Guild of Battlefield Guides

[CGM]

I have followed this thread with interest, and think I can see both sides of the discussion.

One question springs to mind:

Does the GBG have a policy to cope with complaints?

For example, if a group which had been guided on a battlefield tour by a member of the Guild was dissatisfied with the service received would the Guild take responsibility for arbitrating between the two parties?

Would the Guild take responsibility for supporting their member, should the group have failed to make clear what they expected from the trip, and then unfairly criticised the guide?

And, if a guide should be found to be failing (on more than one occasion) would the Guild take steps to help the guide to improve?

And, as a final resort, would the Guild take steps to remove membership from a failed guide?

These points (particularly the last one) would give credibility to the Guild - in my eyes.

Just my own thoughts.

CGM

[chrislock]

Thank you Simon. I rest my case.

[Willywombat]

CGM,

I'm not an executive member of the Guild and I will leave it to others to give a detailed reply.

I am aware, however, that there are indeed procedures to deal with such problems as you mention. It is not a union and does not employ guides itself, hence complaints would usually be taken up with employers. That said, high standards are expected and there would indeed be advice, guidance and ultimately sanctions if a guide were to bring the Guild, or the craft in general, into serious disrepute.

[SWorrall]

Does the GBG have a policy to cope with complaints?

For example, if a group which had been guided on a battlefield tour by a member of the Guild was dissatisfied with the service received would the Guild take responsibility for arbitrating between the two parties?

Would the Guild take responsibility for supporting their member, should the group have failed to make clear what they expected from the trip, and then unfairly criticised the guide?

And, if a guide should be found to be failing (on more than one occasion) would the Guild take steps to help the guide to improve?

And, as a final resort, would the Guild take steps to remove membership from a failed guide?

These points (particularly the last one) would give credibility to the Guild - in my eyes.

What a good question to ask !

The Guild, as has (hopefully) been made clear is NOT a professional regulator. It has no statutory powers to discipline or punish any member for failing in a commercial undertaking between that guide and his clients. It holds no formal register (which does not exist, in any case) and cannot 'strike anyone off'. It is not the employer of that guide, and not responsible for any problem that is caused. It is not responsible for the standards of service or level of knowledge of any member. If it attempted to arbitrate in the way suggested and the member resigened their membership then the ability of the Guild to intervene is at an end.

The disappointed clients ought to take the matter up with the commercial organisation employing the guide (if such a relationship exists, for example with one of the larger companies. One thinks of Anglia, Leger, Titan/Holts, etc. in this regard).

If the guide is an independent, running their own company, or a self-employed hired-hand, then the correct recourse (as far as I understand it) is through a body like Trading Standards, if the guide offers a service which does not meet the advertised and expected level of service.

The last point you make is an intriguing one, but one I do not have the knowledge to answer. I suspect that if the paying public were making supportable complaints about me to the Guild Council then I might well get a phone call asking me to consider my ongoing membership. But that is entirely supposition on my part. I have no knowledge of it ever having happened in the past.

Simon.

[SWorrall]

Thank you Simon. I rest my case.

Chris,

I'd be interested to read your thoughts on my earlier response. If / when you have time to post them?

Your post, which I was responding to, raised a number of questions, for example about the membership model. It simply is what it is and the alternatives you suggest bring their own set of problems with them. How can one surmount those obstacles and improve the membership model? It may be a case of 'not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good-enough' ?

Simon.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... Tom T-M: No-one has been 'turned down for badging'. That's a fabrication. No-one has been refused entry or been made to feel 'in' or 'out' for any reason. ...

Simon - I'm interested to hear that, as the circumstances of being turned down for badging were described to me (and others) first hand by the person concerned. The account given to us pointed towards the process being unfair, biased (on a personal level), and, in terms of the principle reason which was apparently given, downright stupid.

How do I put this - the truth was not being spoken ? - Is that correct ? Please advise.

Tom

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Also - can I add that I can't decide whether I'm losing interest in this topic and the organisation concerned, or am I becoming subconsciously enthusiastic and should maybe stick in an application for membership - noting that a proposal is a formality and not required (do they have a "make him a member and shut 'im up" category ?).

More seriously, can I just draw attention to a matter which does slightly concern me ? There are correspondents posting on this topic who are telling us what a lot of good sports the G of BFGs are, and that they themselves are members, but, for reasons which can only be guessed at, are hiding behind what are clearly false names. What does that tell us ? Seriously, why would someone who is a member of a body which they promote to be a positive and influential entity be afraid to make their views known under cover of their real identity ?

