From the USPA website:

[kallend 1,651]

Antitrust Lawsuit is Settled (updated 12/04/07)

Statement to USPA Members Concerning Skyride Antitrust Litigation

On November 29, 2007, the United States Parachute Association (USPA) ended a two-year-old legal dispute with entities affiliated with 1-800-SKYRIDE. USPA believes this action best serves the interests of its members, the USPA and the sport of skydiving.

As a statement recently posted on the USPA’s website indicates, in conjunction with a resolution of a federal antitrust lawsuit against USPA, USPA has restored the memberships of three entities and two persons affiliated with 1-800-SKYRIDE and discontinued a “consumer alert” concerning 1-800-SKYRIDE.

While specific details concerning the resolution of this litigation must remain confidential, USPA wants to reassure its members that it did not take these steps without careful consideration. USPA denies all liability in the lawsuit, and its attorneys were continuing to vigorously defend its actions. In fact, USPA succeeded in dismissing four of the eight claims lodged against it early in the litigation.

However, as any person or business involved in litigation must do, USPA regularly explored and assessed all available options for favorably and efficiently resolving this dispute. The lawsuit contained a number of allegations about current and former USPA officials making statements and taking actions unfairly targeting persons and entities affiliated with 1-800-SKYRIDE. These allegations, which formed the basis of the remaining claims, were not likely to be fully resolved without substantial additional delay and cost. And, regardless of USPA’s belief in the arguments it was prepared to make, there was no guarantee that a judge or jury would view the facts in a similar manner. Thus, given the relevant risks and options, the elected leadership of USPA decided now was the proper time to end this dispute in an amicable manner in the best interests of our sport, and, after considerable effort, was pleased it was able to do so.

USPA has never sought, and does not seek, to regulate the business activities of its members. However, all USPA members must comply with the organization’s policies and procedures, which include a requirement to uphold basic ethical principles, and comply with state and federal laws. USPA does not accept members who are unwilling to adhere to these standards, and it does not tolerate violations of these principles by its members. USPA will use its best efforts to avoid future situations in which its internal proceedings become unnecessarily entangled in litigation. USPA simply believes resolution of its legal dispute with the 1-800-SKYRIDE entities at this time will allow all relevant parties to move forward. USPA believes its efforts are best spent promoting the safety and enjoyment of skydiving.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

The sad thing is even if the other lawsuits against Skyride are won we will still be stuck with the assholes because the claim will then be "Well the dropzones didn't do anything it was Skyride".

Just one more example of "What is legal is not always right and what's right is not always legal".

[davelepka 4]

That's fucked up. I can see settling a lawsuit, and paying your way out of a trial. Sometimes it's not an issue of who's right or wrong, but if the lawyers can drag it out long enough that the legal bills will outweigh the cost of a settlement.

But allowing them back into the USPA crazy. The whole basis of the lawsuit was that the USPA outsted the Skyride gang based on their business practices. The USPA is not known for frequently relinquishing membership or DZ group membership, so when they actually do relinquish a membership, you know that some thought and process went into it, and it represents the feelings of a majority of the BOD.

If they are being truthful when they claim to believe in their position, and that settling was purely a financial decision, this means that they allowed the Skyride group back into the USPA fully believing them to be unethical and not worthy of the standards of membership.

I could see if the settlement was the result of Skyride's lawyers presenting evidence that Skyride is not unethical, and that the relinquishing of their membership was a mistake. In this case, allowing them to return as memebers would be correct.

But knowing they are crooks, and permitting them back into the USPA?

Thanks for pissing in the drinking water USPA.

[jojo69 0]

However, all USPA members must comply with the organization’s policies and procedures, which include a requirement to uphold basic ethical principles, and comply with state and federal laws.
***
Does this mean that our judgement of ethics (USPA BOD) does not count and only the judgement of a court case will be enough to allow the USPA to dismiss a member? I am aware of several court cases but none that have been completed.

[psychoswooper 2]

Ha ha... the best (maybe most fucked up ) part is that 1-800-skyride now has what almost amounts to a front page ad on USPA's website. They will never have to relinquish my DZ group membership because it will not be renewed.
I think it's time for DZOs to "bail out" on this stupid group membership concept & leave USPA to the individual skydivers as it was intended.
Gotta give props where props are due: Ben & Carey. Nicely done!
USPA -you suck.

