Confidentiality and Internal Communications
FlowState Divers depends on honest, unguarded communication between mentors and staff - about candidates, about complaints, about difficult judgement calls that don't have a clean answer in this document. That kind of honesty only survives in a space that stays private. This page sets out what confidentiality actually means in practice, and what happens when it's broken.
What Counts as Internal Communication
Why This Matters
A mentor raising a concern about a peer, a difficult call about a diver's readiness, or an honest disagreement about how a standard should apply to an unusual situation - none of this happens candidly if the person raising it has to worry about it becoming public, or reaching the individual being discussed through a route other than the formal process designed for that purpose. Confidentiality here is not about secrecy for its own sake. It is what allows the quality processes described elsewhere in this document to actually function, rather than existing on paper while everyone quietly avoids saying anything honest in a channel that might leak.
What Is Expected
Every mentor and staff member with access to internal communications is expected to:
- Keep discussion of candidates, complaints, evaluations, and internal organisational matters within the official channels they were shared through.
- Refrain from screenshotting, forwarding, or otherwise removing internal discussion from its intended context, even where the intent behind sharing it feels justified at the time.
- Raise concerns about a peer, a policy, or a decision through the appropriate internal channel or the complaint process, rather than airing them publicly first.
- Exercise the same discretion when discussing internal matters informally - in conversation, at industry events, on personal social media - as would be expected within the official channel itself.
What Happens When Confidentiality Is Broken
A mentor who knowingly allows internal discussion to become public knowledge - whether through direct disclosure, careless forwarding, or public commentary on a matter that was meant to remain internal - is subject to the disciplinary process set out elsewhere in this document. This applies regardless of intent. A breach caused by carelessness is treated seriously, even where it wasn't caused by malice, because the damage to trust in the system is the same either way.
This Does Not Protect Wrongdoing
Confidentiality within internal channels is not a mechanism for concealing misconduct, and it is never invoked to discourage a mentor or staff member from reporting a genuine concern through the proper process. The expectation set out on this page governs how internal discussion is handled once it exists appropriately within our official channels - it does not limit anyone's right or obligation to raise a complaint, flag an issue, or seek review through the routes this document provides. Confidentiality protects candid internal discussion. It does not protect anyone from accountability for what that discussion reveals.