Tom

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown.")

[SWorrall]

Simon - I'm interested to hear that, as the circumstances of being turned down for badging were described to me (and others) first hand by the person concerned. The account given to us pointed towards the process being unfair, biased (on a personal level), and, in terms of the principle reason which was apparently given, downright stupid.

How do I put this - the truth was not being spoken ? - Is that correct ? Please advise.

Tom

Tom,

The only requirement to begin the 'route to the Badge' (i.e. to start the Validation process) is to have a demonstrable history of having guided on a battlefield. The Validation path MUST start by covering a battle of YOUR choice. It is highly recommended to attend a Guild event and see a few Task 1's being given, so that you understand the format in which they are framed. Once Task 1 is successful the remaining 8 tasks can be done in any order and in the timeframe set by yourself. No-one evers fails Task 1, or any other Task. Rather one is 'Referred' i.e you have to re-do it again at a later date. Pretty much everyone who is on the Validation path has been Referred at some point, perhaps more than once.

Everyone is subject to the same criteria for doing Task 1, to make it a level playing field for everyone doing it. The only reason for being prevented from starting Task 1 is because the person has no guidng experience. This stops it being a paper exercise, which would devalue the Badge I'm sure you will agree?

Age, gender, race, etc. are no bar to one starting Validation, of course.

I cannot speak to why your acquaintance made this claim. Nor will I speak against them without having heard their story for myself.

Simon.

[Willywombat]

Remember, too, that the marking scheme for the assignments is very similar to that used by many university/NVQ courses etc. in that there are a laid down set of criteria ("outcomes") that must be met in order to achieve a pass. Sometimes a candidate may deliver what they perceive to be an informative and entertaining presentation for assignment 1 but are referred because they have not hit all the required outcomes, even though they are clearly laid down in the brief.

To give myself as an example, one of the assignments requires the production of a set of maps detailing the progress of a battle. One of the outcomes required is sufficient reference to the topography of the ground and how that affected the tactics/result. I mentioned topography once but the maps I drew didn't emphasise enough the slopes/contours (an important aspect in this particular battle), thus I was referred. I wasn't very happy and my immediate reaction was to curse the validator! Once I read the feedback and thought about it I realised that they were right: that particular outcome hadn't been met sufficiently. I added a few contours, tried again and passed!

Some people learn from this (everyone is given full feedback on every assignment, pass or refer), have another go and subsequently pass. Others fail to see the shortcoming (despite the feedback) and react accordingly. It's often a case (as schoolmasters always used to tell us) of "reading the question" and making sure each and every part of it is answered. An incomplete answer = incomplete marks!!

I don't know the example mentioned by Tom but I would suggest that perhaps the person concerned was not "turned down for badging" (i.e. prevented from attempting it) but was referred on one or more assignments and didn't like it? There is an important difference!

[chrislock]

Simon. Thank you for your measured responses however, as you clearly identified the need to spend much typing time, it reveals in my book the GBG has a problem in the way it projects itself to like minded but out of the fold others.

If it did not have an image problem why are you and others having to answer so many questions?

As I have revealed to SG and others on many occasions now, my personal problem is the proposal part. I also am not comfortable with a UK self regulating organization being involved/driving/recommending/agreeing on issues which would impact on us resident and legal guides/companies situated in countries who are already regulated.

If the EU or Belgium/France etc bring in new legislation then so be it and we will have to comply no less than we already do. For some, the problem here is the guild regulate themselves and then feel the need to speak on behalf of everyone else and clearly, many are not happy with this. By all means live in your own house with all of it's rules and regulations but please allow us to speak for and answer for ourselves whenever required.

I would also like to raise other concerns which rarely do I hear the guild commenting on yet when they happen they can destroy all of the battlefield knowledge in the world! I previously stated we fill a niche, that being locally based in other countries. Many of us speak good/poor local language/dialects but I still hear certain but not all GBG guides and others shout: Oi 10 beers please mate etc! even though they have been attending the battlefields over many years and should by now have aquired a level of language applicable, if only to show a little respect to the indigenous population. If you are serious on raising a complete package, why am I still hearing such phrases offered by badged guides in the town where I live? It is not just battle knowledge that visiting guides should be concentrating on.

