0
fencebuster

Proposed Amendment of BSR concerning TI Medical

Recommended Posts

DUI/DWI alcohol level difference only!" decision making & responsibility
no difference.
Can a background check on an individual determine his physical capability? not really.
Next question; how does a background check for DUI/DWI,determine the current physical & mental condition of a tdm master?

Alcohol & drug abuse,by tdm masters,most Likely caused last year one tdm fatal,both tdm master& tdm student.And one tdm incident both tdm master&student critically injured on crash landing,seconds away from a fatal,thank god but not.

the daily check on a tdm master would have the best results to keep everyone safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is , given the popular .08% limit, almost anyone that drinks could find themselves in the position of making this mistake. A first offense should not be an end all judgement against someone. It's not viewed that way in court, why do you see it that way?
People should not have to suffer penalties beyond the court system. Making someone pay the rest of their life for making a mistake is idiotic IMO.
Removing someone's ability to make a living due to one mistake is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
normiss

My point is , given the popular .08% limit, almost anyone that drinks could find themselves in the position of making this mistake. A first offense should not be an end all judgement against someone. It's not viewed that way in court, why do you see it that way?
People should not have to suffer penalties beyond the court system. Making someone pay the rest of their life for making a mistake is idiotic IMO.
Removing someone's ability to make a living due to one mistake is wrong.


And here you are absolutely wrong. 1 DUI is not a death sentence. As Mr. Mullins pointed out there is a road to redemption. And as far as anyone could make that mistake you are absolutely WRONG. It is a conscience decision to drive drunk. We are all grown ups we know the ramifications of driving drunk.

A TI or a Pilot KNOW they will those their ticket if they take that chance which shows POOR decision making skills. And that is why it is part of the medical. If you are willing to put innocent peoples lives in danger with no regard then you have no business flying paying passengers. How you can justify that is mind boggling.

And yes I am for a 90 day jail term for the first offense. I do not know the recidivism rate for drunks so I wont make up numbers but use my own circle as reference. Those I know with DUI's all have at least 2 because the first one wasn't painful enough they had to try it again. My brother is one of those and when his friends called me on the second one to see if I wanted to bail him out I said thanks for calling but I'm going back to bed. He got their by himself he can get out by himself. Something my mother told me the first time I was arrested.

You see my history is one of amends and redemption. By the grace of God I never killed anyone or even got a DUI. More so because I am a really good Liar/shit talker not because I never drove drunk.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catfishhunter

***My point is , given the popular .08% limit, almost anyone that drinks could find themselves in the position of making this mistake. A first offense should not be an end all judgement against someone. It's not viewed that way in court, why do you see it that way?
People should not have to suffer penalties beyond the court system. Making someone pay the rest of their life for making a mistake is idiotic IMO.
Removing someone's ability to make a living due to one mistake is wrong.


And here you are absolutely wrong. 1 DUI is not a death sentence. As Mr. Mullins pointed out there is a road to redemption. And as far as anyone could make that mistake you are absolutely WRONG. It is a conscience decision to drive drunk. We are all grown ups we know the ramifications of driving drunk.

A TI or a Pilot KNOW they will those their ticket if they take that chance which shows POOR decision making skills. And that is why it is part of the medical. If you are willing to put innocent peoples lives in danger with no regard then you have no business flying paying passengers. How you can justify that is mind boggling.

And yes I am for a 90 day jail term for the first offense. I do not know the recidivism rate for drunks so I wont make up numbers but use my own circle as reference. Those I know with DUI's all have at least 2 because the first one wasn't painful enough they had to try it again. My brother is one of those and when his friends called me on the second one to see if I wanted to bail him out I said thanks for calling but I'm going back to bed. He got their by himself he can get out by himself. Something my mother told me the first time I was arrested.

You see my history is one of amends and redemption. By the grace of God I never killed anyone or even got a DUI. More so because I am a really good Liar/shit talker not because I never drove drunk.

And if you know anything about FAA medicals, you would know how wrong you are. One DUI means a denial of your certificate. To get it after that you have to go through more physicals, evaluations, hearings, and jump through lots of hoops. That DUI conviction could be thirty years ago! There is no reasonable explanation for how the FAA determines fitness of pilots based on ancient events.

And if you have ever been prescribed medications on their list, you had better be prepared for a long fight. I would venture to guess most people unwittingly answer these questions wrong too. If you have ever been prescribed Valium or any benzodiazapams, you can lose your med cert. Those can routinely be given pre-operatively to patients with or without their knowledge. You may have gotten Valium the night before your wisdom teeth were extracted or a vasectomy. Guess what, that could be reason to deny your med cert. You have been prescribed meds for psychological reasons.

Lastly, it doesn't matter if Mr. Gittins is a Group member anymore or not. Since this is a BSR, any MEMBER involved in ANY BSR violation can be disciplined by the organization (see USPA governance manual, Section 1-6.B.1 and .2). That means the DZO, DZM, pilot, packer, manifestor, SnTA.... anyone involved. And not just at Group member DZ's, but any member anywhere.

Mr. Gittins is spot on here. USPA has way exceeded its constitution by trying to regulate liability of business with age restrictions for jumpers and now flight restrictions of tandems. They have effectively voided their disclaimer (that they spent tens of thousands of dollars having an attorney draw up) by entering into the regulation not of its members, but of businesses. I would not be surprised if some TI who can't work files an anti-trust lawsuit against USPA someday.

Remember, most of the people on the BOD of USPA work for manufacturers or are dealers for their equipment. In the last ten years, the BOD has repeatedly shown they are willing to put USPA and its members at risk to protect manufacturers' interests. By violating the disclaimer on the SIM, any and all protections that disclaimer ever brought are null.

top
Jump more, post less!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I would venture to guess most people unwittingly answer these questions wrong too. "

That paired with:

"who makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or entry, may be fined up to $250,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both"

Could spell trouble!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
topdocker



And if you know anything about FAA medicals, you would know how wrong you are. One DUI means a denial of your certificate. To get it after that you have to go through more physicals, evaluations, hearings, and jump through lots of hoops. That DUI conviction could be thirty years ago! There is no reasonable explanation for how the FAA determines fitness of pilots based on ancient events.



Not necessarily. It depends on what your BAC was. First offense and below .15, it's at the discretion of the AME to issue.* Above .15 and/or a repeated offense and you're absolutely correct- the AME has to defer it to the FAA Aeromedical division and it gets costly and complicated (but not impossible). Recency also affects it- if you only have one offense and it was more than two years ago, the AME should be able to issue it as long as there is no history or diagnosis of dependence or abuse.


*Even though the AME can issue it, the FAA can overrule the AME and void it once they get the paperwork. This applies to every medical certificate application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The FAA medical is a vestige from when Tandem was "experimental" and was done under an FAA waiver.

The USPA kept the FAA medical requirement that is not now an FAA requirement, according to one BOD member, to "track DUIs."

If you read the first page of the SIM, USPA disclaims any responsibility for anything relating to skydiving and especially what occurs at any DZ. Yet, the medical requirement for regular skydivers is RARELY if ever enforced.



This brings up the question as to who the USPA is there to benefit ?.

It sounds like the medical was part of FAA when tandem was still classed as experimental and this was to make the FAA happy. But, guess what its 2015 and its not experimental any more.

The USPA group members rarely enforce any medical for other jumpers and aren't trying to track DUI's for all jumpers either.

So why are the USPA so intent on singling out tandem instructors from any other jumpers and just adding to the beaurocracy.

This along with the other BSR changes sound like USPA doing actions to limit manufacturer liability. Either way the USPA should quit doing the work for the manufacturers and work towards benefiting your members - and that does include tandem instructors.

The USPA has no absolutely no business tracking DUI's and if they have a medical requirement for all jumpers - enforce it otherwise get rid of it completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am just amazed how you guys can justify DUI's as no big deal. Hell everyone should have one or maybe two..

TI's are responsible for the lives of their passengers. If they have no concern for their lives or the other people on the road then why would anyone believe they have concern and can make responsible decisions in the air? These are legitimate questions and if they can prove they have learned and the FAA gives them their ticket back great if not then THEY CHOSE to lose their right to take PAYING passengers.

Pretty damn cut and dry.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my response to what you wrote is SO. A TI as well as pilots should be held to the utmost standard. Lack of judgment when it comes to the lives of innocents is a serious character flaw. I know I have that flaw I was just never caught. Also part of my decision not to pursue a TI rating. if you cannot make sound decisions you shouldn't be taking the lives of unsuspecting passengers into your hands.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I am just amazed how you guys can justify DUI's as no big deal. Hell everyone should have one or maybe two..



