Experience of Local IAM Groups - Sheffield/Matlock Area

[GC8]

As title, Id be interested to hear anyones experiences or opinions about Matlock, Chesterfield, Sheffield and Rotherham IAM groups.

I know that different groups have different outlooks, but I cant really try them all out before I elect which one to join.

I do have experience of the Matlock group, but it was twenty years ago (called Hope Valley then, IIRC) and Im sure that a lot has changed since then.

More than once-monthly meetings and a willingless to offer as many observed runs as are required, rather than a rigidly fixed number are both on my agenda, as well as a PH-type outlook...

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

No specific experience I'm afraid, but I'm sure they wouldn't mind answering your questions. As you say, different groups structure their training in different ways, so it's not unreasonable for you to check before signing up.

Once you've whittled them down, you could ask for a free assessment which would hopefully give you a better idea of the group ethos. It has to be said that an observer with a PH-type outlook might be harder to find, but there are a few of us around.

I'm obliged to mention that you might also consider local RoADAR groups, if there's one in the area.

[Glosphil]

As an observer with our local IAM group it always amazes me that some groups only offer run on Sundays and insist the test is taken after a fixed number of observed drives.

All associate joining our group have an initial assessment drive with the Chief Observer (or a senior observer if the CO is busy) and are then assigned to an observer that has free time too match that of the associates. It is then left to the associate and observer to schedule observed drives to suit their mutually free times. It is expected that they do a run at least every two weeks and preferably every week. One of our observers assisted 6 associates to IAM test passes year. If an associate and observer don't get on then a change of observer is arranged. We aim to be as flexible as possible.

Anyone see anything wrong with this method or can suggest improvements?

[GC8]

Your group sounds ideal Phil - its a shame that youre three hours away. I will also consider RoSPA groups using the same criteria...

[R0G]

The Matlock group is very busy as they have local council funding for under 26 year olds

They have a very good reputation

The head of that group posts often on ADUK and on the IAM members forum

[GC8]

Thanks Rog. Im from West Derbyshire originally, so Im tempted to join the Matlock group this time too. When I took my original test the Matlock group was very different, with a lot of beards and a pair of strange identical twins...

[guillemot]

Glosphil said:

As an observer with our local IAM group it always amazes me that some groups only offer run on Sundays and insist the test is taken after a fixed number of observed drives.

All associate joining our group have an initial assessment drive with the Chief Observer (or a senior observer if the CO is busy) and are then assigned to an observer that has free time too match that of the associates. It is then left to the associate and observer to schedule observed drives to suit their mutually free times. It is expected that they do a run at least every two weeks and preferably every week. One of our observers assisted 6 associates to IAM test passes year. If an associate and observer don't get on then a change of observer is arranged. We aim to be as flexible as possible.

Anyone see anything wrong with this method or can suggest improvements?

We are similar, except for the initial assessment drive with the Senior Observer which we don't do. Our SO will ring the associate, ascertain a little bit about them, then pair them with whoever he thinks appropriate geographically and personality wise.
The rest is the same - runs happen as often as desired at mutually convenient times, and if it doesn't work out we swap observers.

[Glosphil]

guillemot said:

Glosphil said:

As an observer with our local IAM group it always amazes me that some groups only offer run on Sundays and insist the test is taken after a fixed number of observed drives.

All associate joining our group have an initial assessment drive with the Chief Observer (or a senior observer if the CO is busy) and are then assigned to an observer that has free time too match that of the associates. It is then left to the associate and observer to schedule observed drives to suit their mutually free times. It is expected that they do a run at least every two weeks and preferably every week. One of our observers assisted 6 associates to IAM test passes year. If an associate and observer don't get on then a change of observer is arranged. We aim to be as flexible as possible.

Anyone see anything wrong with this method or can suggest improvements?

The initial drive by the CO is actually a risk assessment drive as the IAM want a risk assessment on each drive. Our group decided it was simplier if the CO undertook the first drive with each new candiate and then just left the observers to take the normal precautions. So far we have rejected 3 candiates - 1 with eyesight problems (had double vision and thought a piece of card over one eye wnen driving was a good idea!) and two who were just dangerous drivers and would not listen to the CO.

We are similar, except for the initial assessment drive with the Senior Observer which we don't do. Our SO will ring the associate, ascertain a little bit about them, then pair them with whoever he thinks appropriate geographically and personality wise.
The rest is the same - runs happen as often as desired at mutually convenient times, and if it doesn't work out we swap observers.

[Vaux]

Glosphil said:

The initial drive by the CO is actually a risk assessment drive as the IAM want a risk assessment on each drive. Our group decided it was simplier if the CO undertook the first drive with each new candiate and then just left the observers to take the normal precautions.

Hope I got the quoting correct.
Since when did Chiswick want every Associate/drive risk assessed?

[R0G]

Vaux said:

Since when did Chiswick want every Associate/drive risk assessed?

They don't

This is probably an interpretation of an HQ idea done by a local group

All first drives by observers are a driving assessment and are also be a risk assessment by their nature

[Vaux]

R0G said:

Vaux said:

Since when did Chiswick want every Associate/drive risk assessed?

They don't

This is probably an interpretation of an HQ idea done by a local group

All first drives by observers are a driving assessment and are also be a risk assessment by their nature

Another concept that was either misinterpreted or ignored by the Groups? I remember there was some kerfuffle a while back about this (Observers threatening to resign!) but it's gone quiet.

[guillemot]

Vaux said:

R0G said:

Vaux said:

Since when did Chiswick want every Associate/drive risk assessed?

They don't

This is probably an interpretation of an HQ idea done by a local group

All first drives by observers are a driving assessment and are also be a risk assessment by their nature

Another concept that was either misinterpreted or ignored by the Groups? I remember there was some kerfuffle a while back about this (Observers threatening to resign!) but it's gone quiet.

But they do want everything risk assessed, or if they don't I (along with the rest of our committee) have very much misunderstood the HQ idea?
We decided we'd remain as we are with observers doing their own informal RAs as they meet the associates and their cars for the first time. If it becomes an enforced formalised RA we'd lose quite a percentage of our observers.

[R0G]

guillemot said:

But they do want everything risk assessed, or if they don't I (along with the rest of our committee) have very much misunderstood the HQ idea?
We decided we'd remain as we are with observers doing their own informal RAs as they meet the associates and their cars for the first time. If it becomes an enforced formalised RA we'd lose quite a percentage of our observers.

As a senior obs I can say that if forced to fill in no end of un-necessary paperwork then I am OFF !!