Yesterday I felt the need to become involved in a situation which developed at Langemark. A British coach had parked on the cycle path and facing on the wrong side of the road. The driver became most angry when the police appeared and almost delivered an on the spot fine. His attitude was what's the problem? He was totally unaware that you simply cannot park over here as one does in the UK, well you can but don't complain when the police slap you with a 150e fine which they do with relish. On several occasions I have witnessed UK based coaches and some containing badged guides do this. Perhaps they were un aware of this but then again, we local guides are very much aware of these issues so this being the case, now who requires regulating? Horses for courses I say.

We are familiar with the local battlefields and are often contacted by guild members enquiring where certain locations are etc and I welcome this. Of course I cannot match the world knowledge that some of your badged guides have but I/we often assist Guild guides when planning their trips, I know I have by recently assisting badge No 12.

I was delighted to be of service to him and I hope this continues.

On several occasions due to being known in this part of the world, I have unfortunately been contacted by the town hall to assist with information after certain well known guide companies coaches have discharged their sacks of rubbish at Tyne Cot, Bayernwald, Langemark. These events sometimes go un noticed by the guides on board as once the sacks have been off loaded on the battlefield rather than be taken to the dedicated civil refuse depot or taken back home, only then to be strewn everywhere by foxes, the wind etc they are long gone. What they do not see is the local authorities having to be called out to clean up the mess and that of course does not go down well.

By the way I did not say Trip Adviser was a regulating body and of course it is not perfect but what is these days?

I simply stated they are a tool that the clients have at their disposal to post whatever. I dare say some of your badged guides/affiliated companies also have this facility?

There is more to guiding than simply having heaps of battle knowledge and sometimes I feel the GBG overlook this. For my part, I strive to improve on all levels and I like to think I am a better guide today than I was yesterday and if not, then back to the drawing board. My over riding point is this: do we outside of the guild need the guild to speak or act on our professional behalves without our acknowledgement and without permission rather than leave this to the in house Belgian/French etc legislation already in place?

Simon. You asked for my thoughts and to confirm, I/others feel at times the guild in it's current form seem to offer the impression that they speak on behalf of all and that does not fit well to some. Sorry mate but that is how it is!

I wish you well and I look forward to discussing this further if required with other badged or un badged guild members who are friends and business colleagues today.

Fear Naught

Chris.

[David Filsell]

Formation of the Guild cropped up some eight years ago when I was guiding for Ledger Tours - Arnhem, Atlantic Wall mainly. I stopped because my wife was taken ill, and I have not returned to guiding. The Guild's stated objective, if I remember correctly, was to improve standards. I asked then and I still ask who was qualified to judge my knowledge. When I came to a new tour I worked damned hard on my script, the facts, the stories and the topography to ensure I was on the ball. Since then the organisation appears to have grown by 7.375 guides a year, and it seems to me had little overall impact. If it is only taking membership from existing guides by 'proposal' - and doing nothing to train new guides - in itself, because of the sheer range of battlefield over which to guide - judging standards is problematical. Not least guiding is cliquey - I was effectively stopped from undertaking Great War tours because of an individual whose rudeness and arrogance was legion amongst guides and who took a dislike to me. So, despite this thread, and largely because so few of the good guides who I know are members - and because of my hatred of those who wish to regulate everything in life - I am not not a brown badge enthusiast. Such qualification would have absolutely no influence on me joining a tour. Key point is do we actually need someone to guide the guides - I think reputation, publishing and etc are the best way of choosing.

[Cormorant]

SG, Willywombat and Simon Worrall are doing sterling work in putting the record straight about the Guild. I would echo everything they have said so far but just want to pick up on a couple of other points.

The Guild was formed just over 10 years ago and currently has over 330 members. Of these, 59 have completed the assessments required to become Badged; the award of the Guild Badge indicates that the holder is an experienced guide who has attained a verified level of expertise. The 9 requirements/tasks for the Badge have been carefully worked out according to current educational thinking and submissions are assessed against clearly defined required outcomes. The people who do the assessing are Badged Guides who have volunteered to become Validators. Once the Validator has completed a detailed Feedback sheet both it and the original submission are forwarded to the Chief Validator who acts as a Moderator. We have tried to make the system as fair as we can - and there is an Appeals procedure which is clearly shown on the Guild website. I was an experienced guide before I undertook the Badge process but can honestly say that I benefited from working through the assignments.

Regarding the example of someone apparently being turned down for Badging I find that strange because since 2007 I have been the Guild's Validation Secretary. Anyone wishing to attempt Assignment One has to apply to me and show evidence of some previous guiding experience. Simply having an in-depth knowledge of wandering the battlefields for decades is not enough by itself. Any guides reading this will know that it is a vastly different matter when one is taking a group, who may or may not be known to the guide, and for whom one is responsible for matters of (say) timings, transport, accommodation, duty of care, health and safety etc etc in addition to making the battlefields about which one is passionate come to life for them. If the individual cited was told that he/she did not have enough guiding experience then they will have been given advice on how such experience may be gained.

A great deal has been written on this thread over the last day and it may be that 'never the twain shall meet'. All I would say is don't judge the Guild by what you hear from people who may or may not be well-informed. Look at our website, which is open to all, and come to a Guild event and see for yourselves.

Alison Hine, Badge 36, Validation Secretary Guild of Battlefield Guides

[healdav]

I think it would be nice to have some sort of organisation to which guides could belong, and membership of which is some sort of indication, if not guarantee, that what the person is telling you is the truth and not just made up.

What I object to with this guild is that I have found over the years is that people I guide want to see a battlefield - Verdun, say - and get an idea what happened; see the forts, look in the Ossuary, perhaps walk around some of the trenches, etc and ruined villages. They have no interest in being told that on 24 April, the 2nd Platoon of the 44th Regiment, stopped here and had lunch. Indeed, if you tell them, five minutes later they have forgotten.

The impression is what they want.

I always mail people who ask me to guide and tell them that if they want to see something specific, see where a particular unite was, etc, then tell me NOW and I can research and make sure they see what interest them.

The thought of researching a battle (what about, say, Bois le Pretre where the battle started in September 1914 and finished in September 1918?)

Much more important than knowing a battle is to know places not on the ordinary tourist trip, places that are untouched since the war, and for the guide to be able to explain what people are seeing in an interesting manner.

I have only had one couple who complained vociferously about my ignorance from the USA, and that tour had begun with the wife asking exactly who was fighting at Verdun! and refusing to believe that the US army had not taken part. She didn't even know that the USA wasn't in the war, then. Then I discovered that she was handicapped - my fault, obviously. My car was unsuitable for off-roading (a Toyota Land Cruise!).

Other than that I have had nothing but praise for what I do.

Who needs a badge?

[chrislock]

Alison. Would you not echo any of the positive and constructive points offered by well meaning and dedicated guides/forum members posting on this thread also? Or is it a case you simply do not wish to acknowledge their valid input also and praise your own only? I cannot believe that some of the posts made here by non GBG people is not just as valid or helpful!

[Guest exuser1]

SG, Willywombat and Simon Worrall are doing sterling work in putting the record straight about the Guild. I would echo everything they have said so far but just want to pick up on a couple of other points.

The Guild was formed just over 10 years ago and currently has over 330 members. Of these, 59 have completed the assessments required to become Badged; the award of the Guild Badge indicates that the holder is an experienced guide who has attained a verified level of expertise. The 9 requirements/tasks for the Badge have been carefully worked out according to current educational thinking and submissions are assessed against clearly defined required outcomes. The people who do the assessing are Badged Guides who have volunteered to become Validators. Once the Validator has completed a detailed Feedback sheet both it and the original submission are forwarded to the Chief Validator who acts as a Moderator. We have tried to make the system as fair as we can - and there is an Appeals procedure which is clearly shown on the Guild website. I was an experienced guide before I undertook the Badge process but can honestly say that I benefited from working through the assignments.

Regarding the example of someone apparently being turned down for Badging I find that strange because since 2007 I have been the Guild's Validation Secretary. Anyone wishing to attempt Assignment One has to apply to me and show evidence of some previous guiding experience. Simply having an in-depth knowledge of wandering the battlefields for decades is not enough by itself. Any guides reading this will know that it is a vastly different matter when one is taking a group, who may or may not be known to the guide, and for whom one is responsible for matters of (say) timings, transport, accommodation, duty of care, health and safety etc etc in addition to making the battlefields about which one is passionate come to life for them. If the individual cited was told that he/she did not have enough guiding experience then they will have been given advice on how such experience may be gained.

A great deal has been written on this thread over the last day and it may be that 'never the twain shall meet'. All I would say is don't judge the Guild by what you hear from people who may or may not be well-informed. Look at our website, which is open to all, and come to a Guild event and see for yourselves.

Alison Hine, Badge 36, Validation Secretary Guild of Battlefield Guides

With the mention of timings , transport and accommodation ,duty of care and H/S are we talking tour manager or battlefield guide ,2 very different animals .