[airathanas 0]

Quote

The sad thing is even if the other lawsuits against Skyride are won we will still be stuck with the assholes because the claim will then be "Well the dropzones didn't do anything it was Skyride".

Just one more example of "What is legal is not always right and what's right is not always legal".

I concur.

http://3ringnecklace.com/

[livendive 8]

Quote

The USPA is not known for frequently relinquishing membership or DZ group membership, so when they actually do relinquish a membership, you know that some thought and process went into it, and it represents the feelings of a majority of the BOD.

If you look through the BOD meeting minutes on the USPA webpage, you'll see that the issue was discussed over 3 or 4 consecutive board meetings before action was taken in the summer 2005 meeting. There wasn't, however, a majority in favor, mostly because a whole bunch of the board members abstained due to a conflict of interest.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[doogie 0]

Quote

... mostly because a whole bunch of the board members abstained due to a conflict of interest

This "conflict of interest" seems to keep coming up over and over in discussions about the GM program....

I think the USPA statement itself is sufficiently conflicted in its own verbage that I would hope it is clear to the USPA by now that the GM program needs to be retired in its existing form; I can't see any reason for a DZ to be a part of the GM program because the statement reads such that a DZ can pretty much do what they want anyway.

I know I've read this on here before, but it is also my own $0.02 as well: I don't think it makes sense for the USPA to both represent skydivers as a whole and DZs. If the DZs feel they need a trade organization, it should be completely indepedent of USPA and board members/mgmt/etc shouldn't be part of both organizations.


November 29 2007 -- USPA GM program (RIP).

[livendive 8]

Quote

I know I've read this on here before, but it is also my own $0.02 as well: I don't think it makes sense for the USPA to both represent skydivers as a whole and DZs. If the DZs feel they need a trade organization, it should be completely indepedent of USPA and board members/mgmt/etc shouldn't be part of both organizations.

I think the DZs should align themselves with PIA and USPA should cover competition, instruction, demo jumps, and safety. Those aspects of instruction and demonstration jumps that cross the line should be collaborated on between USPA and PIA with each organization representing their own constituency to the best of their ability.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[catfishhunter 1]

I sure hope the USPA Lawyers or anyone on the BOD for that matter, has proposed dismantling the GM Program under it's current form and then starting a NEW program which would require each DZ to re-submit. Based on previous acts they could then refuse to allow the afore mentioned DZ's in.

Now I know people want it gone all together but if it isn't going to go away then it should be shut down in it's current form and something else should take it's place

MAKE EVERY DAY COUNT
Life is Short and we never know how long we are going to have. We must live life to the fullest EVERY DAY. Everything we do should have a greater purpose.

[shermanator 3]

I'm confused at why details must be kept confidential.. after the fact, of being in the courts, can they not talk about it? or is it to the effects of they don't want to talk about it because they know they sold out, and don't want us members to know how much of our dues they sold out with.

CLICK HERE! new blog posted 9/21/08
CSA #720

[CSpenceFLY 1]

There are often gag orders connected to settlements.

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

There are often gag orders connected to settlements.

In fact, parties often settle for that very reason - it prevents the gory details from having to come out in open court.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[shermanator 3]

that's a shame.

CLICK HERE! new blog posted 9/21/08
CSA #720

[Amazon 7]

After reading that tripe on the USPA website..... I think USPA has ZERO credibility any longer....I wish I lived closer to Lodi so I could jump and still tell USPA to take their freaking membershjip and SHOVE IT

[jtval 0]

Quote

The sad thing is even if the other lawsuits against Skyride are won we will still be stuck with the assholes because the claim will then be "Well the dropzones didn't do anything it was Skyride".

Just one more example of "What is legal is not always right and what's right is not always legal".

It's never been about what right and wrong, but how much "JUSTICE" one can afford.

My photos

My Videos

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Yet many seem content with this system.

[jtval 0]

Shit, its out of my league.
Sur eI can revolt and all that good shit but unless EVERYONE is onboard I'm the idiot who has no where to skydive.

Shitty thing is MOST people feel that way but no one has the energy,time,knowledge to organize a new medium.

My photos

My Videos

[johndh1 0]

Quote

There are often gag orders connected to settlements.

You're right, especially with product liability, but this one I don't quite get. One thing that bothers me here: can you think of any reason the plaintiffs would want this in place? They won, so to speak, at least as far as this is concerned. They got what they wanted. Why would they desire confidentiality? They have bragging rights (so they think - what is so boastful about being a GM anyway?!).

Now, had the (very few purporting to represent the majority of the organization of) defendants - the EC - required the proceedings to be kept in secret, well, that's another story.

I still smell a rat. I think a full explanation is in order, and not this contradicting drivel posted on the USPA webpage (by "contradicting," I mean the whole tucked-tail attitude directly repudiates the previously highlighted so-called "ethics" clause, making it a useless portion of the agreement).

Roll Tide Roll

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

It's never been about what right and wrong, but how much "JUSTICE" one can afford.

Does seem to reinforce the impression that the process by which they were dumped was not within accordance of their own rules, hence they had to retreat. Seems more likely than 'it was too expensive' to win.

Hopefully there was no payout in this retreat.

[Krip 2]

Quote

I think the DZs should align themselves with PIA and USPA should cover competition, instruction, demo jumps, and safety. Those aspects of instruction and demonstration jumps that cross the line should be collaborated on between USPA and PIA with each organization representing their own constituency to the best of their ability.

I don't think there's any incentive for the PIA to allow the GMDZ's to join their organization.

Based on the numbers of members and $$$ the DZO's would take over the PIA just like they did USPA.

PIA are businessmen, same for DZO's I'd be surprised if they could belong to one organization.

Anyone notice the new Exec Director of USPA used to be in charge of the GMDZ program. Things aren't going to change for a long time.

R.I.P.

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

After reading that tripe on the USPA website..... I think USPA has ZERO credibility any longer....I wish I lived closer to Lodi so I could jump and still tell USPA to take their freaking membershjip and SHOVE IT

well.... I wish I could do that too. And on top of it all to boot, I just moved to Houston and not only do I have to have a membership to jump at the local DZ, but this local DZ (spaceland) is also accepting Skyride certificates.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Amazon 7]

At least our little DZ is not a Group Member DZ.. but we have required people to be USPA members for the insurance... but the stuff they pulled this time... unforgivable... consorting with crooks rubs me the WRONG way

[DSE 3]

Quote

At least our little DZ is not a Group Member DZ.. but we have required people to be USPA members for the insurance... but the stuff they pulled this time... unforgivable... consorting with crooks rubs me the WRONG way

Mad at USPA for doing what they needed to survive?
Faced with a lawsuit that they couldn't possibly win, losing the organization vs allowing crooks be members when (outside of ethics) they never should have been booted in the first place?
Every rose has its thorn.
I agree, no DZO should every be allowed on the board, ever. But to be angry at USPA for being in survival mode? Any intelligent business would do the same thing.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

consorting with crooks

I think you're blowing this a little out of proportion. They kicked the owners of skyride and the dropzones they own out of the USPA. Seemed like a good move at the time. But they were well aware that it was a mistake as soon as skyride sued. They knew they were going to lose as soon as they talked to their lawyers, or soon after.

So at some point they needed to start listening to their lawyers. That's the smart thing to do when somebody sues you.

I think its great that they put that statement up. It's basically saying "we had to let them back in even though they are criminals. And we had to take down the consumer alert about the 1-800-skyride-scam. We aren't going to tell our members how to run their businesses no matter how crooked they are." Hardly an advertisement for skyride.

The USPA screwed up bigtime by kicking them out. But I'm still glad they didn't consult their lawyers and wuss out way back then. They took a stand and did what was right. Turns out it might not have been legal. Oh well.

I do think USPA needs an overhaul. I think the GM program should be dropped immediately. As far as I can tell, it just lets dropzones advertise that they are members. As if that means anything more than that they paid a fee. I guess group members can also look up individual members in the computer. I guess they'll need a way for DZs to do that, because I think most dropzones would still require membership even if the GM program was gone.

Dave