals to be on duty for 11 hours so a venue will have to find a mechanism by which it can exploit its operational hours by engaging a paid team of personnel and organisational services that can operate a race circuit to a standard that is acceptable with regards to Health and Safety.”

But what exactly would such a change of policy entail? According to Robert:

“It would mean the circuit employing a team of circuit personnel, rescue/fast intervention/recovery and medical vehicles that could be hired by organising clubs to service their track hire race meeting. A minimum required number of personnel and vehicles would be agreed with the organising body and insurers, taking into account the status and type of meetings and what currently happens
at the many midweek track and test days – some of which may have more drivers on the day than club race meetings!”

But where would this leave existing marshalling organisations? Robert makes the point that he is not talking about national championships or international status meetings where the existing BMMC and similar clubs would continue to provide voluntary marshals. Such volunteers would not be excluded from attending other
track events but the levels to ensure the track hire meeting can operate, supplied by the circuit, would be termed Circuit Personnel and Services, not marshals.

The Marshal put the idea to Grant Stewart, CEO of the BRSCC and therefore someone involved with over 60 race meetings a year. He feels there may be an inevitability about the idea – he can well understand why big businesses (which are what circuits are) simply cannot leave themselves in the hands of external forces.

Any benefits for organising clubs?

“Peace of mind through knowing that the event is guaranteed to take place,
especially at circuits when finding enough marshals can be a problem.”

And any downside?

“We certainly wouldn’t want to damage, or lose, the enthusiasm for the sport shown by the many marshals who turn out week after week in all weathers. It could of course be that circuit facilities for officials would improve because the
owners might listen more to their own regular team of circuit personnel”.

An interesting and somewhat revolutionary idea. Robert Fearnall stressed that this is just a thought starter and he would welcome input from marshals. The correspondence columns for the next issue are now open…

[blackx]

Going slightly of the subject but contained in the same downloaded publication...........

Have you seen what awaits volunteers on the Ralleye Sunseeker in 2004???

With regards to paid permenant circuit staff....

It is inevitable IMHO that things will go this way as the costs of travelling country wide become more prohibitive and people find that home life makes more of a call on their spare time than in years before....

It could however create a bit of an atmosphere on a post where you have some people earning a fair wedge of dosh for a day on the bank and others doing the same job for a lot less or even nowt...........

I know you can say that if this bothers you then dont do it but.........

It could be viewed like this...........One marsahl is there because he/she has to be as it is their job....

Anothere marshal is there because he/she wants to be......They are volunteers

Who is making the grater "sacrifice" ??

Before you all hit me with objections and arguments to this.....These are NOT my views but views I have heard expressed by others in the last few months....

A bit more food for thought perhaps....

[Beardy359]

Originally posted by blackx

It could be viewed like this...........One marsahl is there because he/she has to be as it is their job....

Anothere marshal is there because he/she wants to be......They are volunteers

Who is making the grater "sacrifice" ??

Does it matter as long as both are happy to be there?

Suppose you need the assistance of the police - does it matter whether the officer is a regular or a special constable?

Seriously, I don't see the problem here - if you want to be paid to marshal join the circuit staff, if you want to marshal as a hobby and pick and choose your events then don't, as long as people are still able to marshal at the events they want to .

[blackx]

Before you all hit me with objections and arguments to this.....These are NOT my views but views I have heard expressed by others in the last few months....

[Beardy359]

Sorry blackx, I was not having a go at you, merely commenting on the points you raised.

[blackx]

[ascarracinguk]

i can see alot of friction here....id rather see the money payed as a salary going to improving marshaling conditions to everyone and maybe a tenner at every meeting for everyone

[Beardy359]

Originally posted by ascarracinguk
i can see alot of friction here....

Why? If you volunteer for a meeting knowing there will be circuit staff there it's your choice. If you want paying to be a marshal apply for a job.When I worked as a service engineer many people complained about how much the salesmen earned, management replied that if you wanted salesmans money be a salesman. Its all about choice - as an independant marshal you have a choice what meetings and which circuits you attend. As a circuit employee you would do what you were told.

Originally posted by ascarracinguk
id rather see the money payed as a salary going to improving marshaling conditions to everyone and maybe a tenner at every meeting for everyone

Wouldn't we all, but that would still not guarantee the circuit adequate cover at an event. As I understand it the circuit staff are only there to guarantee a core staff such that the meeting will take place. If you can suggest another way to guarantee to the circuits that sufficient marshals will always be available to enable their meetings to go ahead I'm sure they would listen. What they are proposing will be very expensive to implement in both manpower and training costs.

[Woolley]

OK, you all knew I was going to bite on this one, so here's my threep'ny worth.

My first question is "why?"

It's no surprise that this 'inititive' comes from Donington. Fearnell is representing this as a 'big' business' decision, so there's two possible reasons.

First, Donington suffers more than most from a lack of marshals. The fact that this is because Donington treats its marshals worse than most seems beyond the wit of the management to understand. If clubs start having to cancel meetings because of this, I assume this will have an effect on the circuit's income.

Secondly, if they can make it a success, I would assume they would be looking at hiring this service out at a profit to other circuits.

So, who would they attract? Difficult one this. I spent a day at Donny this year with a crew that consisted of a lorry driver, a foundryman, a Local Govt Officer (me) a retired Civil Servant and a Company Director. IT was great, because all of that was irrelevent and we were all the same. I'll let you guess who was in charge and who was a 'bod' but I'll guarantee you'll be wrong because it doesn't work like that. If you're going to hire a crew, you are realistically only going to draw from the unemployed, the retired and the underpaid. Would you give up a well-paid job for this? I wouldn't. And are they going to pay for trainees? Have you tried to recruit trainees for other work? It's not easy even if you're not promising them the conditions we accept.

How about Health and Safety/Working time regulations? The circuits could not put on meetings the way they do if they are to abide by them. Would you want to work for them if they want exemptions? And there's the minimum wage, of course.

The question of working alongside paid officials as a volunteer cannot be ignored. I've already refused to do Fridays as a result of this, and I know I'm not alone. Who would be in charge of the post - the employee or the volunteer? Whichever you were, would you be happy to accept the instructions of the other, and what are the implications for H&S and insurance? How about competitors who choose to sue the circuits following an incident where the officials are employees and not volunteers. Only last week a Japanese driver was awarded £½m in damages following an incident.

I'm not going to begin to attempt to answer those questions, but my initial feeling is that this is madness - a direct result of the circuits having shown their contempt for us over the last few years, Donington in particular, and those who are supposed to be representing us failing to achieve anything (and that includes incident team organisers and chief marshals. It should not be seen as a criticism of the marshals' club, who are simply volunteers who are prepared to take on an organisational role).

Finally, the suggestion is for officials/medical crews/ fast response vehicles. That sounds to me like a flag/observer, rescue units and incident crews like you see on Champ Car, not men on the bank. How is this going to affect race meetings? Can clubbies operate this way? Would FIA bring international meetings if that was the cover that was offerred?

My message to Mr Fearnell? Think carefully about what you wish for, it may come true.

[ascarracinguk]

my main worries are

paid ppl....taking charge over volenteers...a higher status

money can be spend better else where....come on if hes complaining about the lack of marshals at the moment...we have about 60 or so....if thats low in his books how many is he offering to pay??????

whos gonna pay for it...robert wont hes a business man...the bill will go straight to the competitors...and we will loose gird numbers cos of it.....

at the end of the day we marshal cos we enjoy it....i dont wanna be paid....its a hobby!

finally...public perseption.....we get alot of gratitude from some people because we are volenteers...if we were to be paid then its a job...people and drivers may have a different attitude towards us then....

me for one am against it...there are too many problems

my suggestion......

safety crews....if u wanna pay ppl have them on safety trucks like at rockingham.....the only time youll need extra hands is if something big happens....in which case the safety car or red flag will be deployed anyway

finally from a business point of view....hes doing this to save money so meetings arent cancelled.....the amount of marshals hed have to pay would be quite a lot...surely this wont be cost effective...if marshalling conditions were improved then there would be no need for this.

[Beardy359]

I am not for one moment agreeing with this proposal, but put yourself in the position of someone running a circuit. You not only have to please your paying public, but also the people who run your meetings. If you put together a package which is popular with the punters/drivers and profitable for you BUT unpopular with the volunteer marshals what can you do? Are you saying that as volunteer marshals we should be in a position to make or break a commercial proposition? If I or anyone else wants to hire a circuit, staff etc. and run an event, what right do you have to stop me. Insurance, Health & Safety etc. are my concern as organiser and if found wanting I should be prosecuted/sued.

I repeat, guarantee organisers a marshalling force by any other means and I'm sure they would drop this - otherwise get used to it, because it is probably the way it will go!

[Woolley]

It's chicken and egg - marshal numbers are dropping because of poor treatment mainly. If we all turn up and put up with whatever sh** is thrown at us, then we can keep coming. If we don't the situation will be changed so we're not needed. Maybe it's just plain blackmail or power politics? Who knows.

