bclark 0
I have not read all of the extensive debate in this thread. My feelings are that the PRO rating is a challenging rating to get. I think that if you get your PRO rating fairly you earned it. I have seen a few people getting their PRO's who have really half assed it. Examples: counting non pre declared open field demos as PRO jumps. NOT passing the PRO written exam, (not even close) and then having the test pencil whipped.
Anyway: If people demonstrate the skills and discipline to get the rating, and do it correctly I think they are qualified. Also S&TA's, I/E's and others in positions of authority need to be stringent in making sure the people they are signing off actually meet the requirements.
Anyway: If people demonstrate the skills and discipline to get the rating, and do it correctly I think they are qualified. Also S&TA's, I/E's and others in positions of authority need to be stringent in making sure the people they are signing off actually meet the requirements.
QuoteI have not read all of the extensive debate in this thread. My feelings are that the PRO rating is a challenging rating to get. I think that if you get your PRO rating fairly you earned it. I have seen a few people getting their PRO's who have really half assed it. Examples: counting non pre declared open field demos as PRO jumps. NOT passing the PRO written exam, (not even close) and then having the test pencil whipped.
Anyway: If people demonstrate the skills and discipline to get the rating, and do it correctly I think they are qualified. Also S&TA's, I/E's and others in positions of authority need to be stringent in making sure the people they are signing off actually meet the requirements.
I think we are all on the same page on the issues you mention. Now we need to pressure USPA to see to it that things are done correctly. And I say again, are you listening USPA board.
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals
QuoteLastly, what does the money that we pro-rated jumpers give to USPA go. I have heard many scenarios over the years, none of them justifing the added expense of the rating. There shpould be a large sum of extra money just from the pro-rated jumpers. Shouldn't this be used to help offset the curreny cost of insurance?
QuoteYou're joking right?
As it currently stands...the PRO program is bleeding the USPA general membership fund at a critical rate.
$4.78 of each and every members yearly dues go to subsidize the PRO Demo insurance program...
and even at that rate USPA has to come up with additional funds to cover insurance costs...
that's the reason the insurance rate just doubled as of today!
I've been trying to stay abreast of the current situation as far as demo insurance goes...
and hey gang!
It is REAL likely that it will go away altogether following the next BOD meeting.
It's an emotional issue for me, I've been doing in the area of 100 paid demo jumps a year for the past 20 plus years.
But I do fully under the business decision USPA must make at this point, and the rational behind it.
Don't like it..wish we would have done something 5 years ago to raise the PRO qualifications ...
Perhaps we wouldn't have had so many high dollar insurance claims.
And we wouldn't be in this position of trying to come up with a Band-Aid this late in the game.
Unfortunately it looks as if anything we do may be too little too late!
And to clarify...
PRO stands for Professional,
The definition of a Professional is someone that gets PAID to perform.
If you are a Professional Parachute Demonstration Jumper...how is it that 250.00 bucks will make you stop???
In a business scenario, if the cost of the product goes up...
isn't that cost actually passed on to the consumer?
If said "professional" can't 'afford' to continue in business ...
Then perhaps the business model being used needs revising.
If 250-500 bucks would assure the continuance of the program it would be a small price to pay.
(We average 3500.00 a year for ICAS membership & convention, 1500.00
for PIA)
...we spend over 2000 a year on RESERVE packs for team gear...
Not trying to sound glib or anything, but at just what level are many of the PRO rated jumpers using their ratings?
How many times a year doing demos? Getting Paid?
Maybe Masher's info is a possible way to go...
A 'semi-pro' rating and a Pro rating.
...Make a Skydive...Get a Check!
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
QuoteSo, if someone doesn't mind paying, or can easily afford a $250 rating fee, then they are going to be a professional, concientious jumper that doesn't pencil whip thier quals or lie about thier ability?
Quote
I think you missed my point altogether.
No, just paying the money would not make someone a better demo jumper.
But long term it could.
If the money were used toward that end...
as in a program that assisted with and assured compliance of, a more safety stringent demo environment overall.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
QuoteTwo, the bandit jumps will get out of control. If it cost $200 to $300 dollars to get a PRO Rating less people are going to do it. Does that mean that Joe skydiver is still not going to jump into his buddies cookout, I don't think so.
Quote
If Joe Skydiver wants to make a bandit jump..so be it.
He will be putting himself at an EXTREME liability risk in doing so.
As without the proper qualifications and credentials insurance wouldn't be available.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
[
And my point was: If everyone stuck to the rules as they are, then there would be no problem. Follow the rules. Complicating things, increasing fees and adding more red tape does nothing. We don't need a big government approach here.
Quote
I think you missed my point altogether.
No, just paying the money would not make someone a better demo jumper.
But long term it could.
If the money were used toward that end...
as in a program that assisted with and assured compliance of, a more safety stringent demo environment overall.
And my point was: If everyone stuck to the rules as they are, then there would be no problem. Follow the rules. Complicating things, increasing fees and adding more red tape does nothing. We don't need a big government approach here.
John Wright
World's most beloved skydiver
World's most beloved skydiver
QuoteAnd my point was: If everyone stuck to the rules as they are, then there would be no problem. Follow the rules. Complicating things, increasing fees and adding more red tape does nothing. We don't need a big government approach here.
QuoteUnfortunately, that's a big " if "
And as history in this matter has shown, that's just not happening.
The state of matters as far as Pro Demo Insurance is concerned is testament that the present system is inadequate.
"Wishing" everyone would obey the rules, follow the guidelines and play nice...
without any oversight, just isn't working.
If you truly have any constructive input as to how to even approach fixing the current situation facing Demonstration Professionals...I'm all ears!
To say everything would be fine...if it were different,
doesn't merit consideration.
And if you believe things will / should just stay as they are...
you in fact have no concept of the gravity of the situation.
Trust me, unless action is taken to rectify the program, a year from now the 'PRO" rating as it currently stands won't exist.
The only people able to do "insured" demonstrations will be the ones with deep enough pockets to procure liability coverage on their own.
If the idea of being committed enough to getting a PRO rating, doesn't include raising the standards....
wait until you have to come up with 10 grand to cover the premium for a weekend demo on your own.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
This would be a great place to start, are you listening USPA board members?
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites