Excellent news.... , who knows other resorts might follow, which would be a bonus...

Posted by Robert on June 8, 2015 17:37

...and the gov't probably loves this idea too as they no longer feel obligated to have to take care of this themselves and now can pocket any money that would usually be allocated toward these job positions...they must be smiling again

Posted by sky on June 8, 2015 18:04

well done, someone has to step up to the plate if the gov. doesnt get its act together....

Posted by J on June 8, 2015 18:57

i live in phuket.and when in wietnam i could see the difference with life guards or no life guards.all beaches in vietnam have numerouse lifeguards, and numerous life vests. also a jet ski with a bunch of life vstsit's taken seriosly there

Posted by aki on June 8, 2015 19:05

Robert

nothing excellent at all, considering that the resort compensated mismanagement of beaches by local authorities - who DOES have money for enough lifeguards and equipment, but mishandle both this and other aspects of beach management.

Don't forget that the province collect 1% room tax from all hotel accommodations (and the province can rise it up to 3% if necessary) - that is absolutely direct link between tourist spendings in the prince and provincial budget.

However, as it was earlier reported by PW, half hotels on the iskahd remains not registered as hotels (lack of enforcement by the province), thus they escape room tax (collection of which is then responsibility of Revenue department) , and the province misses these funds in provincial coffers.

22Mio annually for 86 lifeguard is simply ridiculously small amount of midget, giving that of should cover salaries for every day presence , social insurance contributions, some expenses like uniforms etc., and the company profit.

The province is failed to establish sound framework how to organize lifeguard service : which equipment they need to do the job, who will own that equipment (probably, it should be the province ), legal framework for passing this equipment for use by lifeguard - and their responsibilities for maintenance etc., incl.allocating budget for it when tendering for their service.

As PW rightly put it, there is no oribkrm [problem?]with money - there is a problem with sound policies.

And, unlike some fellow commenters like MoW, who suppose that evil route is lack of professional competence by officials, I believe the primary cause is apparent unwillingness to resolve these problems as a result of direct or indirect conflict with their vested interests.

The professional competence in fact is no trust bad of Thai officialdom - one of examples is Assets Commision report unreveleaning Dr. Thaksin offshore scheme and his beneficial ownership - it was of so great prudesdinal level , that you may not find often in Europe or US for similar matters.

Posted by Sue on June 8, 2015 19:13

Good for them,

They are not the first though Meridian and Laguna have been doing for long time.

Posted by Michael on June 8, 2015 19:24

Sky,
I see it slightly differently. If the privately funded lifeguards are seen to eventually provide a professional service, other hotel/ resorts may follow suit and the need for government overseeing or control may not be required.
The Government may then just be required to make an annual contribution towards the cost and leave the operational aspects to a group of resorts in a specific location.
Governments are not good at leading from the front but many resort managers will be aware of what is provided in other countries, what equipment and training is required.
Eventually, these individual groups could co ordinate and standardise how the service is provided, share the use of high cost resources and even compete against each other to display the skills they have acquired.
The Australian surf live saving assoc is both a community service and amateur sport and although partly funded by local authorities and sponsors, most of the actual life saving work is undertaken by volunteers.
What's more, they do a very professional and mostly unrewarded job.

Posted by Manowar on June 8, 2015 19:43

Sue,
I agree that vested interests do not always result in good decisions, however, you can never solve a problem unless you understand what the problem is, why it exists, what is a proper solution and how much it will cost.
Then there are some problems that cannot be solved either due to costs or disturbance, in which case the best solution is to minimise the short term impact using the resources available and plan to reduce the cause or reduce the problem over a defined period of time.

Posted by Manowar on June 8, 2015 20:03

This will have a negative impact over time. When each hotel has its own lifeguard service, there will be an issue of when and where do they respond, and whether there will be a consistent level of quality. This rewards the ineptitude of the local authorities for their failure to provide proper protection. It also subsidizes the illegal hotels and guest houses who contribute nothing to the upkeep of the beaches, nor support the basic lifeguard services.

Posted by Ryan on June 8, 2015 22:18

Well done, Kata Noi is my favorite
beach on Phuket.

Posted by Tuna on June 9, 2015 02:24

Manowar,

in regard of your proposal of community private-funded lifeguards, it seems, that you indeed somehow forgot for the moment which country it is about - and that local government continioulsy used this argument - of services related to beaches, provided by "local people" - to justify their misgovernance of the issue - they will be only happy if some farangs only will help them sing this song.

Examples are the following - which you surely know, or herad about very sismilar ones:

- Karon municipality to justify privilges given to Karaon-Kata co-op, usually used an argument that 'local people clean the local beaches, so they take care about enviroment"
- Surin municiplaity ecpolained that there is no wastebaskets at all on Surin beach ' cause "they look not nice", so tourist should drop their garbage on the sand , as "sunbed operators will clean everything after"

As you can see they developed strategy to justify certain group access to say 1billion baht per year financial benefits on account that they provide some service that mau cost to municipality 1million baht per year...

Same about lifeguards - then certain groups or hotels will be given teh same or similar benefits.

And indeed, ratio of farang becahgoers vs. Thai beachgoers on Phuket is probably 100:1, but in Australia is vice versa, probably 1:20, as very few people goes to Australia for beach baking holidays.

Take a care, not to make use of yourself by local Big Papas ;)

In regard of technical solutioin about ebaches, everything except one thing - how to manage sunbeds/umbrellas - is either in Blue Flag code or in recent

ISO 13009:2015

Tourism and related services -- Requirements and recommendations for beach operation

ISO 20712-1:2007

Water safety signs and beach safety flags -- Part 1: Specifications for water safety signs used in workplaces and public areas

ISO 20712-2:2007

Water safety signs and beach safety flags -- Part 2: Specifications for beach safety flags -- Colour, shape, meaning and performance

ISO 20712-3:2014
Water safety signs and beach safety flags -- Part 3: Guidance for use

Posted by Sue on June 9, 2015 04:29

Sue and Ryan,
I agree this issue should not have to organised and funded privately by the resorts and responsibility should be with local authorities.
It is also clear that these authorities really do not care about providing this service with continuity.
A resort has taken it upon themselves to provide a life saving service at their own cost for protection of their customers and other beach users. Whether it works long term will be seen but they have at least realised a problem exists and found a solution that they are able to implement and have some level of control.
Hopefully it works well enough to embarrass the authorities, whoever that ends up being, into providing this service permanently. We can only hope!

Posted by Manowar on June 9, 2015 09:28

Great news that the Kata Thani is doing this. Good for the lifeguards that they can go to Karon Beach. Still not enough of these folks for the size of the beaches. Mabe this will help the private sector do more in supporting the beaches that they all use on the brochures and marketing their websites.

Posted by Jiminkata on June 9, 2015 11:22

Compliments for this private Resort/Hotel!

Shame on Phuket officials and authorities!
Earning millions of room tax from hotels, ment for Phuket tourist infrastructures, but now not spent on it.

Posted by Kurt on June 9, 2015 14:11

Finally somebody with enough nouse has arrived on the scene.... wonderful news guys.... lets hope it may have a knock on effect and see all other beaches properly manned/equipped etc...

Posted by DG on June 9, 2015 14:52

Manowar,

as you well know, in this country a lot f things are not said expressly, but are implied, sometimes by action.

That "mismanagement" by authorities of beach issues is not by negligence or 'cause f lack professional competence, but well-planned escalating of "desperation feeling" among public to throw in the solution they favor:
authorities are playing the old game with everything related to beach management, by not taking an action they create situations - e.g. not cleaned at all beaches, apparent shortage of lifeguards coverage and apparent under-equipping of them , coerce public opinion into accepting weird solution that
e.g. jet ski boys "who will clean the beach"
( what a sigh of relief after few weeks of not cleaned beaches at all..; but employing beach cleaners who would go around every cm2 of the beach every morning and before twilight would certainly cost not more that the total current lifeguards bdg of 22M THB - can't the province find 22M THB (650,000USD..?) to do that beach cleaning properly like in any other major beach tourist destination ??)

Similar with lifeguards - and the need for extra lifeguards and upgrade of their equipment is apparent for everyone. Can't the province buy the equipment and increase the number of lifeguards, by, say, doubling this bdg? Of course they can - especially if they would collect room tax from all the Phuket hotels, half of which are not registered like hotels and evade paying this provincial tax; or build fewer "Patong City sighs" and alike.
But most important that such solution when some hotels provide lifeguards themselves well fit authorities rules of game:
" yes, beaches are well maintained by local people : sunbed operators collect garbage on Surin, jet ski boys clean beaches on Patong, and XXX hotel taking care of lifeguards at YYY beach".
There was mention that LeMeridien used to have its own lifeguards - that , of course, is again a part of the same game: authorities do not bother hotel that it prohibit non-residents to attend the beach, thus making it private, in exchange the hotel doesn't bother authorities with request spend public money on lifeguards, if these money are better used for "Patng city signs"

Now that we are celebrating that the hotel put its own lifeguards at Kata Noi out of desperation - it is exactly what the authorities planned, that joy of resolving the problem - that objectively exists - will disguise both that the problem is man-made and shoukd not have happen at all and that such outcome well fit larger picture of how they want beach services to be run.

