Staff Longevity at Dropzones - an opinion

[MikeTJumps 4]

During a recent PIA symposium and USPA Board of Directors' meeting, a rather interesting statistic was presented: the average working tenure of an instructional staff member in our sport was approximately seven years. A question comes to mind, "Why is this so?"

Over the past twenty-nine plus years of participation in our sport (twenty-seven of which I have been an instructor), I have had the opportunity to observe the comings and goings of many different staff members at a variety of dropzones. I have been able to encourage and train many new instructional rating holders into the sport in a variety of training programs. I have seen initial enthusiasm turn into doldrums, passive indifference, and I have watched the staffing levels decrease with a diminished interest in people obtaining ratings. So, why is this happening?

One primary reason for the departure of staff is that they have taken on additional personal responsibilities in their lives which may not have existed when they started into our sport. Items that are prevalent are marriage, children, and business obligations. As our assets and responsibilities accumulate, we tend to become increasingly hesitant to allow ourselves to be subjected to the risk of "losing it all" by a legal action being brought against us whether we had any direct responsibility for an incident or accident. Only those people who feel the calling to remain in a staffing position being stronger than the warning bells in our heads about the fact that "we can lose everything even if we are right" will get beyond this mental stopping point.

There are financial reasons for departing from a staffing position as well. If you examine the average amount of income earned as a staff member at a dropzone, you will find that it is barely above minimum wage when average over the year unless you happen to be one of the exceptions to the rule. Incomes as a DZ staff person are weather dependent, student population dependent, and seasonal dependent. You could be at the DZ for days and have very little business, thus very little "contractor" income. On the other hand, you could have a great day and earn over $200. But those lucrative days are the exception at most dropzones, not the rule. People that are "permanent" DZ residents must have very low living expenses, something that as we get older, we are not necessarily willing to tolerate because we want more and more out of our lives. So in truth, the majority of us must have other sources of income which are more reliable, consistent, and promising than an income from a DZ job will provide.

The enthusiasm that first develops as we get into the sport is something that just can't be described to the average person. People like to share their enthusiasm by jumping with their new friends in the skydiving community. Some people pitch in to share that enthusiasm with newcomers by becoming more than a cheering section on the sidelines; they become instructional staff. But that enthusiasm can diminish over time as we settle into the routine of training personnel either through repetitive instructional sessions or we end up waiting through a long period of bad weather days. There is nothing quite so depressing as spending weekends at the DZ waiting around for the weather to clear with nothing else to do. Thus, we find other things to do which are themselves a cost item. This seems to develop into a downward financial spiral where if we can't spend or earn money in our passion of skydiving, we'll spend it and not earn it on something else.

Politics of a dropzone are also a consideration in how long someone stays on the staff. The personal lives of DZ management have a trickle down effect on the attitudes of their contractors. When management and ownership sees their personal financial condition deteriorating, they tend to project negative feelings upon their staff members. Cliques that develop as to "resident staff" vs. transient or “part-time staff” can also be a negative influence. The "weekenders" take income away from the full timers by the very fact that they are at the DZ to help when the student load is not sufficient to use all of the staff throughout the day. Personality clashes (prevalent throughout humanity) are always a factor, especially within the "Type-A personality" community of jumpers.

There is also another influence that seems to deter staff from renewing their ratings: that of getting over-used. As staff sizes decrease for any number of reasons, the remaining staff gets burdened with additional work demands. This cuts into their “fun jumping” and as such, they get “turned off” to the very reason why they became staff members in the first place (that of wanting to help the student population thus growing the sport). When their playtime turns into work time without their personal wish for it to be so, they decide not to renew their ratings, thus forcing the issue of turning all of their skydiving endeavors back into their own choice and not being at the beck and call of the DZ management for staffing purposes. (You can’t use me because I don’t have a current rating.)

