USPA - Jan Meyer Impeachment??

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Frankly any group of people could start a new org, get the insurance set up, focus more on current DZ/skydiving needs...

Quote

No so far fetched?

You mean like Skyride and it's affiliates are trying to do?
Or is it that they (The BOD) are trying to incorporate skyride and the USPA into one business?

One should not be able to use his/her position within an organization, as an elected official, to gain him/herself monetary gain by utilizing the power and influence that that position affords.

If they want to quash the "Conflict of Interest" name they have made for themselves, then disasociate them selves with Skyride until their term is over and they are no longer an elected official. Then - if they still think that Skyride is a moral choice to make - then they can pick up their membership with skyride again.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

• Quote

[DSE 3]

Quote

The fact that the USPA has a GM program could also be argued as the reason the USPA Had to settle.

The Fact that the BOD Voted them out (a GROUP Effort) could be argued as the reason.

The Fact that there was a sitting member of the executive committee still in business with Skyride Before, during and AFTER they were kicked out could be argued as a reason.

Quote

The fact that Insurance companies always want settle lawsuits could be argued as the reason we had to settle.

The insurance company always wants to settle. The BOD could have voted otherwise, apparently they had enough information to do what they felt was best. No one here knows. I'm willing to trus that there was/is no grand conspiracy on the part of the BOD, legal advisers, and insurance company. What evidence do you possess that contraindicates their information or responsibly suggests they should have tossed the dice?

Quote

The Anti-Trust Lawsuit was coming no matter what she said or did because the USPA had a GM program.

You can say this with unequivocable authority and honesty? What do you know that we don't?

Quote

To say that Jan is the only reason the USPA was sued I think gives her a little too much credit.

Agreed.


Coulda, coulda, coulda. It's all supposition. It could be jsut as easily argued that the entire BOD consumed ganja brownies at that meeting. The only indisputable facts I'm aware of are:

A-BOD erred when they took Skyride out of the organization.

B-Skyride sued, as is their right (anyone can sue anyone).

C-Public statements by policy-makers have been directly cited as an element of evidence in the Skyride suit against USPA. Most of those statements are still available.

Where has anyone said Jan is 100% responsible? That's a strawman's argument.

Demonstrate any public anti-Skyride or USPA statement from another BOD member cited in the lawsuit against USPA (made during or post litigation), and it's possible that others bear equal responsibility and therefore those members of the BOD should be removed as per your comments.

No one is screaming "Jan has to go!" Rather, people are responding that there are issues which are relevant to why it has been proposed that Jan be removed from the board. Those issues are being discussed. Nothing more. Not one person in this thread, save for Gary Peeks, has any a vote in whether Jan is retained or not. We all have influence with our RD's and the EC, but that's where it stops.
Both sides of the issue not only ought to be discussed, both positions should require discussion so that folks might be informed.

You feel it's acceptable that public statements of weight made by a member of the Board of Directors, made during a period of active litigation and post litigation.

Others feel that a member of the board should have used jurisprudence and discretion in makingcomments about the litigation or related parties to the litigation.

My belief, which is probably less informed than most:
~USPA terminated Skyride's membership in the USPA.
~Skyride sued USPA.
~Jan Meyer had/has a lot to say about Skyride. As a BOD member, this may or may not be appropriate, but it does summarily generate a risk for the representative body.
~USPA apparently asked Jan Meyer to not speak about Skyride and USPA. She allegedly continued to do so, and at the least left previous commentary available to the general public and promoted those comments via search engines/bots.
~For whatever reason, Skyride specifically identified those comments as being made by a policy-maker at USPA and addressed those comments as part of their complaint against USPA.
~USPA's legal team, insurance company, and EC voted that it was best to settle the complaint out of court. We'll never absolutely know if this was the right thing to do or not, but we do absolutely know that settling the complaint limited USPA's financial liability, exposure and freed up USPA resources.
~One member of the BOD has requested a discussion on whether Jan Meyer should be permitted to remain as a member of the BOD.

