FIC Protects Against Personal Training and AED Legislation in Ontario
| Proposed legislation in Ontario which, if passed, could affect personal training and civil liability concerning AEDs for fitness companies, was recently addressed on behalf of the industry by Fitness Industry Council of Canada and Can-Fit-Pro. |  |
Personal Training
Within the legislation is the proposed regulation of the Kinesiology industry. The proposed legislation inadvertently includes personal training as a subset of Kinesiology. FIC’s argument, which was submitted to the Standing Committee on Social Policy on April 23, 2007, states that while some kinesiologists are practicing personal trainers within a fitness setting, not all personal trainers are kinesiologists and should therefore not be inadvertently captured in the proposed legislation.
If this legislation is passed, the worse case scenario would see all personal trainers required to be accredited as kinesiologists. Fines for non-compliance are $25,000 for the first offence and $50,000 for each subsequent offence.
If the intent of the proposed legislation is to include only those kinesiologists practicing as personal trainers, and not all personal trainers regardless of certification, FIC asked the Standing Committee on Social Policy to clarify both the Scope of Practice and those professions included as a subset of kinesiology to reflect only those Health Professionals with kinesiology accreditation. If the intent of the legislation is to regulate all personal trainers, regardless of certification, FIC requested that an in-depth and focused analysis be completed to fully ascertain the impacts such regulation would have on the personal training industry and on the Canadian fitness industry as a whole.
We believe such legislation will be detrimental
Of the 12 million people currently living in Ontario, approximately 15%, or 1.8 million people, participate in a fitness facility. Standardization of personal training under the proposed legislation, without differentiation between services offered by accredited kinesiologists operating as personal trainers and personal trainers working within a fitness setting, could not only cause irreparable harm to the industry but could also result in higher rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and inactivity related conditions for clients and members as well as financial hardship for personal trainers and facility operators within the fitness industry.
AED Legislation
Also buried within the proposed legislation were amendments to the Heart Defibrillator Civil Liability Act. Though the proposed legislation promotes protection from civil liability for an individual using an AED and an owner or operator of a facility providing an AED, it neglects to offer protection from liability on behalf of a corporation (for example, a fitness company). FIC requested the Standing Committee on Social Policy protect the assets of a corporation in the event of injury or death due to cardiac arrest.
The legislation also fails to address the issue of non-use of a defibrillator if the equipment is on premises. Such non-use could be a result of misdiagnoses or inability to perform. The current legislation protects the individual (for example, a staff member who is the first to respond to an emergency situation within a fitness facility) from civil liability in the event of non-use. That is, if a staff member freezes and is unable to administer the AED, he or she will be protected from liability. Unfortunately, the current draft of the legislation does not extend the same protection to the business owner and operator or the corporation providing the equipment. FIC asked the proposed legislation to be changed to include non-use protection for the individual, the owner and operator of a facility and the corporation.
“FIC is dedicated to tracking legislation which may affect our industry. This piece of Ontario legislation is an example of what can be passed without input from business owners who will be most affected,” says Dave Hardy, President of FIC. “It’s important we continue to be involved in the consultation process of developing legislation so we can ensure our industry is both represented and protected.”
Rod MacDonald, Vice President of Can-Fit-Pro, and Stephane Cova, Certification Director for Can-Fit-Pro, both attended hearings on behalf of FIC at the end of April. Results of the hearings will likely not be published for some time, though FIC will continue to track and provide updates on the legislation.
Are you dealing with legislation in your province which may affect the fitness industry? Please contact Megan Dart, Communications Coordinator for FIC, at mdart@ficdn.ca for information on how to best represent yourself, your business and your industry when dealing with government.
Popularity: 21% [?]
May 2nd, 2007 at 6:27 am
I think this is an excellent idea, as there are too many people calling themselves “Personal Trainers” with as little as a one weekend course on the subject.
I am a Personal Trainer as well as the Supervisor of all the Personal Trainers in my organization - and we have all completed our degree as well as our CFC and or PFLC certifications. We are out there - now it’s just a matter of the government backing us in our chosen career.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
The worst case scenario is quite scary.
My first professional role in fitness years ago was and continues to be as an aerobic instructor. When, after years of teaching group fitness, continuing education workshops, practicing and trying out new exercises, and basically walking the talk, I took the personal trainer certification to be accredited doing one-on-one what I had been doing for years 30-40- and 50 to one. There were kinesiology students in my “weekend course” who didn’t know the difference between a ballistic stretch and a static stretch, and some who didn’t even know how to stretch the various muscles.
Just because a trainer doesn’t have a degree, doesn’t make them unprofessional or lacking knowledge. By the same token, just because a trainer has a degree, doesn’t make them better or more knowledgeable than one who doesn’t.
Just as there are many CEO’s
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Oops, hit the wrong button.
I was going to say, just as there are CEO’s who don’t have degrees but do a great job of running companies, there are many knowledgeable trainers without degrees to do a great job of training, particularly because they’ve taken that journey themselves and have sought out knowledge because they truly wanted to know more, usually to help someone they were working with, and not simply because they were fulfilling the course requirements for a degree.
I personal train, teach all kinds of fitness classes, have trained for for triathlons, and own and operate my own fitness club in Toronto, all without a degree.
May 2nd, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I agree that there are too many individuals calling themselves “personal trainers” with no qualification to do so. The statements provided in the document above contain a lot of the misinformation given by “for-profit” organizations that provide designations based on a weekend course. If you look at the requirements of being a CSEP-certified professional and/or kinesiologist you will see that there are major differences in the Scope of Practice and core competencies of these university educated specialists. The public is increasingly becoming aware of the need for university-trained health and fitness professionals. Regulation is long overdue and warranted. Congratulations to the government of Ontario for attempting to regulate an industry that truly needs regulation.
May 22nd, 2007 at 8:08 am
Let me make this clear that in my facility every personal trainer is certified. So i do agre that there should be some form of regulations against non certified trainers and very high fines. But I do agree that Kin’s are most of the time not even close to the practical knowledge required to guarantee results for clients. If this is there chosen perfession than they need to know nutrition and training tech. to get the job done.. Which then means now everyone would have to take Kinesiology and Nutrition as an undergrad to be truely certified, where does it end. I am the director for 30 trainers and all are certified in nutrition as part of our companies futher education program!!!
May 30th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
I so agree we need regulation in our profession. I currently work in British Columbia as a Registered Personal Trainer and Trainer of Fitness Leaders, with the BCRPA Fitness Branch. I went to UBC in the 70’s and have a PHED degree not a Kin Degree–matter of fact Kinesiology was not available when I was at University.
I am a regional committee member for our registration and we are working on a project to mandate BCRPA registration in British Columbia, based on the standards we have created for all Fitness Professionals. We are not demanding that everyone have a KIn degree as that would wipe out almost 75% of our registered Personal Trainers.
But we are trying to stop those individuals who believe a weekend course gives them the right to Personal train.
I also agree with the comment above–I believe you don’t need to have a degree to personal train, but you certainly need post secondary education–college or other wise–with a curriculum that follows the standards of the industry and tests the individual for their competancies.