The marshals clubs need to get a serious grip of the situation before it becomes inevitable. I've said it before - I am a Chief Marshal for one club. I view my job as to be a marshals' reperesentative to the club - I stated when I accepted it that they should view me as they would a union rep. I have yet to see a circuit chief (750MC excepted-and look at the results in comparison) do the same. There may be others, and if so I apologise for missing you, please make yourself known. And if you're not doing the same, WHY NOT???

[ascarracinguk]

problem is theyre not gonna please competitors or punters....where do u think hes gonna get the money from to pay for all of this...by increasing entrance and race prices

[Cynic]

This is going to be a non-starter. As soon as you pay people they become employees. That means the employer is bound by Health & safety, and working time legislation. And of course one of the reasons for poor facilities is that as we are volounteers the circuits have no such obligations.

[scorch]

I see the age old question has come up again...

If you view this as a business and motorracing, marshalls, competitors don't matter and it's only the bottom line you are interested in, the way I see it is this... if you have paid marshalls who will be there and always ensure that the event will go ahead, therefore as circuit operator WILL always get his money from the organising club, and this money will cover all the expenses ie payment for marshalls etc... Of course some of the organising clubs cannot afford to pay the higher rates or some may try and go heavily into debt but the circuit still gets his money.

I see a win, win situation for the business running the circuit, only the richest international meetings get held and on the spare weekends I have more time to run track days for some corporate hospitality and make still more money...

In the mean time club racing has gone to hell in a handcart..

And need I remind you that for the last 2 GP’s there has been paid marshalls alongside volunteers, and I believe that at some circuits paid officials do tasks that marshalls cover at other circuits.

[Dave Brand]

I held back from commenting on this until I'd had time to think it through.

Some worthwhile thoughts there, maybe, but I can see problems.

Firstly, Fast Intervention Vehicles. Sounds like a good idea - at any incident in, say, 30 seconds. However, from my limited marshalling experience I would suggest that in dealing with many incidents those first 30 seconds are the most important; many lesser incidents can be made safe in 30 seconds or so.

It's reasonable to assume that, to ensure adequate cover for holidays, illness etc., the crews would be drawn from a pool of employees. So, if I were one of the circuit team, would I want to marshal as a volunteer at a meeting where I was not called upon to act as a paid employee?

The thing that concerns me most is that this is aimed at the small club meetings. As a project engineer, I like to put numbers to any proposal. So, a few figures just plucked out of the air.....

Minimum manning levels? Let's say 30, enough to give us one flag/observer on any post & basic incident, rescue & recovery teams. Pay level? Let's go for minimum wage, say £50/day. So, our wage bill for a day's racing is £1500. However, the cost of employing a person includes a lot of other expenses, so the charge to the customer will be more than just the wage bill. Let's be optimistic & add 50%; we now have a cost to the club of £2250. The only way I can see the clubs covering that cost is entry fees; a club meeting will, with a bit of luck, probably attract 200 entries. So, to cover the cost of the circuit staff, we're probably talking of adding around a tenner to the already high entry fees - & that's on a very optimistic costing. In reality, the oncost to each competitor could be £20-£30.

I personally have no problem working as a volunteer alongside paid employees as long as everybody is treated as an equal & everybody is doing the job in a professional manner. Maybe, however, we need to look at the root cause of marshal shortages. An example: a couple of weeks ago KayBee & I did a 500-plus mile round trip to marshal at a Bemsee meeting at Brands; next year we won't be making the 90-mile round trip to Oulton to marshal at the F3/GT meeting. The reason? F3/GT treats marshals like & their organisation of meetings, at least at Oulton, is shambolic. Bemsee, on the other hand, really looks after its marshals & organises meetings in a slick, profesional manner while still maintaining a 'family' atmosphere.

[JimW]

If you view this as a business

What else do you think running £20M of a circuit is? Only the BRDC/BARC used to have other/additional major aims which were not "make money". Sure, there are lots of good people involved in circuits who have tremendous dedication to motorsport and that is why they chose to work in this business. But it is a business and if they don't make it pay they will be changed for someone else who will. If we as volunteers want to be able to participate then we will have to co-operate/support their aims.

As soon as you pay people they become employees. That means the employer is bound by Health & safety, and working time legislation. And of course one of the reasons for poor facilities is that as we are volunteers the circuits have no such obligations.

Not quite true from either perspective. Have a look at what some workers have to put up with in terms of facilities. About the only thing some circuits still lack is the provision of portaloos within reasonable distance. Equally it is (sadly, in my opinion) not true to say that HSE does not touch volunteers. We may be protected from the dafter effects of this legislation but not from many of its basic effects. (Or benefits as I should perhaps call them. )

Fast Intervention Vehicles. Sounds like a good idea - at any incident in, say, 30 seconds. However, from my limited marshalling experience I would suggest that in dealing with many incidents those first 30 seconds are the most important; many lesser incidents can be made safe in 30 seconds or so.

Fire engulfing the cockpit area is the factor which will give you the constraint here. And the 30 seconds is a sensible timescale for planning. But step back a moment and consider a number of things: How often does this scenario have to be dealt with? How often would we fail to deal with it at present manning levels. What level of risk would the Insurers live with? (Risk can be thought of as severity times frequency). Since the organisers of Rallies can get cover for a situation in which there is no realistic prospect of assistance from marshals to put out fires in 99% of the event, why might this not be acceptable (to the insurers) for a race.

Remember, the people the insurers are most worried about are not the drivers. It is the other people who attending the event.

As for medical/rescue intervention, the MSA used to work to a 90 second intervention time. So that’s two vehicles for Donington. (I know, because I have timed it and mapped those times to the circuit and available gaps.)

Minimum manning levels? Let's say 30, enough to give us one flag/observer on any post & basic incident, rescue & recovery teams.

Observers (and blue flags – see below) would be the most difficult to replace if you are working to our standards. But then many small club meetings don’t work to those standards anyway at present because there are not enough bodies. Television – perhaps of an enhanced standard compared to the existing installations – may be offered as the solution. Very difficult to argue that TV is not an “acceptable” surveillance solution. Does not do judgement calls, particularly of dynamic situations. Interesting deficiencies also. Take a recent kart race. Driver departs the scene at maximum speed into Recticel. Kart goes under and the Recticel drops (fairly) neatly back on top. Race control watching the TV does not notice and the kart is not visible. The observer on post and the rescue unit both take appropriate action and so there is no problem. If it was TV only how long before a reaction?

Yellow flags – well lights would be a very hard case to argue against. OK so operation from Race control on the evidence of TV would be a poor quality response but could you really argue that the difference was sufficient? Especially given that we sometimes work with incomplete cover, sometimes provided by people who are not experienced or adequately supervised? (No criticism of the unfortunate person who is presented with some flags and told to get on with it in spite of little or no training or experience.)

Blue flags – There is no realistic prospect of continuing these under such conditions. Look how badly this is done at present sometimes.

Numbers and wages. If a circuit covers a busy track day now with 8 people paid perhaps £30/40, then I reckon that another 8 people might be regarded as fitting the needs (given all my assumptions above). Even assuming that Rescue crew cost you a bit more (as some circuits pay), I still think that £900 might be nearer the mark.

First, Donington suffers more than most from a lack of marshals. The fact that this is because Donington treats its marshals worse than most seems beyond the wit of the management to understand.

Mmm. I’m not quite sure that I recognise what you describe about treatment Certainly Donington has crowded schedules and late finishes and this turns some people away and perhaps explains the poor numbers sometimes. Beyond this, I can’t think of any examples of poor treatment which I would regard as other than the occasional errors which happen with any circuit/promoting club.

And Donington certainly helps and supports marshals in a number of ways, not all of which are very visible. For example, they are (and have always been) incredibly helpful in providing training facilities. Self-interest you may say, but why then are some other places so noticeably less helpful? If their self-interest and ours coincide, then everyone benefits .

Why? If you volunteer for a meeting knowing there will be circuit staff there it's your choice. If you want paying to be a marshal apply for a job.

Absolutely right. Most of us regard one of the plus points of marshalling to be the difference from our day job.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want us to go down this route. I wonder if this is more of a stalking horse to promote certain views than a real prospect for change but I’m not betting on that.

Regards

Jim

[PaulSands]

Is there anything in particular that has prompted this "thought starter" from Robert? Has Donington been encountering problems obtaining a workable number of marshalls this year or is it a more widespread problem thats effecting most circuits.
From my experiences this year Mallory always seems very well catered for but I assume a lot of that is down to the shortness of the track. On a couple of ocassions at Donington however it has felt like a tumbleweed blowing across the track type scenario...I hasten to add however that was at meetings that had crossed into evening time, the FIA Sportcars being a good example.

Is there a single representative of the UK's various marshalling bodies that can sit down with the circuit owners and discuss the way forward..or is this somehing that already happens.
If not is there maybe a need for such a figure to be elected/designated, and possibly paid a reatiner, to represent the best interests of marshalling?

Given the parlous state of Octagon and the various clubs/championships that are on the verge of extinction maybe the marshalling fraternity (who I have complete and utter respect for) should take the lead and action some form of modernisation process while at the same time maintain the grass roots concept of volunteer marshalls doing something they love?