2 2
3331

USPA BOD Election Results 2022-2224

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, SStewart said:

5539 total votes out of over 40 thousand USPA members. The message is clear; most skydivers don't care about USPA.

     

Scott, it's not that people don't care about USPA. It's that they don't care to get involved in the politics or the governance process. That is a distinct difference.

For the most part, skydivers just want to skydive and know that USPA is supporting them in real-world ways. Skydivers DO want USPA to handle licensing, ratings programs, safety & training issues, and the infinite number of things that can screw up an otherwise great day of skydiving. They want us to keep the government out of their way, keep the A-holes from taking them out with bulletproof attitudes, and lead the administration of the world's largest (by far) skydiving organization properly.

As a regional director I get several calls each week from members with questions or issues that require action on the part of USPA. As president, I see DZO's with airport access problems, airspace use complications, airport tenant conflicts, unreasonable or impossible venue requirements, and a million other things that threaten our sport and our rights.

Skydivers also want excellent customer service from USPA and they get it. Call headquarters some time. You will notice that your call is answered by a real live human being, not a voicemail system. That is by design. Ask a member who recently turned in a license or ratings application how long it took to process. Most applications these days are processed within a week, and some within a few days. I've had members routinely report getting applications for licenses, rating, and awards processed within 24 hours of submitting them. Try to get that kind of customer service anywhere else. The list goes on, but you get the point. Most members don't realize what USPA does for our members until they need something. Then they just want their problem solved so they can get back in the air.

The truth is there are many reasons members don't vote that have nothing to do with "not caring" about USPA. A lot of members are newbies who wouldn't know who to vote for without performing a lot of research. Some are lifetime members who have no active interest in current affairs. And many (most?) members who don't vote choose to sit out the elections for one very simple reason - they don't see anything significant that needs changed.

I used to get irritated at people with apathy toward USPA, but after 6 years of service on the board and a front row seat watching USPA serve members with problems that need our attention, I no longer do. The fact is the average member doesn't know the insane amount of work that goes on behind the scenes, but they DO care that we are there doing the work - even if they don't realize it until they have an issue that needs solved.

They also want a nice place to pack and a fridge that keeps their beer cold. We leave those items to the DZO's.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
On 11/4/2021 at 8:59 AM, chuckakers said:

Scott, it's not that people don't care about USPA. It's that they don't care to get involved in the politics or the governance process. That is a distinct difference.

No, most don't care. And they only belong and pay dues because they have to if they want to jump at most DZs. And that is the fact of the matter. Not that I don't think you are doing a good job, but really it is a trade group mostly run by insiders from the industry that skydiving has largely become.

Edited by gowlerk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
29 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

No, most don't care

Maybe most don't know that they care? If USPA disappeared and the FAA stepped to the fill the void, I think most would learn pretty quick.

Edited by nwt
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 minutes ago, nwt said:

Maybe most don't know that they care? If USPA disappeared and the FAA stepped to the fill the void, I think most would learn pretty quick.

I don't disagree with that. USPA is a needed and important thing for the sport. But just the same, most jumpers would not spend the money to join if they did not have to. I have been on the CSPA BoD. I get it. As a part owner of a DZ I am one of the people explaining all too often why we require jumpers to have a current membership.

Edited by gowlerk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decouple the existence of the USPA with the vote for board of directors.

 

I care that the USPA exists. Some organization is needed by FAA law.

 

But have yet to see any evidence of something positive coming from the board in my decade in the sport.

