Professional Saddle Fitters Association (H&H article today)

[Widgeon]

Can anyone share any background on the reasoning for setting up this body, or how it's anticipated to work? Do you think it will be a good thing or open up problems? I'm just curious, as the statement in the H&H article from the SMS ("did not wish to comment ") suggests to me that it's been a bit of an acrimonious process. However IMHO I have always found it a little bit suprising that the SMS (who seem to be primarily to maintain standards in saddle making - correct me if I'm wrong though) would also be overseeing saddle fitting, which is an additional set of skills.

I'd love to know what the saddle fitters of the forum think of this, although I realise it can be difficult to post personal opinions on a public forum when it relates to work.

 

[LEC]

I suspect it will allow all the one week training courses that Voltaire and Devoucoux run to be considered on parity with the SMS.

 

[sbloom]

I suspect it will allow all the one week training courses that Voltaire and Devoucoux run to be considered on parity with the SMS.

Absolutely not. It has quite stringent requirements from first look, annual CPD expectations as well as fulfilling lots of qualifying conditions. It has moved into the space left by the MSFC Society.

I am watching with interest, I know the parties involved. The industry is "interesting", with the SMS and MSFC "qualifications" (I believe that strictly speaking qualifications, the word, is reserved for those that can be provided by competitor organisations such as degrees and NVQs) only provided by their own organisations, a great deal of history (yes the SMS absolutely has it roots in the UK saddle making industry) and politics involved, in some ways, for both of them, and operating in an industry that is not held in very high regard by some. Something needs to change, this may or may not end up being part of a beneficial change.

 

[Andrea0000]

Can anyone share any background on the reasoning for setting up this body, or how it's anticipated to work? Do you think it will be a good thing or open up problems? I'm just curious, as the statement in the H&H article from the SMS ("did not wish to comment ") suggests to me that it's been a bit of an acrimonious process. However IMHO I have always found it a little bit suprising that the SMS (who seem to be primarily to maintain standards in saddle making - correct me if I'm wrong though) would also be overseeing saddle fitting, which is an additional set of skills.

I'd love to know what the saddle fitters of the forum think of this, although I realise it can be difficult to post personal opinions on a public forum when it relates to work.

Can anyone share any background on the reasoning for setting up this body, or how it's anticipated to work? Do you think it will be a good thing or open up problems? I'm just curious, as the statement in the H&H article from the SMS ("did not wish to comment ") suggests to me that it's been a bit of an acrimonious process. However IMHO I have always found it a little bit suprising that the SMS (who seem to be primarily to maintain standards in saddle making - correct me if I'm wrong though) would also be overseeing saddle fitting, which is an additional set of skills.

I'd love to know what the saddle fitters of the forum think of this, although I realise it can be difficult to post personal opinions on a public forum when it relates to work.

I think it should not be run by two tack shop owners it’s a conflict of interest .

 

[Industry-Watcher]

Why not do a little bit of Due Diligence on the individual purportedly running this outfit.

If you were to type his surname or his company name into the this very forums search box the results will tell you enough to raise a lot of warning flags.

What better way to attempt to gain credence from the Industry than to create a new organisation, award yourselves some post-nominal letters as a badge of authenticity and then fill the Executive with self-appointed Officers.

A few whispers in the industry tells me all may not be that harmonious at the top of the PSFA tree.

 

[Andrea0000]

Very well said !! The directors name shows on Companies house all the companies he is - was a director of .

 

[Industry-Watcher]

Thanks Andrea0000, you were right to raise a potential conflict of interest as being something new members should consider when looking at the PSFA.

Following this theme you might realistically ask the question why the Officers of the “not for profit” PSFA, which is committed to Continuous Professional Development by “Providing a broad range of saddle fitting training opportunities for all members” have coincidentally established PROFESSIONAL EQUINE ACADEMY LTD ( https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11911328/officers ).

I haven’t seen anything so far from the PSFA regarding financial governance so I suggest the membership raises a potential conflict here regarding the sourcing of educational material and any costs that might flow through the Limited company.

 

[Industry-Watcher]

I really think it’s time that someone in the industry made an effort, perhaps through the Horse & Hound themselves, to start revealing what an undemocratic outfit the PSFA really is.

Here’s just a taste of some interactions I know of:

- They are unable to publish the meeting minutes that resulted in the election of the President and Vice President
- They are unable to publish a copy of their Code of Conduct
- They refuse to investigate a damaging complaint against the President himself
- They refuse to put in place a confidential process that allows the complaint to be discussed without the President having open access to the mailbox
- Attempts to ask legitimate questions about the organisation through their Facebook pages are immediately censored

Need I go on.

I see SBloom has tried to raise questions with the organisation. Perhaps she might try some more searching questions

 

[sbloom]

Deleted.