NewUSPA Age rule, Tandems, 16 with notarized consent-Will your DZ use it?

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

The manufacturers may eventually simply not send the tandem equipment to DZ's that allow tandem passengers under the age of majority for that state.

Be aware....

That would be serious serious money lost. If they (manufactures) keep the age requirements in their contract and that contract is broken to allow someone under the proper age to go, then its not the manufacture's ass if something happens.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If they (manufactures) keep the age requirements in their contract and that contract is broken to allow someone under the proper age to go, then its not the manufacture's ass if something happens.

Actually, you are incorrect (in most, if not all states). The question becomes whether it is foreseeable to the manufacturer that a dz would use the tandem equipment in a way inconsistent with the contract. The manufacturer is still on the line, and must pay up. Under option one of my system, it would then be up to the manufacturer to recover from the DZ for anything lost (indemnity).

Unfortunately, the dz may have been wiped clean in a lawsuit, and the manufacturer will have to pony up to the plaintiff.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Here is the new age BSR from the latest USPA meeting:

The requirement for tandem jumpers to be at least age of legal majority was removed from the BSRs. Now all skydivers, regardless of type jump, must meet the same requirements: 18 years of age or 16 with notarized parental or guardian consent.



What do you think????


Buzz

I think it is a step in the wrong direction.
I voted against both motions, by name, on the 16 y.o. age limit.
One motion changed the BSRs and the other motion changed the Bylaws.

The 16 yo BSR and the statement 'No person under the age of sixteen(16) shall be eligible for actual skydiving although membership is encouraged.' (from the bylaws) are in place for historical or legacy reasons. Back when the BSRs and Bylaws were first written the legal climate in the US was significantly different than it is today. There was not a proliferation of lawsuits in the 1960s and 1970s. People took responsibility for their actions. I believe that if PCA or USPA were formed today the language would be 'age of legal majority'. This would be because of the many lawsuits we see today and how the whuffo community perceives skydiving.

"If George Bush Sr. can jump out of a plane and nothing happens to him, I don't know how my good friend, who is perfectly healthy, can jump out of a plane and something happens to him." said by Jay Sleyter a friend of Joel D. Morgan who was the recent fatality at SDC. [source Chicago Tribune 7/9/04]

IOW, the whuffo community used to believe that all skydivers were crazy and had a death wish. Today, many whuffos believe that skydiving is 'perfectly safe'. This is incorrect because skydiving is a hazardous activity. It is safer today than yesterday, but it is still dangerous.

At the July 2002 USPA BOD meeting, Relative Workshop sent Mr. TK Donle to petition the BOD to add an age requirement for tandems that used the verbiage 'the age of legal majority'. Motion 50 from this meeting added that to the BSRs for tandem jumps. The vote was 18 to 1.

People immediately saw the inconsistency between the tandem age BSR and the AFF/SL/IAD (single harness, dual parachute system) age BSR. People did not recognize that the AFF/SL/IAD age BSR was a legacy that just kept propagating because "that's the way we've always done it" and that the tandem age BSR was a new age limitation driven by the FAA adopting tandem within it's doctrine and the current legal climate in the US.

At the July 2004 USPA BOD meeting there were two motions concerning age.

One motion struck the sentence 'No person under the age of sixteen(16) shall be eligible for actual skydiving although membership is encouraged.' from the bylaws. The vote was not unanimous (I do not have the exact vote count).

The second motion changed the wording in the BSRs as mentioned by Buzz.
The vote was not unanimous (I do not have the exact vote count).

You might want to ask BOD members that were on the BOD in 2002 and in 2004 why they changed their mind on this issue.

IIRC, the tandem mfgs have age limits in their contracts and you must get a waiver from them in order to do under-age tandems.

Any instructor or coach that is asked by their DZO to jump with under-age children should realize that your personal assets could be in jeopardy if some bad happened. More so when a minor is hurt or killed than an adult. Instructional staff has the right to refuse to jump with minors. You might start asking all students how old they are if your DZ accepts under-age jumpers and you do not want to do them. Hopefully, most DZOs and instructional staff will not accept minors.

I strongly recommend re-reading this post.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[AggieDave 6]

Wow, thanks for correcting me, I learned something very interesting tonight.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[buzzfink 5]

Quote

At the July 2002 USPA BOD meeting, Relative Workshop sent Mr. TK Donle to petition the BOD to add an age requirement for tandems that used the verbiage 'the age of legal majority'. Motion 50 from this meeting added that to the BSRs for tandem jumps. The vote was 18 to 1.

Then Bill Booth decides it's OK to take his underage daughter, on a Tandem Demo at that. So what happened to underage Tandems being so terrible Bill???

Quote

IIRC, the tandem mfgs have age limits in their contracts and you must get a waiver from them in order to do under-age tandems.

Only Relative Workshop does as far as I know.

Quote

Instructional staff has the right to refuse to jump with minors.

Instructional staff have the right not to jump with any one for any reason. But on the flip side, the DZO also has the right to stop using them and replace them with someone who will.


For the record, I am split on this issue. Done correctly, I think it can be done safely with the risk managed. The bottom line is do you want to? As for Instructors, I do not feel it is appropriate to pressure any Instructor to take anyone under 18 and there unwillingness to do so should not effect their employment. But others think differently. Bottomline is stand up for what you believe, even if it means you may not be doing Tandems at that DZ anymore and know the risks. If you don't have much to lose, and realize you may have to file bankruptcy if an accident occurs, then go for it. If you have alot to lose, then think twice.

As for the Manufacturers liability, I think it is way overstated. And Bill Booths hipocracy by taking his underage daughter says it all. Why haven't manufacturers also put age restrictions on their regular experienced parachute systems? I know of alot of 16 & 17 year olds jumping. Won't the whole industry go down if they die too???

Also, Don't take my post wrong. I think Bill Booth has done alot for the Industry. But on this issue, I think his taking his underage daughter says it all.

With that said, I think USPA did the proper thing to leave it up to the DZ's. Good work!

Blue Skies!


Buzz

[skydiverton 0]

Quote

Users of Relative Workshop Tandem equipment:
Please be aware that this change in the BSR's does not free you from your contactual responsibility not to allow anyone "below the age of majority" to use our tandem equipment. It is paragraph 11 in your User Agreement. Waivers are available from Relative Workshop for extraordinary circumstances.

Bill, why do you still sell tandemrigs to europe?
We both know we are jumping with passengers well "below the age of majority"
The tandem with the youngest passenger ever has been made with a Vector.

On the other hand there has never been a serious case concerning tandemjumps in the Netherlands

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Using your droque to gain stability is a bad habit,
Especially when you are jumping a sport rig

[ryoder 1,380]

Quote

Quote

Users of Relative Workshop Tandem equipment:
Please be aware that this change in the BSR's does not free you from your contactual responsibility not to allow anyone "below the age of majority" to use our tandem equipment. It is paragraph 11 in your User Agreement. Waivers are available from Relative Workshop for extraordinary circumstances.

Bill, why do you still sell tandemrigs to europe?
We both know we are jumping with passengers well "below the age of majority"
The tandem with the youngest passenger ever has been made with a Vector.

On the other hand there has never been a serious case concerning tandemjumps in the Netherlands

This ongoing discussion is about the US Parachute Association, a US manufacturer, and the US legal system.

1. The US legal system in notorious for allowing baseless lawsuits to procede, and awarding outlandish sums of money.

2. Since Bill Booth and RWS are in the US, a lawsuit has the potential to bankrupt Booth and RWS.

3. What is the worst that could happen as the result of a European accident? Probably RWS would have to stop doing business in that country. I doubt there is any way a foreign incident could result in the seizure of US assets.

In summary, I would say this discussion is mostly irrelevant for operations outside the US.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ryoder 1,380]

Quote

[And Bill Booths hipocracy by taking his underage daughter says it all.

I don't see it as hypocracy at all. (Bad example, perhaps).
The issue at hand is legal liability and exposure to lawsuits. When underage kids get hurt, who is probably pushing the lawsuit?
1. The parents.

Who gets sued? (In order of preference)
1. The instructor.
2. Manufacturers.
3. DZ operators.
4. Airport owners.
5. Pilot.
6. A/c owner.

Now when the parent is also a member of the 2nd group, the likelyhood of a lawsuit goes to about zero. It would probably be more likely the parent might get charged with child-abuse over the injuries.

When people who are in the industry, (eg Booth, Mike Mullins), take their kids jumping, they are fully aware of the risks, and will not be filing frivolous lawsuits. This is very different from a whuffo parent who learns the hard way that Johnny's skydive wasn't as safe as a carnival ride.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[buzzfink 5]

Quote

Now when the parent is also a member of the 2nd group, the likelyhood of a lawsuit goes to about zero. It would probably be more likely the parent might get charged with child-abuse over the injuries.

Then why has RW pulled Tandem ratings of DZO's who have taken their kids? Bill's post states they have a procedure to grant an exemption for "extrordinary" circumstances. I don't think this is extrordinary. As for the likelyhood of a lawsuit falling to zero, what about the wife (or ex-wife)? The siblings? The grandparents? Emotional Distress?

I fully understand Bill's rule and it is within his right to make the rule. I just think it undermines his whole argument when he takes his underage kid on a Tandem. And a Demo at that! It's my understanding from several BoD members also that Bill did not inform the board that the passenger was underage when he approached USPA about it.

And again, I think Bill Booth has done great things for this sport. But nobody is perfect (especially me!). Just ak my wife.


Buzz

[ryoder 1,380]

Quote

Then why has RW pulled Tandem ratings of DZO's who have taken their kids? Bill's post states they have a procedure to grant an exemption for "extrordinary" circumstances. I don't think this is extrordinary. As for the likelyhood of a lawsuit falling to zero, what about the wife (or ex-wife)? The siblings? The grandparents? Emotional Distress?

I wasn't aware of the ratings pulled from DZO's kids rides. I agree that an ex-wife, (especially a non-jumping ex-wife), could change the picture dramatically. I also wonder about that exemption procedure. I can't think of any good reason for an exemption.


Another aspect, which hasn't yet entered this discussion:

What happens when that lovely young thing, (or her parents or boyfriend), believe the middle-aged tandem master touched her inappropriately while fitting the harness, or during the jump?

a) If she is over the age-of-majority, he might get slapped with criminal charges for sexual assault, and a civil suit for sexual harassment.

b) If she is under the age which the local state defines as a child, it may be criminal sexual molestation of a child, and the associated civil suit.

I know which scenario I would prefer.

I bring this up because I recently learned of an incident in which the DZO received a complaint about a TI's tightening of the leg straps. It was apparently filed by an overly-jealous boyfriend who was standing there as the TI geared up the student. Fortunately, the complaint never went further than the DZO, but what if it had been an underage student, and the upset party was a parent?

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Quote

At the July 2002 USPA BOD meeting, Relative Workshop sent Mr. TK Donle to petition the BOD to add an age requirement for tandems that used the verbiage 'the age of legal majority'. Motion 50 from this meeting added that to the BSRs for tandem jumps. The vote was 18 to 1.

Then Bill Booth decides it's OK to take his underage daughter, on a Tandem Demo at that. So what happened to underage Tandems being so terrible Bill???

The BSR 2-1.D.2 is waiverable by the Full Board. What happened at the demo was a paperwork brainlock, not only by Bill but by the BOD members present and reached by phone. All 4 BOD members were at the Summer 2002 mtg and knew the rule. It was an oversight not to ask about or provide the age of the passenger.

A waiver was also needed to 2-1.J.5. The USPA President obtained that waiver on site the day of the demo.

Quote

And Bill Booths hipocracy by taking his underage daughter says it all.

What about USPA's hypocrisy? USPA granted a retro-active waiver to 2-1.D.2 (tandem age BSR) on 4-9-04 for a tandem jump done with a 16 yo. It was a Make-a-Wish jump.

I floated the idea of a retro-active waiver for Bill's jump with his 17 yo daughter after the Winter 04 meeting. No one liked that idea. Suppose it was Joe Jumper that did the under-age demo jump last fall? People are bent because it was Bill Booth, but he broke a rule that was waiverable. He probably would have obtained the waiver if someone asked about age. A few months later USPA gave a retro-active waiver for the same rule and circumstance.

A paperwork brainlock has lead to a change in the BSRs that opens up USPA to a much larger liability. USPA is almost always named in lawsuits.

This is probably all a moot discussion anyway. Most DZs will still require jumpers to be 18 anyway.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[slotperfect 7]

I am not a lawyer, and I don't have a thorough understanding of 1) the liability of taking minors on a tandem skydive, 2) my level of risk in that liability, or 3) just how well our DZ waiver would stand up in court.

I am a skydiving instructor, and I do know that 1) the level of assumed risk in skydiving has been mitigated through improvements in equipment and training to a level that has made jumping out of airplanes safer than that I have ever seen it, 2) there is HUGE value in people assuming such risks to make a tandem skydive, and 3) the value that I get personally from sharing a first skydive experience with my students far outweighs the liability cloud hanging over our heads in this country.

I agree with Chuck Blue:

Quote

If you live your life in fear of being sued, then you might as well just not ever get any sort of instructional rating or start any skydiving-related business. I don't have such fears.

I don't live my life that way either.

I do respect the proprietary wishes of the owners of the skydiving school at Raeford, along with those of the DZO. Additionally, they do not ask any of us on the instructional staff to operate outside our personal limits, or those established by the rig manufacturers, USPA, FAA, local and state laws, etc. If things change so 16 years olds are given the green light at Raeford, and someone on the staff chooses not to take anyone under 18, that will be respected.

I have two children, 13 & 10. They both want to skydive. Their Mom (a former skydiver and occasional tandem student of mine) also supports them making a skydive. As a father, I look forward greatly to the day when I can share my love of the freedom of the sky with them. I see great value in that for them and for me, despite the risk. I will choose not to seek a "bootleg" jump for them, because I feel I would be teaching them that all of the guidelines I have been upholding for all these years apply to everyone else but me.

If I can do it for them at 16 because of all the tandem age limit issues coming into collective agreement, it will be an incredible joy. If I can do it by requesting special permission from Relative Workshop, I will be grateful. If nothing changes then I will either train them as AFF students at 16 or wait until they turn 18.

Arrive Safely

John

[buzzfink 5]

Quote

I floated the idea of a retro-active waiver for Bill's jump with his 17 yo daughter after the Winter 04 meeting. No one liked that idea. Suppose it was Joe Jumper that did the under-age demo jump last fall? People are bent because it was Bill Booth, but he broke a rule that was waiverable.

I think many people were "bent out of shape" because Bill Booth, being one of the leading authorities on Tandem jumping, knew she was underage and told no one. Do you really think Bill Booth of all people did not know of the BSR requirement? And that Bill is one of the strongest voices against underage Tandems and will revoke ratings for it. That's why people get bent out of shape.

Quote

He probably would have obtained the waiver if someone asked about age.

I think not. Many were opposed to it. Taking an underage child that is terminally ill for their "make a wish" Tandem jump is much different than taking your daughter on a tandem demo.

If you believe it was simply an oversight by Bill, then you don't give Bill as much credit as he deserves.

Blue Skies!


Buzz

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Then Bill Booth decides it's OK to take his underage daughter, on a Tandem Demo at that. So what happened to underage Tandems being so terrible Bill???

Do you have children? If so, do you ever practice corporal punishment? If so, do you let others practice corporal punishment?

Look. There are differences in this. Any parent would recognize them.

Bill's not gonna sue himself. In fact, Bill has removed ALL moral hazard by not being insured, since some people mess themselves up and sue themselves to get insurance money. It happens. Bill's got no insurance, so what's he gonna do?

Bill is an extremely intelligent businessman. And Bill Booth also seems to have a good fucking attorney advising him. And Bill is smart enough to take the advice. As an attorney, I'm glad.

On the other hand, as a human and past and future jumper, I'm glad there are guys like Chuck Blue out there who prove to be great ambassadors of the sport. Like Bill Booth, only with a different approach.

I applaud them both.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[tspillers 0]

As Bill mentioned it is already in their user agreement to not allow anyone under age.

Todd

I am not totally useless, I can be used as a bad example.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

I think many people were "bent out of shape" because Bill Booth, being one of the leading authorities on Tandem jumping, knew she was underage and told no one. Do you really think Bill Booth of all people did not know of the BSR requirement? And that Bill is one of the strongest voices against underage Tandems and will revoke ratings for it. That's why people get bent out of shape.

I do think BB knew of the tandem-age BSR. I do think he pulled a fast one. I also know that the quorum of the Executive Comm. by-passed the S&T Comm. The usual procedure to any BSR waiver request is to run it by the S&T Comm first. This was not done. It was an embarrassing situation all around.

What you don’t get is that the 'bent out of shape' reason was used to change the BSRs.

In my book, that is not a sufficient reason to open USPA up to additional liabilities.

All of the reasons TK Donle and RW's attorney stated for the language of 'age of legal majority' are still valid today as they were in 2002.

Just because USPA opens a door, does not mean you have to walk through it. The 16 yo age limit for single-harness, dual parachute system has been in effect for years. Very few DZs walked through that door. The waiverability of the tandem age BSR was available for jumps by Make-A-Wish and kids of jumpers.

Opening the door to whuffo kids for tandems is potentially a huge liability for USPA.

In the interest of USPA, I voted against the changes.
.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[billbooth 10]

Buzz;

I didn't try and hide my daughters age from anyone. Before I got her out of school and flew her the 400 miles to Carolina Sky Sports, I asked the DZO Paul Fayard if it was OK. Both Paul and his wife were aware that Katie was 17 and still gave their permission. Then, on the very morning of the jump, we were told that Katie couldn't make the jump because she didn't have a "D" license (an unknown to me demo jump insurance requirement). Katie, as you might expect, was heartbroken. I then asked if that requirement was waiverable. I was told it was, and was granted one "on the spot" by the USPA board members present...for which both Katie and I thanked them profusely.

All this happened as we were suiting up for the dive. Katie's age simply did not come up, and I frankly didn't fully understand, or for that matter even care which particular rule was being waivered, as long as Katie could jump. I guess I assumed that Katie's age was known by all involved, since I had made no attempt to hide it, and she doesn't even look 16 to start with. I guess I was wrong.

The Demo in question was into the 100 th anniversary of the Wright Brother's first flight, at Kitty Hawk. I doubted they would have put off the celebration for three months until Katie turned 18. I decided that this was a special, time sensitive, occasion that my aviation buff daughter would never forget. It was simply a gift I had to give her. So I issued an exemption to Relative Workshop's rule. I would have done the same for any experience tandem instructor parent who wanted to jump their 17 year old into such a momentous event.

But guys...all of this has nothing whatever to do with DZ's, in the US, taking up paying passengers without valid waivers. I have nothing against children jumping tandem. I have taken many myself, IN OTHER COUNTRIES. My problem is with the US legal system which makes large scale jumping of whuffo children a truly stupid enterprise for all of us.

Katie has told me that this jump was one of the peak experiences of her life (including her first tandem jump at age 12 into the North Pole). While I don't really believe in fate, I felt on that jump over the Wright Brother's Memorial, that this is why I had developed tandem in the first place...so I could be there, in freefall, at that moment, with my daughter. If you guys can't give me that, then to hell with you.

[skydiverton 0]

Quote

Buzz;

Katie has told me that this jump was one of the peak experiences of her life (including her first tandem jump at age 12 into the North Pole). While I don't really believe in fate, I felt on that jump over the Wright Brother's Memorial, that this is why I had developed tandem in the first place...so I could be there, in freefall, at that moment, with my daughter. If you guys can't give me that, then to hell with you.

Bill,

Of course You should have the ability to jump with your daughter, espessially in such an event.

Now it becomes clear to me you only have problems with taking underage in the US because of legal issues.
I assume you agree underage passengers can be taken in countries without such a law system.

I think you do a great job for the sport, please continiue the way RS is doing.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Using your droque to gain stability is a bad habit,
Especially when you are jumping a sport rig

[buzzfink 5]

Bill,
No disrespect is intended. But many people want to do the same thing you did. They want to take their kids skydiving.

As for the risk, it should be left up to the DZ. I think USPA did the right thing. I do not think the majority of DZ's will start taking underage tandems just as they have not taken underage AFF or Staticlines.

As you have stated, this is a liability issue, not a Basic Safety issue.

While I no longer run a civilian DZ, I have been assured by several attorneys that there are ways to mitigate the liability (i.e. seperate corporations, parents signing legal defense contracts, etc.). Perhaps this does not meet your acceptable standards but as you know, many feel the risk is acceptable. That's their right and their decision.

Let's worry more about stopping those over 18 from killing themselves under an open parachute and all go out and have some fun skydiving.

Blue Skies!


Buzz

[tombuch 0]

Quote

As for the risk, it should be left up to the DZ. I think USPA did the right thing. I do not think the majority of DZ's will start taking underage tandems just as they have not taken underage AFF or Staticlines.

I think USPA blew it on this one. The big difference between solo programs such as AFF and SL , and tandem, is that drop zones sell AFF and SL as training, but they sell and treat tandem as a ride. There is a feeling that we wouldn't put underage kids out alone, but heck, strap them to an instructor and nothing can go wrong. That's of course the wrong way to view tandem, but it does seem to be the industry view, and it's the way many of our customers think of tandem.

When an adult gets hurt or killed, the liability is mitigated by a waiver. When a child gets hurt or killed, the waiver is useless. You are correct that the drop zone should be able to define its own level of liability, but when there is no valid waiver, the drop zone is inflicting the elevated risk on the manufacturers and USPA. That's us. No drop zone should be allowed to inflict the financial liability of a no-waiver skydive on USPA or the manufacturers.

If I had my druthers, the age limit would be 18 for all programs, and would be waiverable by the full board. That would allow a program to take a very specific minor under specific circumstances, without subjecting the organization to unlimited liability.

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

[obelixtim 100]

Personally, coming from outside the US, I've always thought the liability laws in the US are crazy, way outside the boundaries of common sense, and are an unnecessary burden for everyone who tries to make things happen.....which is sad....

At what age can citizens of the US don uniform and expose themselves to the possibility of being shot full of holes in Iraq or other hotspots around the globe???.......16????.....and who is liable in this case.......

Not sure of the answers here....just wondering about consistency if Government is involved....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[PhreeZone 14]

You can enlist in the military in the US at age 17 if you have a High school diploma/GED and notorized parental consent. Otherwise you have to wait till you are 18.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[ryoder 1,380]

Quote

Personally, coming from outside the US, I've always thought the liability laws in the US are crazy, way outside the boundaries of common sense, and are an unnecessary burden for everyone who tries to make things happen.....which is sad....

Aahhh....I see you understand our US legal system PERFECTLY!

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[livendive 8]

Quote

You can enlist in the military in the US at age 17 if you have a High school diploma/GED and notorized parental consent. Otherwise you have to wait till you are 18.

I enlisted in the Navy at age 17 while only a junior in high school. Went to boot camp during summer break and then played reservist one weekend a month during my senior year.

Blues,
Dave

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Personally, coming from outside the US, I've always thought the liability laws in the US are crazy, way outside the boundaries of common sense, and are an unnecessary burden for everyone who tries to make things happen.....which is sad....

The American system works well to curb abuses, but relies on a certain degree of common sense and personal responsibility. Unfortunately that sometimes appears lacking.

The alternative method used by some nations is to presume their citizens lack them and to make the safety decisions for them. Given the choice, I'll stick with the one I know. It doesn't work as well for minors, but overall will usually give me the ability to pick my level of risk. Sometimes that means finding the right operator that caters to people like us.