The reasoning seems cut and dried.
The opinion various people may have is going to be derived from what they believe they know or surmise has transpired. Some apparently feel that no matter what the cause may be, "two wrongs make a right." Others may feel that allowing the liability that (may have) existed to continue to exist, is still a liability in perpetuity.

Each person needs to to form their own somewhat-informed opinion and forward that opinion to their Regional Director and the EC so that they might best know how to best represent individual opinions at the next meeting. Otherwise this entire thread is nothing but wasted babble and emotional spew, IMHO.

• Quote

[rushmc 18]

A simple open and honest presentation of the facts and the settlement would end all the speculation as the reasons. The blame game would go on.

I find it hard to stomac that an org such as the USPA could legally withhold this kind of info from the membership.

The lawyers out there, can you help me understand how this is possible?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lauraliscious 0]

Quote

~USPA terminated Skyride's membership in the USPA.
~Skyride sued USPA.

The USPA did not terminate Skyride's membership, because Skyride never had a USPA membership. The USPA terminated the memberships of the individuals who own Skyride and the Group Memberships of the DZ's they also own. Those individuals in turn sued the USPA in the anti-trust lawsuit. If the GM program did not exist in the 1st place, Skyride probably could never have brought an anti-trust lawsuit. As J has stated, in forming the GM program the USPA seems to be acting more as a Trade Organization instead of a non-profit organization.

***Disclaimer: I don't know much about trade organizations and non-profit organizations. I know I am not the most informed person making statements about this topic but I am trying to learn more. DSE, I think your last statement in that post was excellent and I agree whole-heartedly.

Enemiga Rodriguez, PMS #369, OrFun #25, Team Dirty Sanchez #116, Pelt Head #29, Muff #4091

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

My belief, which is probably less informed than most:
~USPA terminated Skyride's membership in the USPA.
~Skyride sued USPA.
~Jan Meyer had/has a lot to say about Skyride. As a BOD member, this may or may not be appropriate, but it does summarily generate a risk for the representative body.
~USPA apparently asked Jan Meyer to not speak about Skyride and USPA. She allegedly continued to do so, and at the least left previous commentary available to the general public and promoted those comments via search engines/bots.
~For whatever reason, Skyride specifically identified those comments as being made by a policy-maker at USPA and addressed those comments as part of their complaint against USPA.
~USPA's legal team, insurance company, and BOD voted that it was best to settle the complaint out of court. We'll never absolutely know if this was the right thing to do or not, but we do absolutely know that settling the complaint limited USPA's financial liability, exposure and freed up USPA resources.
~One member of the BOD has requested a discussion on whether Jan Meyer should be permitted to remain as a member of the BOD.

These things out of Order.
Jan Had her Website up and making public anti-skyride posts Long before the BOD voted to remove Skyride and their owners from the organization.
The BOD was fully aware of this when they voted to expel skyride and their owners.

Also I believe that this statement is not true "~USPA's legal team, insurance company, and BOD voted that it was best to settle the complaint out of court." It is my understanding that this matter was handled exclusively by the EXECUTIVE Committee. The BOD NEVER had any say on the settlement. (Thus why I keep bringing up the conflict of interest).

[DSE 3]

Quote

It is my understanding that this matter was handled exclusively by the EXECUTIVE Committee. The BOD NEVER had any say on the settlement. (Thus why I keep bringing up the conflict of interest).

One more time for the slow folks.
Lee was excused from the EC vote because of his DZ's policy of accepting Skyride coupons, if my understanding is correct.

The timeline of the webpages and posts in question is moot. They still exist today. They've continued to perpetuate following the settlement. My understanding is that it was asked that they be removed.

I don't understand why you're all so damn fast to tar the EC with a hot brush and a load of feathers.
These are decent people we're discussing here, people who's reputation you're so glibly maligning. I don't know everyone, but I do know Jay, Sherry, and Scott. They're all honorable people. They're all skydivers, just like you and I. They have a vested interest in our sport, just as we all do. You know how much they're paid, right?
Have you ever shaken their hand, jumped with them, broken bread with them? Shared a cup of coffee?
I doubt it, because it's pretty clear that they've been de-humanized by so many of these posts.

Bear in mind, I came into this discussion with one perspective. A few phone calls, an email here and there, and a little research caused me to understand why a proposal has been made. I don't know how it will turn out, but the proposal certainly has just cause.
Lose the "Oh my god, they're booting one of my friends" and look at it objectively, and any moron can see that it's a discussion that needs to take place, regardless of the outcome.

[Gary73 8]

Quote

Have you read the lawsuit against UPSA? - divnswoop

No. Is that available online somewhere? Thanks.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

[Thanatos340 1]

Does anyone have a file share space I can upload all the publicly available documents to?

They are all too big attach.

I especially want EVERYONE to read the Judges one and only ruling in this case.

See how many BOD members and EC members that you can find mentioned in the judges ruling. Guess what.. There are several more than just Jan that did things much more questionable than leavening a pre-existing website up.

[packerboy 3]

The avatar is pretty cool. Looks like she is going to go down shooting from both barrells! I seriously respect that.

I personally believe that as an organization the right thing to do is let her go, but I also believe that it looks like she is the only one on that board to step up and show some balls to do what is right. Either way, it is bad for the USPA. Who's watch are we on here? Catch 22 for the members.

Anyone think Chris Needles leaving has anything to do with this?

Shitty situation for sure. I'm 99% sure I'm going to ditch the USPA and go with CSPA over this. I'm not a big fan of the CSPA, but at this point it seems that they are WAY less of a clusterfuck than the USPA.

--------------------------------------------------
In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[DSE 3]

Quote

I personally believe that as an organization the right thing to do is let her go, but I also believe that it looks like she is the only one on that board to step up and show some balls to do what is right. Either way, it is bad for the USPA.

In a nutshell, I think that sums my opinion up very well.
J, I've got plenty of webspace and bandwidth if you want to upload documents.

[divnswoop 0]

Quote

J, I've got plenty of webspace and bandwidth if you want to upload documents.

YEAH! Education!...now everybody can read it and come to their own conclusion that there isn't just one innocent person...... nor one guilty.

[packerboy 3]

C'mon now.. that's just crazy thought!! You're either with us or against us. If you're not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

No rational thinking allowed here.. just pure emotion, this isn't a search for the truth.. it's a debate!

--------------------------------------------------
In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[Thanatos340 1]

I just emailed them to you.

I highly encourage every one to read the Judges Ruling on the motion to dismiss (Which summarizes the other Documents fairly well) and why he let some counts stand.

Read it all but pay close attention starting at the top of page 12 of the Judges Ruling.

You might recognize some names other than Jans.

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

YEAH! Education!...now everybody can read it and come to their own conclusion that there isn't just one innocent person...... nor one guilty.

Now on that we are in 100% agreement.

[DSE 3]

Quote

I just emailed them to you.

I highly encourage every one to read the Judges Ruling on the motion to dismiss (Which summarizes the other Documents fairly well) and why he let some counts stand.

Read it all but pay close attention starting at the top of page 12 of the Judges Ruling.

You might recognize some names other than Jans.

I'm going through what you sent me now. So far, doesn't look any different than what I've currently got, but I want to be sure there is nothing confidential in there before hanging my tail out. I've had the original filing and responses on my website for a few day now, but have only been PM'ing them.
It's easy to hang your hat on the single ruling, but the single ruling does not remotely address the bulk of the complaint.

[Thanatos340 1]

That single ruling is all we have to go on. The complaint is just that, a Complaint.

The counts that the Judge felt there was enough to move forward and his reasoning behind allowing those counts to move forward are very important.

Also just because the Judge allowed those counts to stand does not mean that they would have prevailed.

[popsjumper 2]

Jan,
If this proposal goes through, please do not initiate litigation against USPA, the board or any of us peon skydivers. It will only make things worse for us as a group.

The future is yet to come and who knows...even if you get booted now doesn't mean that things couldn't change such that you could be back with us later.

Skyride is really, really enjoying this ride, I'm sure.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[chriswelker 0]

Quote

USPA doesn't regulate commerce.

BULL SHIT!

Winged Warriors
Discuss a program by which DZs would offer a comp tandem to any returning
wounded vet who wants to make a jump.

USPA wants to tell DZOs to 'give away' free tandem jumps.
Big DZs may be able to do that, but what about the small DZs that might lose
a significant portion of their income by such a policy.
I don't think this motion will pass, but it is on the agenda.


The USPA GM program HOSED US, NOT JAN.

No man can serve to masters.

Mr. Welker

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

J, I've got plenty of webspace and bandwidth if you want to upload documents.

YEAH! Education!...now everybody can read it and come to their own conclusion that there isn't just one innocent person...... nor one guilty.

Will a link be posted here?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rapidshare 0]

http://rapidshare.com/files/85967894/6_-_Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967895/Amended_complaint_by_Skyride.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967896/ASCCountercomplaint.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967897/Original_Skyride_Complaint.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967898/Skyride_response_to_Motion_to_dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967899/USPA_Response_to_Response_on_Motion_to_dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967900/VanceSkyride.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967901/Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html

For each of these just scroll down a bit, click on the free button and then wait for the screen to pop up asking where to download from, enter in the letters you see in bold in the little box and you will have copies of the files.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

http://rapidshare.com/files/85967894/6_-_Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967895/Amended_complaint_by_Skyride.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967896/ASCCountercomplaint.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967897/Original_Skyride_Complaint.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967898/Skyride_response_to_Motion_to_dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967899/USPA_Response_to_Response_on_Motion_to_dismiss.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967900/VanceSkyride.pdf.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/85967901/Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html

For each of these just scroll down a bit, click on the free button and then wait for the screen to pop up asking where to download from, enter in the letters you see in bold in the little box and you will have copies of the files.

Thank You

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Thanatos340 1]

while I think everyone should read all the documents completely, There is alot of material there.

To get a good summery of the Complaint and Responses as well as the judges opinion, This document is a good overview..

It tells us what the Judge thought had merit and what did not.

http://rapidshare.com/files/85967901/Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html

[airtwardo 6]

Thanks!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Thanatos340 1]

This is just one example from the judges ruling (This is a small excerpt from the ruling, Everyone should read the entire ruling)..

Defendant = USPA,
Plaintiff = Skyride/ASC

From Page 12 of the Ruling:

Quote

Specifically, on August 6, 2005, the president of the executive committee of the USPA, who was also the manager of a drop zone that competed with Plaintiffs in the Philadelphia area, visited Plaintiffs' facility in Perkasie, Pennsylvania and advised the employees of the recent USPA action and encouraged them to leave their positions to take positions with competitors.(3)

Additionally, the southern regional director of the USPA manages a drop zone in Tennessee, which is a Group Member of the USPA. Prior to the membership termination notice received by ASC, Plaintiffs were in negotiations with an airport for a drop zone location that would have been in commercial proximity to the drop zone managed by the southern regional director .
After the issuance of the August 1, 2005 letter to ASC, Plaintiffs allege that the executive director of the USPA contacted officials at the airport and informed them of the action taken against Plaintiffs . Perceiving it to be a reflection upon the safety and training procedures utilized by Plaintiffs, the self-dealing (count six), breach of a legal duty (count seven), breach of a duty of good faith and fair dealing (count eight), as well as a claim for injunctive relief (count nine). Plaintiffs seek damages in excess of $10,000,000.

(3) Plaintiffs also submit that a USPA national director from Arizona directed his
employees to directly contact Plaintiffs' employees and subcontractors in an effort to
solicit them to leave the employment and business relationships of Plaintiffs and join his drop zone .

Page 23 The judge states his opinions on the claims:

Quote

B. State Law Claims
1. Tortious Interference
In count four, Plaintiffs contend that the USPA tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs' business relationships . Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that the USPA (1) persuaded individuals to break off contract negotiations with Plaintiffs for a new drop zone location at a Tennessee airport ; (2) made public statements to third parties not to enter business relationships with Plaintiffs ; and (3) utilized wrongful means to solicit Plaintiffs' employees .
Under Georgia law, to state a claim for interference with business relations, a plaintiff must allege facts which, if proven, will show that a defendant "(i) acted improperly and without privilege ; (2) purposely and with malice with the intent to injure ; (3) induced a third party or parties not to enter into or continue a business relationship with the plaintiff ; and (4) for which the plaintiff suffered some financial injury." St. Mary's Hosp .
of Athens, Inc . v . Radiology Prof'I Corp., 205 Ga. App. 121,124, 421 S .E .2d
731, 734 (1992).
Defendant argues that Plaintiffs have failed to allege facts to show that the USPA "acted improperly ." Defendant relies upon Sommers Co . v. Moore, in which the Georgia Court of Appeals explained that "improper conduct means wrongful action that generally involves predatory acts such as physical violence, fraud or misrepresentation, defamation, use of confidential information, abusive civil suits, and unwanted criminal prosecutions ." 275 Ga. App . 604, 606, 621 S .E .2d 789, 791 (2005) (citationomitted) . Defendant contends that Plaintiffs have not alleged facts sufficient to meet this standard .
The Court rejects Defendant's argument . The examples of improper action discussed in Sommers are just that-examples that were intended to be illustrative of the types of conduct that might constitute tortuous interference. Here, Plaintiffs have alleged that the USPA solicited their employees, disrupted contractual negotiations, and directed others to cease doing business with Plaintiffs . The Court finds that Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts of improper conduct to withstand a motion to dismiss.
Defendant also argues that even if it was improper conduct to solicit Plaintiffs' employees, Plaintiffs' tortious interference claim fails as a matter 27 245, 248-49, 166 S.E.2d 744 746-47 (1969). However, "the competitor's privilege is lost when an illegal restraint of trade or competition under federal or state statutes is created or continued or when wrongful means in the solicitation of employees are utilized ." Am. Bldgs . Co . v . Pascoe Bldg . Sys., Inc., 26o Ga . 346, 349, 392 S .E.2d 8bo, 863 (1990) .
Plaintiffs have alleged facts, that if proven, could demonstrate that the USPA solicited Plaintiffs' employees with malice and with a purpose to drive Plaintiffs out of business. Additionally, as the Court has already found, Plaintiffs have stated a claim under Section One of the Sherman Act, a federal statute pertaining to the restraint of trade and unfair competition .
Under these circumstances, dismissal of Plaintiffs' tortious interference claim would be inappropriate.

Anyone still think that the only reason we had to settle were Jans Actions and that she alone should pay for the Loss?

People that believe the only reason we had to settle was Jans Posting are mistaken.

Those that worked hardest to do what was right should not be punished for those actions. Two wrongs dont make a right.

The BOD knew of Jans previous work on the Skyride issue when they voted to kick out Skyride Owners. They all share responsibility for the action they took.

Removing those websites would not have kept them from being used in this lawsuit. The Posts she made here could not be removed.

I find it strange that people want to kick Jan out because she didnt take down a personal website that was providing a public service.
Yet it was OK for member of the Executive Committee to continue being a Skyride Business associate and profit from skyride during this entire fiasco.

Is Jan a Renegade and/or Maverick that stirs things up?? I think so.
Does the USPA Need her?? ABSOLUTELY!!

I do feel I owe Dr. Lee an Apology for what many perceive as a personal attack. That is not my intention.
I am simply stating that I feel he made some very poor ethical decisions in a)Dealing with Skyride in the first place. b) Continuing to be a Skyride associate after the USPA kicked them out for ethical reasons and c) continuing to be a skyride associate and doing business with then while remaining on the board of the USPA while Skyride had pending litigation against the USPA.

Everything I have heard is that he is a man of upstanding character, However it is also my opinion that he made a poor ethical decision in this matter.

I have said my Peace on this and will remove myself from the discussion.

I am not a lawyer. All Opinions expressed are just that. My Opinions.

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

while I think everyone should read all the documents completely, There is alot of material there.

To get a good summery of the Complaint and Responses as well as the judges opinion, This document is a good overview..

It tells us what the Judge thought had merit and what did not.

http://rapidshare.com/files/85967901/Ruling_on_Motion_to_Dismiss.pdf.html

Very interesting read. Now, more than ever, I'd like to see the final ruling. Too bad it's under lock and key.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon