Dib-Unite made the following response;
Although we are still collating responses from members, our initial response is as follows;
The sentence “This code of practice has been agreed between DSA and all the bodies representing ADI's listed at the end of this document;” The word ‘all’ needs removing and the paragraph still requires work to make it palatable.
The opening paragraph should state quite clearly that the code is voluntary. In fact the word voluntary is conspicuous by its absence.
It should also be noted that any CoP is an agreement between an individual instructor and the DSA and has nothing to do with their clients. Instructors have, in the vast majority of cases their own Terms and Conditions of business that relate to their dealings with their clients.
We at Dib-Unite still feel that there is still plenty of work needed on the wording to make it acceptable to our membership and the legal department at Unite the Union.
It was pointed out when the original revised code first came from the DSA, that the over use of the word ‘must’, was, and still is unacceptable; out of the six associations that represent ADI’s four objected to this and yet it still remains. The justification for the continued use was because it might dilute the code, as the code is only voluntary how can it possibly dilute something that has no sanctions or penalties for non-compliance.
With regards to possible sanction for non-compliance; we realise that due to the very nature of the employment status of driving instructors, there is very little that can be done other than to remove the instructors signature from the code.
We at Dib-Unite don't make decision by committee. All decision taken by Dib-Unite are after consultation with our membership, this is why sometimes decisions are delayed to allow all members to respond.
Dib-Unites position on this matter has not changed with this version (6.0) of the revised CoP.