Professional proficiency requirements as an instructional staff member require that we be ever vigilant in keeping up with the "latest and greatest" information in our USPA Skydiver's Information Manual. This document, which is "evergreen" is long and hard to read with enthusiasm. Granted, it has very valuable information in it, but reading the entire manual every year to observe the changes that have occurred in it from the previous edition is an arduous task. If you think it is hard on you, consider those of us who work on it several times a year to make sure that it is current and in compliance with the rules of grammar, new information available, and the changing priorities of our sport! (Yes, this is a bid for sympathy for the members of the Safety and Training Committee.)
So, what can we do to increase staff longevity? We have got to make being a staff member “FUN” again. We have to find a balance that lets DZ management and both existing and prospective staff have a good mixture of work and fun at the same time. For those few of us that always have fun while we work, that is not a problem, but “we” are not the “norm.” We’ve got to increase the number of available part-time staff by making the obtaining of a rating an attractive goal, not a laborious task.

I don’t have all the answers, but I do have observations and questions that can open some eyes if the people who are involved are willing to look into finding viable solutions to the problems stated above. I hope that this helps awaken folks to a growing trend of staffing declines that I have observed over the years. If we can make it fun again, we will grow more staff. If it becomes work, we will see staffing continue to decline.

Mike Turoff
Instructor Examiner, USPA
Co-author of Parachuting, The Skydiver's Handbook

[tombuch 0]

Mike:

That’s a very interesting and thought provoking post. I think everything you wrote makes sense, and all the identified causes of staff turnover are very real to varying degrees throughout the sport.

I understand the importance of asking USPA and the skydiving community to work on solutions to staff turnover, but I really think the bulk of the issue belongs to the DZO’s. Too often we have skydiving DZO’s with no business sense, and no management level skills. That creates problems with profitability, student retention, and staff retention. They are all linked. I’d like to see a DZ focused organization (perhaps PIA, definitely not USPA) help DZ’s get their act together on the business front, and I’d like USPA to help instructors handle their relationship with DZO’s. That may be pie in the sky, but I think splitting DZ’s from USPA is a key part of the solution.

Interestingly, I work in the winter as a snowboard instructor. Our representative groups are the Professional Ski Instructors of America (PSIA), and the American Association of Snowboard Instructors (AASI). We have many of the same turnover problems, as I suspect most other recreational sports do. Heck, these past summer days I’ve been at the DZ very little, and instead have been teaching fly fishing. The fishing guide industry also has high staff turnover. Perhaps it would be worth getting an informal group of similar organizations together to see if there are common problems, and any working solutions.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[JohnMitchell 14]

I think the staff turnover rate you've observed is about the same as the jumper turnover rate. Stay at one DZ for 7-8 years and you'll see 80% of the faces change. I'm in it for the long run, but for many people skydiving is just one stop along the path.

However, I do like your's and Tom's ideas for improving my weekend job.

• Quote

[Eule 0]

Quote

I’d like to see a DZ focused organization (perhaps PIA, defiantly not USPA) help DZ’s get their act together on the business front, and I’d like USPA to help instructors handle their relationship with DZO’s. That may be pie in the sky, but I think splitting DZ’s from USPA is a key part of the solution.

I think this kind of goes along with the feeling that some DZ.com posters have expressed that USPA doesn't represent individual jumpers anymore and is instead a trade association for the DZs/DZOs. I haven't been around long enough to say if I agree with this or not, but if you take it as a given, that also seems to say that there should be at least two organizations: one for the jumpers, one for the DZOs.

One way to do that would be to let the USPA be for the DZOs and create a new organization for the jumpers. I am not sure how well this would work; starting a new organization takes a lot of time, effort, and money.

Another way is to have the USPA be the jumpers' organization and expand PIA to include the DZOs. PIA is already concerned with the business side of parachuting, but it seems like, at the moment, they mostly represent the gear manufacturers. I know that some larger DZs are also members, but I don't think there are nearly as many DZs that are PIA members as there are DZs that are USPA Group Members. This may be also be hard to set up; if one assumes that the DZOs are currently "in charge" of the USPA and are structuring the rules to favor themselves, they probably won't like the idea of being a couple of steps removed from the rule-making process.

Again, I am not an instructor and I haven't been around that long. It just seems like there are a couple of areas where "splitting DZs from the USPA" might possibly be interesting.

Eule

PLF does not stand for Please Land on Face.

[Eule 0]

Quote

Granted, it has very valuable information in it, but reading the entire [SIM] every year to observe the changes that have occurred in it from the previous edition is an arduous task.

A couple of ideas for this: First, change bars in the margin would let people quickly see what's new or changed. Second, especially for extensive changes, perhaps issuing a "what's new" document along with the SIM would be helpful. This document would have to say "these _aren't_ the new rules, you have to read the SIM for the new rules" but would give you a hint on where to start reading. Sort of like some of the FAA's advisory circulars - they aren't regulations, but help point out and explain the regulations.

I've only got two years of the SIM (2005 and 2006) to hand, and I looked through them quickly, so maybe either or both of these are already being done.

Eule

PLF does not stand for Please Land on Face.

[firstime 0]

Quote

Quote

I’d like to see a DZ focused organization (perhaps PIA, defiantly not USPA) help DZ’s get their act together on the business front, and I’d like USPA to help instructors handle their relationship with DZO’s. That may be pie in the sky, but I think splitting DZ’s from USPA is a key part of the solution.

I think this kind of goes along with the feeling that some DZ.com posters have expressed that USPA doesn't represent individual jumpers anymore and is instead a trade association for the DZs/DZOs. I haven't been around long enough to say if I agree with this or not, but if you take it as a given, that also seems to say that there should be at least two organizations: one for the jumpers, one for the DZOs.

One way to do that would be to let the USPA be for the DZOs and create a new organization for the jumpers. I am not sure how well this would work; starting a new organization takes a lot of time, effort, and money.

Another way is to have the USPA be the jumpers' organization and expand PIA to include the DZOs. PIA is already concerned with the business side of parachuting, but it seems like, at the moment, they mostly represent the gear manufacturers. I know that some larger DZs are also members, but I don't think there are nearly as many DZs that are PIA members as there are DZs that are USPA Group Members. This may be also be hard to set up; if one assumes that the DZOs are currently "in charge" of the USPA and are structuring the rules to favor themselves, they probably won't like the idea of being a couple of steps removed from the rule-making process.

Again, I am not an instructor and I haven't been around that long. It just seems like there are a couple of areas where "splitting DZs from the USPA" might possibly be interesting.

Eule

What ????

[jsaxton 0]

Quote

I have watched the staffing levels decrease with a diminished interest in people obtaining ratings.

I never tried to get any ratings because I'm too busy fun jumping
I have seen people who started around my time get ratings and loose enthusiasm after a couple of years and I don't want that to happen to me.

Meby I'm a special case because I'm 50 with a wife that dosen't jump and I can AFFORD to pay for all my jumps

[JohnMitchell 14]

Maybe the free market economy can raise the pay scales for all of us hard working instructors, seeing as how we're a vanishing breed.

• Quote

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

Maybe the free market economy can raise the pay scales for all of us hard working instructors, seeing as how we're a vanishing breed.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Your comment echoes a comment made by one of our long-term instructors yesterday.
He said: "Next year I am thinking or doing more camera and fewer tandems. Let the young guys haul the meat. By the same token, I think the DZO is going to have to raise the pay rates to retain tandem instructors."

14 years ago I cut-away from the real world to become a full-time skydiver. I bounced around from DZ to DZ for a few years, then started getting more picky about where I wanted to work.
I have worked at this DZ for 7 years now - the longest I have ever held any job - but am starting to get frustrated that the long hours result in such small pay checks.

[NickDG 23]

I've been crowing about this for years. And mostly on deaf ears. If we don't do something to improve the lot of AFF Instructors future students will be learning through some form of tandem and coach jumps. How long do you think it will be before some DZO convinces USPA that a student can do ten tandem jumps and then safely make a solo freefall? The DZO excuse will be he can't stay in business because he can't find and keep AFF Instructors, and the USPA will agree.

We need to unionize and we need to go on strike. All of us, every single AFF Instructor must stand up for a living wage. A month of no AFF jumps anywhere in the U.S. would change things, and if it doesn't, at least we went down swinging, not whimpering . . .

NickD BASE 194

[Hooknswoop 19]

1. An experienced AFFI makes no more than a brand new AFFI

2. USPA simply lowers the standard when there isn’t enough AFFI’s.

3. DZO’s make the same amount of money regardless of the quality of the instruction, quantity over quality

4. Every student thinks their Instructor is the best.

5. By the time the student figures out that the quality on instruction they received as a student wasn’t very good, they are no longer a student and can’t do anything about it.

6. USPA is run by DZO’s

7. USPA has no real authority.

8. There will always be skydivers willing to live at a very low wage in order to be a paid skydiver Instructor.

9. Once an Instructor realizes that they are being taken advantage of, they also realize that they can quit and will be replaced by 2 new Instructors, or they can keep on teaching. What they cannot do is change anything.

10. A strike will not work since most Instructors just want to get paid to jump and don’t see a problem, yet. They won’t strike. They don’t have the cash reserves to survive not working.

11. A DZO actually makes more money with brand new Instructors than experienced ones. New Instructors can be coerced/intimidated into cutting corners, doing back-to-back AFF, taking students in marginal or less than marginal conditions, etc because they don’t know any better, trust the DZO over their own judgment, don’t have much experience, don’t want to make waves, etc.

12. DZO’s can treat full-time staff like crap because they don’t have another job for their prime source of income. They have to treat the part-time staff well since they don’t need the money and can simply quit teaching at the drop of a hat.

13. DZO’s treat full-time staff like independent contractors and expects them to act like employees.

14. The turnover in Instructors works to DZO’s advantage since people expect to be treated better, make more money, etc the longer they work for a company. New Instructors realize they are brand new and don’t expect to get the benefits and treatment due an Instructor that has been around for a long time. Why give an Instructor a raise, it is cheaper to fire them a hire a new Instructor.

15. The system is set up not to retain Instructors, it is set u to encourage turnover in Instructors and that is how DZO’s want it.

Derek

[skyfreek 1]

well said, rob.
i love working as a skydiver, but those long days working your ass off takes it`s toll. i agree with a pay hike, because jump rates have gone up, why not our pay....it is the customer that has to pay more. all we are asking for is a bit more each jump, and fair time off. being expected to work 10 to 12 hour days 6 to 7 days a week can burn a guy out and take the fun out of jumping. especially if there is no time given for fun jumps.it is hard to keep staff happy when they are all overworked and underappreciated...

[NickDG 23]

Derek,

Of course I agree with everything you said, except for a strike won't work.

Going on strike means making a sacrifice. No pain no gain!

As for all Instructors not joining in, yes, scabs are always a problem in strikes but at the larger DZs they may have to cross a good sized picket line. And DZOs can't just hire people off the street to replace us. Also students would ask what was going on before deciding if they wanted to cross it themselves. Most Instructors could be just as good at talking someone out of jumping, as into jumping.

Strikes are a very dirty business, even bloody sometimes, but the DZOs and USPA have left us flapping in the wind and it's the only real shot at power we have, and it's a power that's available to us. Sure, it may take a series of strikes, the first may be small but they will get bigger.

You know what my idea of courage is? One lone Instructor, who knows the score, out there with a sign walking a picket line at a DZs front gate.

In a general strike the trick would be to get up-jumpers to honor our picket lines. Every experienced jumper owes, at least a bit of gratitude, to the person who taught them and now's the time to cash in that chip. Anyone would easily understand you don't get a 5 to 7 hour class in anything as technical as skydiving for 10 or 20 dollars, which is what most instructors get. How many times have you been asked by former or current students how much money you make? Did you ever feel embarrassed enough to duck the question? Most smart people would consider you an idiot if you answered the question and actually told them what you made.

The funniest part might be a bunch of fat assed DZOs trying to re-new their Instructional ratings, if they ever had any to begin with. But of course the evaluators would (I hope) be on strike too.

I realize this would take educating a lot of people, the newer Instructors, the students, and the public in general to what's really going on, but what's the alternative? We are losing more power and authority every day we wait. We are losing our most experienced Instructors every day we wait. Student Instruction will continually be dumbed down every day we wait.

Some will argue it will hurt the sport, maybe even close a few marginal DZs, but so what? DZOs are putting Instructors out of business everyday, and the ones that stick it out are being run into the ground.

Another systemic problem is Instructors spend their times looking out for everyone else, but nobody looks out for them, certainly not USPA. Where's the communication between Instructors? Everything coming out of headquarters is filtered through a lens of what's good for the DZO.

The present student curriculum is so convoluted I can't even figure it out. Students should be under the direct supervision of an experienced AFF or Static Line Instructor until they are licensed - period. Not a coach, not a tandem pilot, or anyone else, no matter how well meaning they are.

The only people that can help us - is us. It's sink or swim time, boys . . .

NickD BASE 194

[tbrown 26]

Quote

I think the staff turnover rate you've observed is about the same as the jumper turnover rate. Stay at one DZ for 7-8 years and you'll see 80% of the faces change. I'm in it for the long run, but for many people skydiving is just one stop along the path.

However, I do like your's and Tom's ideas for improving my weekend job.

Economics aside, there was an interesting article in Psychology Today a looooong time ago about this phenomenon. It was about people participating in high risk, "high adventure" sports, including skydiving, mountaineering, scuba diving, etc. And they found that for the most part, participation followed a seven year curve, after which most participants moved on to something else in their lives. The article also pointed out that high adventure sports all had their hardcore cases, who were the movers and shakers who kept the sport going and made innovations, and that their commitment was for life.

I found it rather interesting, as my first era in the sport was almost exactly seven years, before I got married and chose to hang it up (for the next 22 years). It was part economics, part burnout, seeing too many accidents among my friends, and a newfound hunger for the rest of life that happens off the dropzone. Followed by my personal feelings about not jumping with young children.

I have a little brother who was a ski instructor/ski bum for several years of his life. He's now a graphic artist at a printing press, with a wife and 3 young kids. He takes city slickers out on grueling cross country ski excursions, but that's for a little extra income and the joy of making New Yorker yuppies suffer in the Vermont winter.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[Trae 1]

in reply to "And they found that for the most part, participation followed a seven year curve, after which most participants moved on to something else in their lives. The article also pointed out that high adventure sports all had their hardcore cases, who were the movers and shakers who kept the sport going and made innovations, and that their commitment was for life. "
.............................................


It appears that a lot of intructors out-grow the job.

Highly experienced professional skydivers need another step of threee in their career paths. Other than opening your own DZ () there's little to do but lump it , move around or move on.

flight of fancy-- DZO's could be required to employ through an agency that was controlled by the employees themselves. There could be a tiered wage system eg more experienced = more pay. The best interests of its members ie the employees, instructors would be its main aim .
Such an agency could also provide workers with access to international jobs and provide some degree of job continuity and security.

This could take the employment power out of the DZO's hands and ensure that they couldn't employ the nasty little hungry inexperienced scabs that prevail at most DZ's.

There could also be a public safety issue here.
If the public is paying good money for this dangerous game they're usually gonna want the best service they can get not just the 'maggots on the block'.

[toolbox 0]

I just spoke with a good friend and excellent instuctor today who has thrown in the towel. He said he is tired of always being broke. He has already found a mainstream job and will never work with another student again. Just three years ago he loved working with students. The low pay per skydive and potential bad weather can ruin the bank account real fast. Just as you said riggerrob,it's the long days for small pay that has led to the loss of staff.
I know people who park cars that make more in tips in a year than I make with my paychecks.

[popsjumper 2]

Eule has touched on something here when speaking of the SIM and it's readability.

"A couple of ideas for this: First, change bars in the margin would let people quickly see what's new or changed. Second, especially for extensive changes, perhaps issuing a "what's new" document along with the SIM would be helpful."

What's needed is a Technical Writer that knows how to present information in a readable and attention retaining manner.

Change bars and a Record of Changes section are good starts but only a decent Technical Writer can put the entire document in order.

I'm not going into great detail here as to how we TWs do things but a good TW is definitely needed.

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

[Tonto 1]

Great post.

I've been jumping for 21 years and have been doing Instructional dives since 1992, mainly weekends only.

7 years ago I got a "real" job. 3 years ago I let my Tandem rating lapse, mainly because I wanted to fly my wingsuit more often. 2 years ago I let my Static Line Instructors and Jumpmasters ratings lapse as I was tired of being tasked to look after students other than my AFF - who's paying for my time - or while I was fun jumping.

I love doing AFF. That seems to be more a passion than a job, and I'm pretty sure if I won the lottery I would continue to do it.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Elisha 1]

Quote

Eule has touched on something here when speaking of the SIM and it's readability.

"A couple of ideas for this: First, change bars in the margin would let people quickly see what's new or changed. Second, especially for extensive changes, perhaps issuing a "what's new" document along with the SIM would be helpful."

What's needed is a Technical Writer that knows how to present information in a readable and attention retaining manner.

Change bars and a Record of Changes section are good starts but only a decent Technical Writer can put the entire document in order.

I'm not going into great detail here as to how we TWs do things but a good TW is definitely needed.

I'll definitely second this. I helped out a TW inserting markers and other such stuff (it's been 6 years - don't quite remember exactly) on some few hundred page engineering manual using Adobe Framemaker. It's not exactly Word Processing.

[airtwardo 6]

I'm not going into great detail here as to how we TWs do things


***

It's ALL..."Smoke and Mirrors!"

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

[riggerrob 558]

Maybe we need an electronic union of professional skydivers.
Licensed instructors would be only be allowed to post comments about DZs that they had worked at. Only first-hand experiences would be published.
IOW, you would not be allowed to bad-mouth a DZ that you had not worked at.

How many jumps can you expect to make per day?
... per week?
... per month?
... per year?
What is the pecking order among instructors?
How efficient is manifest?
How much do they pay?
Do they pay on time?
Do they pay in Joe Dollars?
Do they provide employment at an alternate DZ during winter months?
How well are their aircraft maintained?
What extra duties (cleaning, picking up students from the bus stop, etc.) are expected of full-time staff?
Do their pilots follow the air regulations?
How often do they "push" deteriorating weather?
How closely do they follow USPA, CSPA, etc. syllabus?
Who packs school parachutes?
Do they have a separate loft?
Who maintains their school parachutes?
Do they follow the AAD manufacturer's maintenance schedule?
How often do they re-line school canopies?

If a DZ accumulated too many negative comments, they would have difficulty hiring full-time staff from out of state. For example, a certain East Coast DZO still owes me for 50 hours worth of sewing (patching canopies that students landed in trees).

In the long run, we could also make the electronic union ratings available to the general public - as read-only.

Don't worry, Skyride will not be left out.
Rumor has it, Skyride has already formed their own AASP (American Association of Professional Skydivers). AASP has already awarded GOOD to PERFECT ratings to all Skyride DZs.
Hee!
Hee!

[teason 0]

Wow Derek, that hurts.

I wish I could get instructor retension but I can't. When an Instructor doesn't show, I suffer because I have to pick up the slack.

I've had days where I've taught the FJC and done 5-6 tandems at the same time. It results in poor instruction. It's hard to teach a class and gear up a tandem student at the same time.

Last week I asked an instructor to teach the FJC for me because I was way too under staffed and he said yes. The next morning when he showed up, he saw me struggling and decided to tell me he wanted and $50 for the FJC or he'd walk and I'd have to teach it.

I've had to deal with this BS alot this year. I had three IAD instructors strike because the wanted to jump highly loaded elliptical canopies that they wern't ready for. When I said no (because of concern for their safety)they walked.

So I had to do extra work as did the other instructor who were left. We all suffered.

I have instructors who make more money than I do and they want more even though we pay more than any other DZ in canada that I know of.

If you want to know what kills enthusiasm for the sport it's trying turning the DZ into a money machine.

DZOs aren't the only one who are focused on the almighty dollar it's also some instructors. That's what kills the enthusiasm.

I didn't start a DZ because I thought I'd be able to make money and do free jumps. I started a DZ because I loved teaching new jumpers. The feeling I get when I help someone find the strength to conquer a fear is amazing.

To me Skydiving is not about making money, it's about doing what you love.

Anyone (DZOs or instructors) who is trying to make skydiving a lucrative career is hurting the sport and probably should leave. I really don't understand that type of thinking but one thing I do understand is that it is infectious and destroys the bond people have with the sport.

Focusing on money is poison to the sport.

I just spent $25000 on hanger rennos (well ... borrowed, I ain't got that type of cash). The rennos do not bring in more customers. The rennos do not increase the price of jumps and rennos do not increase profit.

What the rennos do is create a DZ that I can be proud of. The create areas that invite skydivers to socialize. They create a comfortable area in the spring and fall where they can relax and build the bonds between each other that are so important for skydiving.

I think about how much debt I'm in because of these rennos but then I hear Skydivers having a good time and staying after hours and I know it's worth it.

I don't know if I can do this forever, having work dumped on me, being treated like money grubbing garbage and living on other peoples charity because I can't afford a place of my own with all I put in the DZ but when I start treating the DZ like my road to riches that's when I better get the fuck out.

That's when I'll start hurting the sport.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Wow Derek, that hurts.

Sometimes the truth does hurt.

I worked as a full time Instructor for a year and a half. I worked 7 days a week, 12+ hours a day. 1000 jumps/year @ $25.00/jump. You do the math. No benefits. No paid time off. No health insurance. Treated like an Independent Contractor and expected to act like an employee. Yelled at when I wouldn’t take my student though a solid cloud layer at 4,000 feet. Told, “You know your choices”, when I complained that the tachometer was disconnected on the Cessna and the maintenance wasn’t getting done. Then given a 1099 at the end o the year.

If DZO’s don’t want to pay for good help, then they won’t get good help. You get what you pay for. The good Instructors either quit when things don’t improve or they hang on, trying to serve their students, knowing that if they quit, their students will be left to the 300-jump AFFI that is just happy to be able to skydive for a living.

You say “To me Skydiving is not about making money, it's about doing what you love”

That’s great, but 5 years later when you have nothing, then money begins to matter. If having nothing but being able to skydive for a living is what you want, then good for you, but don’t expect to retain quality staff by expecting the same from them. How long do you think an engineer for Microsoft would hang around if they treated them like a full-time skydiver, even if they loved their job?

“I don't know if I can do this forever, having work dumped on me, being treated like money grubbing garbage and living on other peoples charity because I can't afford a place of my own with all I put in the DZ”

I felt the same way when I was skydiving full time. I looked at where I would be in 5 years and got out. I was working way to hard to not have anything to show for it.

Derek

[Ron 7]

Quote

I think this kind of goes along with the feeling that some DZ.com posters have expressed that USPA doesn't represent individual jumpers anymore and is instead a trade association for the DZs/DZOs. I haven't been around long enough to say if I agree with this or not, but if you take it as a given, that also seems to say that there should be at least two organizations: one for the jumpers, one for the DZOs.

One way to do that would be to let the USPA be for the DZOs and create a new organization for the jumpers. I am not sure how well this would work; starting a new organization takes a lot of time, effort, and money.

Another way is to have the USPA be the jumpers' organization and expand PIA to include the DZOs. PIA is already concerned with the business side of parachuting, but it seems like, at the moment, they mostly represent the gear manufacturers. I know that some larger DZs are also members, but I don't think there are nearly as many DZs that are PIA members as there are DZs that are USPA Group Members. This may be also be hard to set up; if one assumes that the DZOs are currently "in charge" of the USPA and are structuring the rules to favor themselves, they probably won't like the idea of being a couple of steps removed from the rule-making process.

Again, I am not an instructor and I haven't been around that long. It just seems like there are a couple of areas where "splitting DZs from the USPA" might possibly be interesting.

I agree 100%. The USPA is more interested in DZO's than regular jumpers.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 7]

Quote

We need to unionize and we need to go on strike. All of us, every single AFF Instructor must stand up for a living wage.

Won't work. Not a chance. Not everyone would go on strike, and even if they did most people would be moved to Tandems, PLUS the damage done to the DZ would be pretty bad. And then what? We pay the AFF "I's" a bit more and then we have to raise the cost of the AFF jumps even more.

Most people when they find the cost of an instructional jump tend to think the price is already too high. We will lose even more students with an even higher price tag.

That is one of the problems we as a sport are having. It costs so much that people quit, or do less.

Quote

A month of no AFF jumps anywhere in the U.S. would change things

I don't think for the better. Strikes will not work well in such a low return business and if we raise prices we will just lose more people.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334