Forums: Skydiving: General Skydiving Discussions:
Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Aug 6, 2012, 5:16 AM
Post #1 of 119 (3146 views)
Shortcut
Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting Can't Post

Sunday, August 05, 2012 Plenary Session:
Continuing the report out of the S&T Committee, a motion was put forward to include a request for an opinion poll to the entire skydiving community as part of the election ballot as to whether or not we should adopt a Wingsuit Rating Program. Naturally, there was some resistance to the language of the proposal but the intent was to provide full disclosure of what was being intended. The question of whether it should be a USPA administered program or should it be an independently administered program is part of the discussion. There was still much divisiveness amongst the BOD members on this issue. However, after much further discussion, the vote was 10 in favor, 8 opposed and 2 abstained in the vote for putting a poll out to the general membership with a link to the program proposed by Douglas Spotted Eagle to determine if the USPA should adopt the attached Wingsuit training program.
There will be a retroactive change to the governance manual such that to be considered as a candidate for being placed on the election ballot, the membership requirement will be for a two year period rather than continuous membership.
Regional Directors: There is still concern on the part of HQ that incident reports are not being submitted for all incidents and sometimes not even for fatalities. These reports are destroyed once they are summarized for educational information and group member dropzones will be encouraged to implement a process where incident reports are submitted and their original copies are destroyed in an appropriate timeframe.
Nominations for various awards were made. The gallery was not allowed to sit in on this discussion. That is all that I have as I had to leave to catch an airline flight.


Southern_Man  (C License)

Aug 6, 2012, 6:41 AM
Post #2 of 119 (3050 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There will be a retroactive change to the governance manual such that to be considered as a candidate for being placed on the election ballot, the membership requirement will be for a two year period rather than continuous membership.

I'm confused about this. Does this mean the candidates who missed the ballot because of issues w/ continuous membership will now be placed on the ballot?

Thanks for all your reports.


pms07  (D 7571)

Aug 6, 2012, 7:06 AM
Post #3 of 119 (3022 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

The wingsuit instructor proposal that was put before the Board is very professional and widely respected in our community. But some believe there is a more fundamental question that should be asked of the membership prior to implementing such a program. That is something like; "do you want the USPA to implement mandatory instructor rating programs for advanced skydiving disciplines?"

Some see a logical extension of the current initiative is for USPA to look at implementing ratings for other experienced skydiver activities such as "bigway instructors", 'swoop instructors", "camera instructors", "down sizing instructors", "CRW instructors", "freefly instructors", etc. To be fair, I don't believe there are any efforts in that direction currently but perhaps the broader question put to the membership would help guide the Board on whether or not USPA should persue this course.


Ron

Aug 6, 2012, 7:19 AM
Post #4 of 119 (3012 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
a motion was put forward to include a request for an opinion poll to the entire skydiving community as part of the election ballot as to whether or not we should adopt a Wingsuit Rating Program

Put out suggestions but don't create a rating. There are MUCH more important issues that the USPA should fix before trying to expand the organization.... Such as canopy deaths.

Quote:
Regional Directors: There is still concern on the part of HQ that incident reports are not being submitted for all incidents and sometimes not even for fatalities


At least once in the past the USPA gave 'privileged' information to an attorney to use in a lawsuit against a member. Only an idiot would give information to someone who did that once already.


JohnRich  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 7:32 AM
Post #5 of 119 (3007 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pms07] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Some see a logical extension of the current initiative is for USPA to look at implementing ratings for other experienced skydiver activities such as "bigway instructors", 'swoop instructors", "camera instructors", "down sizing instructors", "CRW instructors", "freefly instructors", etc. To be fair, I don't believe there are any efforts in that direction currently but perhaps the broader question put to the membership would help guide the Board on whether or not USPA should persue this course.

And if they create this bureaucratic mess of instructors, what are they going to do with them then? Will jumpers be required to make X number of jumps with such instructors before being allowed to participate in such activities? Will there by type-rating cards to fill out? Will they charge extra money for that "training"?

At some point, you've just got to trust the community of skydivers to take care of each other, just because we care. We train other jumpers informally as they progress, and as they express interest in different disciplines. And that has been working just fine for decades. You can't legislate everything.

But if you can have instructors for everything, then I want to be the official flat-packing instructor. No one will be allowed to flat pack without getting my approval first! I'll charge $20 per lesson, and I'll make millions!


(This post was edited by JohnRich on Aug 6, 2012, 7:34 AM)


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Aug 6, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #6 of 119 (2996 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

As long as they were in compliance with all of the other requirements, the two of those affected are to be on the ballot. That is Gary Peek and Randy Schroeder.


theonlyski  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 7:40 AM
Post #7 of 119 (2992 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
At least once in the past the USPA gave 'privileged' information to an attorney to use in a lawsuit against a member. Only an idiot would give information to someone who did that once already.

My question is, if they're receiving info on injuries/fatalities and they destroy it, wouldn't that be obstruction of justice? Wouldn't advising the GM's to destroy it be them telling the GM's to commit the obstruction?