I don't consider a DUI as no big deal. I think you are being pretty flippant on that remark. Perhaps there are people that have been killed through causing an car accident or driving too fast - perhaps they too should be penalized. They have made questionable decisions on the ground. While we are at it anyone who has a driving or criminal record - that shows questionable judgement, so lets stop them from jumping.

TI are responsible for others, agreed. So are all jumpers who have the potential to crash into people and kill them. Canopy and Freefall Collisions have killed a number of people in the last couple of years. Perhaps if we would have prevented anyone who has made any questionable decisions on the ground from getting in the air that these people would still be alive.

And what about those tandem fatalities that have occurred in the past for people who don't have DUI's, passed the medical. How do you see the medical as being beneficial to those people ?

Get off your high horse and realize that the aviation medical does not mean squat. USPA have no business tracking DUI's, who gave them a mandate for tracking this stuff ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have made your point and now sound like a broken record. I fail to see why you believe a DUI is so bad when there are so many other equally dangerous decisions we make everyday. Talking on the phone or smoking while driving both are decisions that put you and others at a higher risk. Owning guns, skydiving over populated area all pose unnecessary risk and are decisions we make regardless if those we may injury agree or not. By the USPA standards and yours, you should not be jumping. As you have stated numerous times you have a track record of poor decisions that, although you have not been caught for, show a pattern. By skydiving, tandem or not, you pose an additional risk to persons and property and as an aviator should be held to the utmost standard. At least tandem passengers are fully informed as to the dangers of skydiving and their instructors potential gross negligence.

I believe part of the point Charlie is trying to make is that a single offense should not cost someone their job. Drinking and driving is a very poor choice however there is a big difference in blowing .08 and .15. If its true that they can ignore a single offense below .15 then I believe the current rule is fine. The industry needs a means of medically disqualifying TI's and the DZO is not the one to be doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RM1

I fail to see why you believe a DUI is so bad when there are so many other equally dangerous decisions we make everyday.

You do see the fallacy in that statement right? Might as well smoke cocaine if you smoke cigarettes makes about as much sense as what you just said.

And my poor decision making in my 20's and 30's where a small part of my decision not seek out my TI cert. More so because of the damage I have done to my body and not being physically the best person to save my son or daughter if the shit hit the fan.

As for one DUI ending someone's career if your career stated that up front and you knew it then yes. That's 100% that persons fault and no one else's. Actions have consequences. I didn't make the decision the FAA didn't make the decision and the unsuspecting tandem student didn't make the decision the TI choose to loose his job all on his own. It was a conscience decision. I feel bad that he has a problem and hope he has gotten help and one day can earn it back.

I believe in redemption and forgiveness. It shouldn't be a death sentence the first time, but I sincerely believe a TI or pilot shouldn't get a second chance if they do it again.

The OP and the following posters have made excuses for a dangerous criminal act that put peoples lives at risk. that every single TI knows up front will cost him his job. If I sound like a broken record GOOD! Alcoholism and addiction are serious diseases and I hope he gets help but making excuses for him and others like them only puts them and others at risk.

Last word promise :) I hope he gets help and gets his job back but I 100% agree that the BSR stays exactly as it is concerning the medical and DUI for reasons that have been stated over and over like a broken record :) Blueskies

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've lived a fair number of years and you've confirmed one of the axioms I've learned... there's nothing more intransigent than a reformed smoker/drinker/sinner.

Get off your high horse. The perspective's better down here.
Every fight is a food fight if you're a cannibal

Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man. - Anthony Burgess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I'm not mistaken, DUI is not a criminal act until the 4th or 5th one, and then is an option for the prosecutor.
I know that's how it is in FL, other states might be different though.

Do you perform a complete background check on potential skydiving employees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have purposefully stayed out of this for a while, but Steve is right on target. Given that I own the business, I know the person involved and have assured myself that it was not endemic of a regular course of conduct, I personally do not believe that the USPA has any business regulating my business. The FAA medical is NOT required by the FAA for tandem skydiving. It is a USPA-imposed anachronism. USPA does not enforse the BSR for regular skydivers -- EVER. Find a skydiver on any DZ who has their doctor's medical approval on their person -- I dare you. The problem with the BOD is that they apparently have not read the SIM. Read the first page of substance in the SIM and it goes on and on about how USPA does not regulate DZs or anything else about skydiving. Which is crap and would not hold up in court, given their regulatory actions at the most recent Board meeting. I made the proposal, it was defeated. I accept that. But, don't be surprised to see me on the ballot for a BOD position in the future. USPA needs more skydiver and DZO advocates to offset the manufacturer's mouthpieces. Nothing changes unless and until someone steps up to be the engine of change. My effort was only the first. It won't be the last. And I will not be slow to speak up when the BOD acts without credibility or conscience, as in the case of a director swooping spectators and causing injury without sanction. That is all. Thanks, Steve!
Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fencebuster

USPA does not enforse the BSR for regular skydivers -- EVER. Find a skydiver on any DZ who has their doctor's medical approval on their person -- I dare you.



USPA doesn't require skydivers to hold an FAA medical certificate, unless that jumper is a USPA TI. One of the medical options for a skydiver:

"c. Have completed the USPA recommended medical statement."

On most USA DZs, all active jumpers have actually met this requirement. I believe it's covered in the section of the waiver where you sign a message saying that you have no infirmities preventing you from jumping. If a vast majority of USPA members are already complying, then there's not a need for active enforcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We must all be over looking all the DUI convicted instructors involved in tandem accidents and tandem mishaps. A list of those would assist in illistrating the magnitude of the problem and give support to the medical requirement. If there is no such problem it must be due to the lack of a problem....

Uncle/GrandPapa Whit
Unico Rodriguez # 245
Muff Brother # 2421

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many BOD members have been at the bonfire with instructors late at night and put students with TI'S who were less than 8 hours bottle to throttle..... every damn one of them. Half owned the dz and employed them.. times are changing but there used to be trust in skills and judgement of DZOS to run their ownshow. Mm doesn't even run his by USPA bsrs but makes rules for others to abide by. Never flown a plane lit either has he.... hypocrisy abounds.

Uncle/GrandPapa Whit
Unico Rodriguez # 245
Muff Brother # 2421

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone tell me where to find "the USPA recommended medical statement" on the USPA website? I must have missed it in the hours that I have spent reviewing this issue. It is not in the SIM; not in the IRM; and, not a document available for download on the USPA website. Please; someone point me to this document and send me a link. Read the first substantive page of the SIM and then think about what it says, Kool-aide drinkers.
Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fencebuster

Can someone tell me where to find "the USPA recommended medical statement" on the USPA website? I must have missed it in the hours that I have spent reviewing this issue. It is not in the SIM; not in the IRM; and, not a document available for download on the USPA website. Please; someone point me to this document and send me a link. Read the first substantive page of the SIM and then think about what it says, Kool-aide drinkers.



Black cherry is my favorite. http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section4/tabid/166/Default.aspx

-Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fencebuster

Can someone tell me where to find "the USPA recommended medical statement" on the USPA website?



It's in the SIM, but not easy to find. It doesn't show up in the 'digital copy' version on USPA's page, however if you download the PDF file, you'll find it in Section 4-3 (page 21) at the bottom of the page, or at the very bottom of this page:
http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section4/tabid/166/Default.aspx

USPA Statement of Medical Fitness

"I represent and warrant that I have no known physical or mental infirmities that would impair my ability to participate in skydiving, or if I do have any such infirmities, that they have been or are being successfully treated so that they do not represent any foreseeable risk while skydiving. "I also represent and warrant that I am not taking any medications or substances, prescription, or otherwise, that would impair my ability to participate in skydiving."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Given that I own the business, I know the person involved and have assured myself that it was not endemic of a regular course of conduct, I personally do not believe that the USPA has any business regulating my business.



The USPA does not regulate your business, you are free to do as you wish, just not under the auspices of a USPA dropzone, USPA rating holders, or as USPA members.

If you want the benefits of any of those three classes, then play ball by the rules. Or take your ball and start your own game.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If there is no such problem it must be due to the lack of a problem...



Or due to the fact that there are currently no (or very few) TI's who have DUI convictions.

I mean, there are no documented cases of a TI with only 50 jumps and a B license causing an accident, so obviously people with 50 jumps and a B license can safety be a TI.

- Dan G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess the question is why they want to single out tandem instructors for tracking DUI convictions. Has there been a number of incidents where this was a factor ?.

How about just asking the question on a rating renewal form. In fact, how about just asking it on a membership renewal form so that you can track this for all members if you want to track this data point. What is the end goal ? Reduction in insurance premiums, Safety or something else. There must have been something that prompted this as I find it strange we have singled out this as a specific point USPA wants to track.

Coming out and asking something in the open leads to a lot less conspiracy theories and ambiguity rather than doing it stealthily through a FAA medical requirement, which is costly for all tandem instructors to track 1 data point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0