Posted by Sue on June 9, 2015 17:30

Sue,
First I must say it is nice to again be back in your focus. I thought you had given up on me and directed your attention to that other floozie.
The questions that you raise are relevant but it also appears that every problem on Phuket has simple and logical solutions that are never considered.
Whether that is due to people in high places, or due to an inability to make a decision and stand by it or whether it's just the 'Thai Way' of finding middle ground between interested parties, I don't know but to a foreigner it looks like higher forces have the final say.
This may be right, wrong or a mix of both.
So is the problem caused by a reluctance to change the existing commission structure or is it caused by having people in positions of authority who have neither the ability or desire to impact on the wealth of those who helped them get to their current position by towing the line?
You and I can consider any problem from many angles. Using the life savers as an example, we consider loss of life, bad publicity, reductions in future earnings, possible compensation or liability and a feeling of responsibility if an accident occurred due to a service we failed to provide. We only consider these issues from what we know and have seen occurs in the developed world. We have grown up in surroundings where certain standards are met or provided to us and this is just normal and the minimum we expect.

Then consider from the Thai perspective. These services have never been provided before, we have never needed them, we don't have holidays let alone on the coastal beaches, many of us work today to feed our families tonight and if lucky, enough to feed them tomorrow as well. This is the standard that they are used to and nothing looks out of place.

We place a different value on a life, we by choice can mitigate a loss, we can afford to plan for the future and most have already mapped out some sort of retirement plan. We place a higher level of importance on what levels of risk we are willing to accept.

I don't believe all strange decisions or non decisions are made solely due to corruption even though sometimes there does not appear to be any other reasonable answer. Some will be but others caused by not realising a problem first exists, not making a decision avoids making the wrong one and a reluctance to change from what is just considered normal and always has been that way.

I grew up on beaches, understand the risks, have seen how quickly conditions can change and I would never let one of my kids get into a situation at the beach that was beyond my reach. I don't see any benefit for me or my family in having lifesavers as I will decide where they can swim, how safe it is and how far they can go.
I do see a great benefit for those who rarely go to the beach or only when on holidays, have no understanding of the dangers and let themselves or their family members get into a situation where assistance may be required to survive.

Posted by Manowar on June 9, 2015 19:07

Hi Alan,
I believe we all agree corruption is a problem for Thailand and also for many other countries. We all talk about corruption but when we attempt to define what should be considered corrupt and what level, it becomes more difficult.

Corruption has now taken on such a broad definition it is hard to establish what is and is not corrupt.
If we take two definitions; abuse of ones position of power for personal gain and; a wrongdoing, either intentional or reckless, it becomes even more complicated.

The obvious, at higher levels would include taking of a payment for awarding a contract or using public funds for personal use or gain.

How do we then consider the bus driver who allows his friend to travel for free or the barman who serves his friend a free drink. This would fall under the category of a wrong doing against the interests of his employee. However, the same free drink may result with his friend choosing this same bar more often and as he pays for the majority of drinks he consumes, overall the bar owner is better off. So is this corruption or marketing?

Another example would be a person responsible for the tenders of a major civil project. This person is in a position of power as he determines who is awarded these projects. Is it his job to achieve the lowest possible cost or a fair and reasonable price for the works?
If he accepts the lowest tender price but he knows the contractor cannot complete the works for this amount and will probably go broke half way through the project, is this the best use of community funds. The project will be delayed and any new contractor will apply a margin above expected costs to carry the liability for work completed by others. In the end the cost will exceed what would be a fair and reasonable price for the work.
If he chose not to accept the lowest price based on his experience and realising that the lowest tenderer could not complete the project for this cost, is accepting a higher priced tender a wrongdoing and does it appear that this decision is corrupt.
After all, all contractors priced the work on the same specification, contractors would have been screened to ensure they were qualified and capable.

The lowest tenderer cannot understand why, when he submitted the lowest price he was not awarded the job.
He assumes an outside influence or corruption but there is justified reason why he did not get the job.
He complains to authorities who have no experience in civil projects and all they can see is that the lowest price was not accepted despite all prices being based on the same scope of work. To the public this appears a corrupt decision.

Is a bottle of Scotch at Christmas time an attempt to influence future decisions, then what value and brand is acceptable or not.
Is a free lunch to discuss awarding of work or a job an attempt to gain an advantage?

After successfully completing a road relaying job the contractor says to the authority project manager, "thanks for all your help arranging traffic controls and diversion, we couldn't have completed the job without your assistance. I have a 10m cruiser at the marina, why don't you take your family out on it for the weekend?".
Is this corruption or is this just saying thank you for your help.?
Joe Smith is seen out on the contractor's cruiser at the weekend by a work college. How does he consider this situation?

There are so many situations in all societies where decisions could be seen as corrupt but are not and the reverse also applies.

Excluding the obvious being payment of cash or a direct personal gain, I can neither provide a definition of everything that is corrupt nor above what value or level a benefit, advantage or favour should be considered corrupt.

I can understand the difficulty for all authorities trying to address this issue.

Posted by Manowar on June 10, 2015 19:44