 

So I don't vote. Because why bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever listened to a meeting? I did this last February, and it was illuminating. No, they didn’t address any of my concerns, but mine are really petty; they did address the concerns of other people, discuss them, consider the possibilities and consequences, etc. They paid attention to things I’m not involved in (instruction, tandem, competition), but, again, they do matter to other people. If nothing else, it gave me an idea of the breadth of interests in the sport. 
By no means do I think they’re perfect, but they weren’t sitting around having a cold one by any means. I don’t agree with all the people who were elected this time, but they were elected. 
Anyway, there is the insurance to manage, and that takes an actual organization; competition is Something a lot of people are interested in, and that takes an organization.  For what you see as future and ongoing needs of the board, identify it, articulate it, and begin working towards it. They’ll probably work with you. 
The cost of membership is not huge. Even if ALL it covered were liability insurance. 
Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, lyosha said:

I care that the USPA exists. Some organization is needed by FAA law.

The FAA doesn't make laws.

 

But have yet to see any evidence of something positive coming from the board in my decade in the sport.

Then you aren't paying attention.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

The FAA doesn't make FARs?  FARs aren't laws?  But I think I was confused (not a lawyer at all...), thinking we were regulated under FAR 103, but really we are under 105 so it seems USPA may not - strictly speaking - be necessary for skydiving at all and it makes it less an FAA endorsed organization that enables the sport through FAR exemptions tied to membership in a particular organization and more of a lobby group.

That aside - forget me for a second - of the hundreds of skydivers I know personally I'd be hard pressed to name more than a couple who I think stand a chance at knowing what the BOD does aside from the E license - and only that because it became a meme due to its absurdity.

To be blunt, if I didn't come to these forums I may not even know it existed.

That virtually none of the population of the people you serve know what it is that you do - that only 20% care to submit a ballot - that's not on most of the skydivers of America.  That's on you.  Either the impact isn't being felt, or it is being taken for granted.

That the only activity of the BOD that most people know about is the E license (and most - myself included - don't know whether it was even a real suggestion) - only because thanks to the absurdity of it it became a running joke on Facebook - is telling.

I doubt I'm the first person to bring this opinion to light.

Edited by lyosha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lyosha said:

The FAA doesn't make FARs? FARs aren't laws? 

No, FAR's are not laws. They are regulations and those are two very different things. If they were laws, they would be called FAL's. The FAA can not make law.

That aside - forget me for a second - of the hundreds of skydivers I know personally I'd be hard pressed to name more than a couple who I think stand a chance at knowing what the BOD does aside from the E license - and only that because it became a meme due to its absurdity.

You need to get out more.

Ask some competitors if they know what USPA does. I bet they know of a few things.

Ask some rating holders if they know what USPA does. Anyone who had gone through a course will know.

Ask any of the dozens of DZO's that have had airport access problems if they know what USPA does. They'll know, and they'll tell you how instrumental USPA was in resolving things.

I could go on. The point is that members who need our services know what we do because we do it for them.

To be blunt, if I didn't come to these forums I may not even know it existed.

As I said, you need to get out more.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lyosha said:

But I think I was confused . . .thinking we were regulated under FAR 103, but really we are under 105.

That virtually none of the population of the people you serve know what it is that you do - that only 20% care to submit a ballot - that's not on most of the skydivers of America.  That's on you.  Either the impact isn't being felt, or it is being taken for granted.

I think the fact that you didn't know skydiving is under part 105 is an indication of what a good job the USPA is doing.  Because of them, you don't have to know.  All you have to do is get USPA training, get a USPA license, go to a USPA drop zone, and jump.  You don't have to know which part of Part 105 applies to you, because it's all summarized for you in the SIM, and the critical bits are taught to you in the FJC.  You don't have to worry about tearing an unsafe jumper a new one because an S+TA does that for you.  You don't have to worry (too much at least) about your DZO setting up a somewhat safe DZ because much of that is called out in the Group Member Pledge.  You don't have to worry about the airport manager telling you you can't jump there any more, because of that Airport Access and Defense Fund you probably never heard about.

Consider the pilot of the last commercial aircraft you flew on.  Did you have to make sure he turned the transponder on before takeoff?  That he had a fuel reserve?  That he did a weight and balance before takeoff?  No - because he did all that and you didn't have to worry about it.  That is the sign of a good pilot, not a bad one.

And did you have to know how an ILS glide slope is set up?  What the clearway is and under what conditions you might need it?  What a VASI or PAPI is, and what airports have them?  Whether your pilot could use an nonprecision approach for the airport, and whether that's a bad thing or not?  If he (or the airplane) could handle a landing in zero-zero conditions?  Again no - because the FAA has figured those things out beforehand.  Your being able to read a book until you get to the gate and ignore all that is the indication that the FAA is doing a good job, not a bad one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the BOD just seeks to be recognized by competitors and DZOs, not a wonder only 20% care to vote about who is on it. Again, that's on the BoD, not on skydivers.

Also, just to throw it out there - Lodi exists without the USPA, and I'm sure there are others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USPA also looks at instruction on a regular basis, and updates it as lessons come in from experiences in the field, as people have ideas (good and bad), and equipment changes. And they do the same with the BSR’s. 
USPA works with airports that want to limit or eliminate skydiving (sometimes successfully, sometimes not), but none of those airports would probably keep skydiving without them. 
USPA is a joint voice to the FAA, so that we don’t each individually have to lobby them when an idea will impact skydiving negatively, and we don’t have (x) million skydivers each coming up with their own (sometimes) self-serving interpretation of the FARs. That joint voice, by (somewhat) proactively taking accident reports and thereby reducing the public authorities’ perceived need to do tons. 
There’s more, but i have some stuff to do. 
The thing is, you personally might not need these things. But other skydivers have, and do. That’s what insurance and organization is about. 
Wendy P. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lyosha said:

If the BOD just seeks to be recognized by competitors and DZOs, not a wonder only 20% care to vote about who is on it. Again, that's on the BoD, not on skydivers.

Also, just to throw it out there - Lodi exists without the USPA, and I'm sure there are others.

USPA keeps the real cops with the real badges away. Were it not for the completely idiotic airplane crap we are prone to it's the FAA you might never have heard about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lyosha said:

If the BOD just seeks to be recognized by competitors and DZOs, not a wonder only 20% care to vote about who is on it. Again, that's on the BoD, not on skydivers.

Melissa Lowe has done an outstanding job of increasing engagement through Facebook. She has done so on a great number of topics, and if you choose to believe it was only about the E license, then that's on you not her or the BOD.

 

4 hours ago, lyosha said:

Also, just to throw it out there - Lodi exists without the USPA, and I'm sure there are others.

No, they don't. They exist without being a USPA member DZ. Very important difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nwt said:

Melissa Lowe has done an outstanding job of increasing engagement

Has she?  I've only seen that evidence of that engagement with regards to an election campaign.

1 hour ago, nwt said:

then that's on you not her or the BOD

No, that's not how it works.  The responsibility of leadership positions is outcomes, not attempts.

I'm telling you - the outcome isn't there.  The numbers aren't fake.  And that it's not about me.  It's about everyone else.  You can stick your head in the sand and say that 80% of skydivers don't even care because we as skydivers are assholes who don't care about anything or whatever you've convinced yourself of.  But all I'm seeing a lot of deflection of ownership and refusal to take responsibility here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lyosha said:

Has she? 

...yes.

1 hour ago, lyosha said:

I've only seen that evidence of that engagement with regards to an election campaign.

Maybe you are the one with your head in the sand.

1 hour ago, lyosha said:

No, that's not how it works.  The responsibility of leadership positions is outcomes, not attempts.

I'm telling you - the outcome isn't there.  The numbers aren't fake.  And that it's not about me.  It's about everyone else.  You can stick your head in the sand and say that 80% of skydivers don't even care because we as skydivers are assholes who don't care about anything or whatever you've convinced yourself of.  But all I'm seeing a lot of deflection of ownership and refusal to take responsibility here.

I don't think I'd consider voter turnout to be an outcome. Does USPA have a mandate to increase this? Why should I care about it? It seems like a strange thing to fixate on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2