[Cormorant]

Of course I would also echo positive and constructive points when they are made, by whoever is making them. It also seems to me that many of the individuals who have posted on this thread are well-meaning and dedicated guides who would probably enjoy the Guild and gain from membership if only they would give it a try.

Alison

[Cormorant]

With the mention of timings , transport and accommodation ,duty of care and H/S are we talking tour manager or battlefield guide ,2 very different animals .

In my experience, it is a lucky guide these days who has the luxury of a tour manager accompanying him/her. However, the point I was seeking to make is that there is more to being a guide than just knowing a particular patch of ground inside out.

Alison

[Guest exuser1]

In my experience, it is a lucky guide these days who has the luxury of a tour manager accompanying him/her. However, the point I was seeking to make is that there is more to being a guide than just knowing a particular patch of ground inside out.

Alison

so are we talking tour guide one size fits all or a battlefield guide ? as I stated earlier I witnessed earlier this year a induction tour for perspective guides for the Guild ,mainly ex army and this was seen as a career move , I would not expect to be on a 70 seater coach touring the Western Front and have just one man running the show , most reputable companies would supply a separate tour manger ,it's a completely different job , yes the guide may be aware of first aid various aspects of H/S but not tickets, accommodation for a group or any other emergency situation , having visited the Guilds site could not find the part that he or she is safety trained bi lingual ,driver and jack of all trades .

[ianjonesncl]

In my experience, it is a lucky guide these days who has the luxury of a tour manager accompanying him/her. However, the point I was seeking to make is that there is more to being a guide than just knowing a particular patch of ground inside out.

Alison

The validation programme 4th task:

4.Draw up a chart delineating the differences between a Guide and a Tour Manager or design a feedback questionnaire allowing people to comment/report on your tour

The requirements around timings , transport and accommodation ,duty of care and H/S do not appear to be in the task list.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Tom, ... No-one evers fails Task 1, or any other Task. Rather one is 'Referred' ...

Simon - maybe I misunderstood this, but I'm old-school. In my day you either passed your driving test or you failed. You passed your "A" Levels, or you didn't. - If you didn't pass whatever it was, then you failed. You could often "re-sit" these sort of things, but the fact was, you had failed. In the GofBFG instance I listened to an explanation for refusal which was given, which was so outlandishly stupid ... but then I wasn't there so I do not have first-hand knowledge to be able to tell you that what I was told was the absolute truth. Perhaps it wasn't.

... There is more to guiding than simply having heaps of battle knowledge and sometimes I feel the GBG overlook this. ...

Chris. So true. Also; microscopic knowledge of every battle and every battlefield from Anno Domini to date is worth near to nowt when the holder of such knowledge has the personality of a brick.

Tom

1762220BST

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown.")

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... Not least guiding is cliquey - I was effectively stopped from undertaking Great War tours because of an individual whose rudeness and arrogance was legion amongst guides and who took a dislike to me. ...

David - my lips are sealed. Apart from noting that we would be singing from the same hymn sheet, what can I say ? No names, no pack drill

Tom

1762232BST

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown.")

[Guest exuser1]

Perhaps what may put a few people's backs up is when checking the Guilds site under members benefits quotes such as being a member of a professional body ? and being a member of a ELITE GROUP ! may not be to everyone's cup of tea , I baulked at the £75 joining fee .

[David Filsell]

Thanks Tom, I have had a couple of personal notes about this - and guess what, they all named the same person. No pack, no drill needed"

[bushfighter]

I am an 'UNBADGED' member, but have a nice 'ordinary' badge which suits me. I'll probably never do a validation because of my distance from the South of England (which I don't care for anyway), and because my interests are in going round distant unexplored battlefields in remote 3rd World locations - and that's a bit different from shepherding smartly dressed clients from one 4* hotel to the next. But I support the Guild because I believe in the application of standards - they are something that have almost disappeared from today's world. However the curators of my two local NW England military museums both run battlefield tours for MoD parties - and neither curator to my knowledge has interest in the Guild. That is the Guild's weakness - if it cannot achieve mandatory support from the likes of the MoD then where does its credibility lie? But, a Guild Member who goes through the mill and becomes 'BADGED' has, in my humble opinion, done something a little like passing PARA or RM selection - he can then always 'jack' and hand his beret back - BUT HE DID IT! Harry Fecitt

[ianjonesncl]

But, a Guild Member who goes through the mill and becomes 'BADGED' has, in my humble opinion, done something a little like passing PARA or RM selection - he can then always 'jack' and hand his beret back - BUT HE DID IT! Harry Fecitt

So being badged is like passing P Company ................................