to not do Safeguarding training?

[Sausagenbacon]

I belong to a church, and occasionally serve coffee at the end of the service. I am being asked to take Safeguarding training, which I think is utterly pointless.
I have expressed this and been told that it's policy, and I have to do it.
AIBU to just stop doing coffee?

@Combattingthemoaners the charity I volunteer there was no form. Write it out on a bit of paper. I do safeguarding training every year as I have to and it does seem pointless. Like OP I do not volunteer with children. The online course is so basic it is common sense. As long as you know who the current safeguarding officer is and how to contact them, everything else is so basic and just common sense.

I'm a teacher, we of course have regular SG training, and there are normally plenty of people yawning and dozing - I'm also Health & Safety officer and RPO, in fact RPO now for several schools, both of which need yet more regular training.

To a certain extent it's box ticking, but it does refresh your memory, and update on developments.

I do agree with the OP that for such a role as hers, a very brief 10 minutes explaining the concept and telling her who to talk to (SO). Sadly jumping through hoops is killing volunteering!!

Sadly jumping through hoops is killing volunteering!!

Sadly a view that everyone in churches is just lovely and that they know best and shouldn't be bothering with such pointless stuff because that would NEVER happen here - well, that isn't doing churches, or people who need to be able to trust them, too much good either.

I am also involved in my church, and 'safeguarding training' usually just means reading a few pages in a file and letting the safeguarding lead (usually the vicar) know if there are any questions or doubts you are not sure about.
In my case at least it was nothing onerous. Unless you will be working with the Sunday school, in which case you would need a DRB check.

Surely part of safeguarding training is knowing what to look out for so that you know what needs referring to the safeguarding officer?

Everyone knows to report abuse of someone says “I’m being abused” but that’s rarely what happens.

Surely it’s a good opportunity to further your knowledge? We all hope that we won’t have to use safe guarding training but you may end up passing a cup of tea to someone who needs safeguarding.

Of course safeguarding is necessary. And things to be aware of can change from year to year, for example at the moment there is a lot of far right terrorism and incel violence. Might not be a problem and we can hope it won’t be, but you just never know.

I wasn’t telling you anything, I was expanding on your point - even litter picking there could be reasons to need safeguarding training. It’s not just about if your volunteering helps vulnerable people, it’s also whether you might be volunteer working alongside someone vulnerable. No disagreement with your point and no judgement was meant on you or your level of training.

@herewegoagainy - it’s not only children who need safeguarding. Vulnerable adults can also be victims of abuse.

@herewegoagainy the issue with saying there will always be someone else there who can deal with the issue can lead to everyone thinking someone else will deal with it and in fact no-one ends up doing anything. Hence, why you are taught safeguarding is everyone's responsibility. Obviously, OP won't have to investigate it but might need to report something.

People saying it is just common sense, how often do you see on here posters telling people to keep their sticky beak out of other people's business. Not everyone has common sense when it comes to safeguarding. Doing a course concentrates your mind on it

I tend to think OP that in some cases sending people on training and background checks can be pointless. I know that it's not the general tenor of the age, but not every role really requires this.

Serving coffee and tea at church isn't more likely to be a risk scenario than attending and drinking the tea, and we don't ask people to train for that! Or working at a place like McDonalds, for example.

My natural inclination is to resist demands for certifications of any kind that don't clearly have an evidence base or which constitute box checking. It ends up shutting people out, who might otherwise be able to participate, and I also think it gets into money making schemes for people delivering the training. The former is important in a church setting IMO, serving tea is something almost any adult can do with very low risk as it's completely public.

All this being said - churches generally can't do much because these demands are driven by insurance companies. They don't actually care about safeguarding, they are looking to find ways to reduce potential liability, and also create grounds for refusing to cover. (It's notable what kinds of organizations they demand jump through these hoops, too. Not McDonald's, that's for sure.)

Personally I think the whole insurance industry needs an overhaul and significant changes to regulation, and a public uprising is totally in order, but that is a bridge too far for most people. (And I am aware that sounds nutty but I have had terrible experiences with insurers over the past 10 years, it's not coming out of nowhere.)

The church won't find insurers with other approaches, so in the end it's whether you feel it's worth taking one for the team or making it a personal protest.

Do you really think in order to serve tea after church people need to learn how to look for signs of far right terrorism?

How are they going to know what to report without the training? Plenty of things may be missed. Someone who has an issue with learning more to help the vulnerable probably shouldn’t be working there even if it’s just “giving out tea”.

I agree with you.

Are they making the men undergo safeguarding ? Do they serve coffee too?

She’s not working there, it’s not her job.

Doesn’t matter if it’s her job, she’s technically still working there handing out tea. Baffled why anyone wouldn’t want the information needed to identity people in need.

What a strange attitude. Quite honestly, the church needs s many people who have undergone safeguarding training as possible.

@Sausagenbacon so you understand the various things that fall under safeguarding that you might be presented with from fellow volunteers and service users?

you know it’s more than sexual abuse.

You know it includes domestic violence. Self neglect. Carer abuse etc.

You know how to handle it if someone confides in you.

You know what you can/cant/shouldn’t say or promise them.

Do you care for your fellow humans at all - I’m just at a loss why 1 hour of your time for a refresher training is such a hardship.

Are you worried that you might not pass the training? The training is very easy and you do not ‘fail’ it as you can re-take as many times if there is a need to do a questionnaire.

if you are just against the idea then whether you are right or wrong is pointless; if you want to do coffee you need to do the course. They’re not going to change the rules for you.

@crumblingschools people here are talking about scenarios that may happen with for example an elderly person in tears saying they want to be dead. No one is going to ignore that. But in OPs situation she can comfort the person and then get someone in charge to deal with what happens next.

People being paid to serve in cafes do not have to do safeguarding training.

Just do the training! An hour out of your life and you'll be able to help someone if they need it. I really don't understand why someone would potentially leave a volunteer role over this. It's just one of those things that's required for a good reason.

My church asked EVERYONE in the congregation to do it.

It was a real pain. It took 2 hours and was a total pointless waste of my time. DH and I are both teachers, so up to date on training. There are doctors, nurses and midwives in the congregation. Massive waste of time and money.

They also aren't volunteering for an organisation with safeguarding obligations

I think I'm largely on the side of the OP on this one. Anything formalised as "safeguarding training" is overkill for some of these very basic helping after the service tasks - anyone at all in the congregation is as likely as anyone serving the teas to find themselves having a conversation that leads to a concern. At which point there will be others also around with whom they can share a concern or to whom they can direct that person.

We certainly cannot entertain a suggestion that "if you want to join our church you will have to have a safeguarding certificate". Which would be the merest of tiny steps from the OPs situation of being asked to do it to help with the teas.

So what is right as an alternative? Clear information on the church noticeboards and in the newsletter / pew sheets, and regularly talking in church about how do we make a difference, where the "if you are worried about someone here what do you do next?" message can be shared alongside wider issues.

Tickbox requirements will just get people's backs up. There's a wealth of difference between helping with the teas, helping clean the church, helping with the creche or Sunday school or joining the parish church council! Appropriate requirements for all these voluntary jobs should not be the same! (doi yes I've done most of these at various times in the past)