In reply to:
But if you can have instructors for everything, then I want to be the official flat-packing instructor. No one will be allowed to flat pack without getting my approval first! I'll charge $20 per lesson, and I'll make millions!

I call dibs on being the pro packing I. Nobody does that flat pack shit anymore Tongue


Premier skybytch  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 8:17 AM
Post #8 of 119 (2966 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pms07] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
To be fair, I don't believe there are any efforts in that direction currently but perhaps the broader question put to the membership would help guide the Board on whether or not USPA should persue this course.

There's been an outcry to get some form of canopy related instruction/rating program in place for <expletive deleted> years now. How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a wingsuit before 200 jumps? How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a canopy that is beyond their ability to safely land in less than ideal conditions?

And yet it's wingsuits that get the attention. What happened to "education not regulation"? Oh, that only applies to canopies....

One more indication of how screwed up USPA is.


theonlyski  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 8:46 AM
Post #9 of 119 (2941 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.uspa.org/...9/Default.aspx#29084
Quote:
Beginning January 1, 2013, the stamped A-license proficiency and progression cards will no longer be considered valid licenses beyond 60 days. They can still be used to apply for an A-license beyond this time frame.

Also beginning January 1, 2013, all USPA instructional rating applications require a valid USPA license, in lieu of the FAI equivalent.

Those both sound like ways to get more money. There was already a point brought up somewhere on here (can't find the post off hand) that if they want to verify license applications are filled out correctly, they could do a courtesy check on it without issuing a license number.

Why not allow FAI licenses for USPA ratings?


airtwardo  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 8:55 AM
Post #10 of 119 (2932 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnRich] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

At some point, you've just got to trust the community of skydivers to take care of each other, just because we care.

We train other jumpers informally as they progress, and as they express interest in different disciplines.

And that has been working just fine for decades.

In reply to:

Two words~ Coach Rating.

Informal mentoring worked decades ago, but the need was obviously seen to legislate who & how even that is done.

I believe the uniform dissemination of pertinent information is the coming wave of the sport, and maybe not all that bad of a direction considering relatively recent history of the improper use of easily obtainable complex / high performance equipment.

I mean...you might have 10,000 hrs in a Cub, but additional training IS recommended prior to space-flight. Wink


DougH  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 8:59 AM
Post #11 of 119 (2926 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
http://www.uspa.org/...9/Default.aspx#29084
Quote:
Beginning January 1, 2013, the stamped A-license proficiency and progression cards will no longer be considered valid licenses beyond 60 days. They can still be used to apply for an A-license beyond this time frame.

Also beginning January 1, 2013, all USPA instructional rating applications require a valid USPA license, in lieu of the FAI equivalent.

Those both sound like ways to get more money. There was already a point brought up somewhere on here (can't find the post off hand) that if they want to verify license applications are filled out correctly, they could do a courtesy check on it without issuing a license number.

Why not allow FAI licenses for USPA ratings?

Absolutely. If a jumper has a stamped card and a current membership, then that should get to be their license for as long as they please.

Where is the issue here, other than USPA not getting more $$$.

My first license with a number was my B.


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Aug 6, 2012, 9:45 AM
Post #12 of 119 (2891 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

NO,

All four candidates who were ineligible by our governance manual are now on the ballot as per a retroactive rule change.


concernedjumper

Aug 6, 2012, 11:57 AM
Post #13 of 119 (2831 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi, Ive been watching this wingsuit debate for awhile now, and saw a post on facebook on Taya Weiss's wall that pointed out salaries and budgets for the USPA, and the post disappeared before I could copy it, and was very interested to review what she posted. Did anyone happen to copy that post before it was deleted? thank you!


Concerned Jumper


JohnRich  (D License)

Aug 6, 2012, 1:16 PM
Post #14 of 119 (2785 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
But if you can have instructors for everything, then I want to be the official flat-packing instructor. No one will be allowed to flat pack without getting my approval first! I'll charge $20 per lesson, and I'll make millions!

I call dibs on being the pro packing I. Nobody does that flat pack shit anymore Tongue

Yeah, but since everyone pro-packs, once they require mandatory and costly training for that, the jumpers will figure they'll start flat-packing to get around the new bureacracy. And that's where I come in - I'll have that loophole plugged tight by being the only USPA certified flat-packing instructor. And then they'll all have to pay ME if they want to continue to jump. I'm tellin' ya, this is a great get-rich quick scheme. Who cares if it kills everyone's enthusiasm to jump?


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Aug 6, 2012, 5:53 PM
Post #15 of 119 (2714 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

I do not believe your statement is correct, however I have been wrong before. I only know of two that were put back on ballot eligibility and I stress the word eligibility. They must still submit a bio, a photo, and a $50 payment to be on the ballot.


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Aug 6, 2012, 6:37 PM
Post #16 of 119 (2699 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Mike,
At the end of the meeting BJ brought forth an amendment to make the new definition retroactive making all four eligible to proceed with the election process. I am positive it is four candidates.
You may have left or not been in the room, it was late on Sunday.


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Aug 7, 2012, 7:12 AM
Post #17 of 119 (2614 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

If it was late on Sunday, you are probably correct in that they would be eligible for listing on the ballot. I had to leave at 1:20 for the shuttle. As always, the final formal secretary's minutes will be the factual answer.


MakeItHappen

Aug 7, 2012, 8:53 AM
Post #18 of 119 (2588 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeTJumps] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Mike, you missed a motion that BJ created to actually change the rules. (even after all his lamenting about not changing rules midstream)

End result is that 2 more of the 4 candidates that were previously flagged on 'current membership' issues are on the list of candidates.

.


MikeTJumps  (D 5957)

Aug 7, 2012, 9:47 AM
Post #19 of 119 (2566 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Okay on that. As I stated, they would be eligible to be listed if they complied with all of the other requirements. Isn't it amazing that he made that proposal? He is the last person I thought would do that but then again, one can always surprise us with a change of heart. It should be an interesting election.


robinheid  (D 5533)

Aug 7, 2012, 6:32 PM
Post #20 of 119 (2492 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skybytch] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
To be fair, I don't believe there are any efforts in that direction currently but perhaps the broader question put to the membership would help guide the Board on whether or not USPA should persue this course.

There's been an outcry to get some form of canopy related instruction/rating program in place for <expletive deleted> years now. How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a wingsuit before 200 jumps? How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a canopy that is beyond their ability to safely land in less than ideal conditions?

And yet it's wingsuits that get the attention. What happened to "education not regulation"? Oh, that only applies to canopies....

One more indication of how screwed up USPA is.

Well, yes and no. It's easier to pick on the wingsuit community because there are so few of them compared to the "canopy community," which by definition includes everyone.

The political and operational dynamics of what's happening here is remarkably like what happened in the Third Reich: Hitler targeted Jews not so much because he hated Jews but because there were too many Catholics and not enough communists.

USPA never went after the skysurfing community because there weren't enough of them, and they don't go after the canopy community because there are too many of them. The wingsuit community, though, is just about right.

And if the Third Reich analogy's too politically incorrect, then go with Goldilocks and the Three Bears: Canopy community too big, skysurf community too small, wingsuit community just right. Chomp!

Same situation, though; a bureaucracy always chooses the path of greatest (perceived) benefit for the least amount of effort.

All this blah-blah aside, however, I'm witchoo 'bytch: USPA should focus more on the still-festering, significant and growing problem of hot canopies + unschooled pilots instead of bothering a small subset of its membership that is not causing much of a problem.

Unfortunately, this will never happen as long as USPA maintains its ongoing primary training focus on freefall FUN skills instead of parachute SURVIVAL skills -- especially when, once again, we have a Designated Skygod Expert driving a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist for reasons that relate only peripherally to safety.

44
Cool


Halfpastniner  (D 30747)

Aug 7, 2012, 7:45 PM
Post #21 of 119 (2475 views)
Shortcut
Re: [robinheid] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

LOL. You guys are funny. If USPA tried to implement some kind of program at the beginning of the HP canopy epidemic, people would have done nothing but complain. Now they try to get out in front of a potential issue, and they are Nazi's. I love skydivers!

WS is gay anywayTongue


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Aug 8, 2012, 11:29 AM
Post #22 of 119 (2416 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Halfpastniner] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
LOL. You guys are funny. If USPA tried to implement some kind of program at the beginning of the HP canopy epidemic, people would have done nothing but complain. Now they try to get out in front of a potential issue, and they are Nazi's. I love skydivers!

WS is gay anywayTongue

Probably the most intelligent post I've read in a long time.

That said...Hitler has become a close personal friend

And he's doing incredible things in a Ghost 3 wingsuit, too.


Premier Remster  (C License)

Aug 8, 2012, 12:11 PM
Post #23 of 119 (2403 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Sly
Attachments: Spot.jpg (104 KB)


robinheid  (D 5533)

Aug 8, 2012, 12:33 PM
Post #24 of 119 (2386 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
LOL. You guys are funny. If USPA tried to implement some kind of program at the beginning of the HP canopy epidemic, people would have done nothing but complain. Now they try to get out in front of a potential issue, and they are Nazi's. I love skydivers!

WS is gay anywayTongue

Probably the most intelligent post I've read in a long time.

That said...Hitler has become a close personal friend

And he's doing incredible things in a Ghost 3 wingsuit, too.

Probably the most revealing post I've read in a long time.

Of course you would think it was intelligent, DWE... you're the guy who will most benefit from the imposition of your new bureaucracy.

But really, how intelligent can it be to "get out in front of a potential issue?"

You know, potential -- as in something that doesn't exist but might at some statistically unquantifiable point in the future?

Oh wait, never mind... you think Hitler is still alive and that you're his close personal friend.

Who else do you count among your close personal friends: the Easter Bunny and honest politicians?

44
Cool


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Aug 8, 2012, 12:44 PM
Post #25 of 119 (2375 views)
Shortcut
Re: [robinheid] Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

>But really, how intelligent can it be to "get out in front of a potential issue?"

I know! It's like quitting smoking before you get lung cancer, or training people to fly their canopies before they kill someone else. Totally idiotic.

>Oh wait, never mind... you think Hitler is still alive . . .

That whoosing noise you just heard was not Hitler swooping . . .


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)