I'm tired of hearing complaints about USPA

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Quote

We get legal representation that allows us to be the "pedestrians of the sky" and have the legal right-of-way of such.

Can you point to that FAR?

Dave

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

Last time I checked the American Federal Air Regulations, powered aircraft were forced to yield the right of way to unpowered aircraft.
airplanes must yield right of way to parachutes

zeppelins must yield right of way to (no-steerable) hot air balloons

[billvon 3,116]

>You collect a group of like minded people, including a few folks
>on key committees and move forward without much notice to anyone at
>all. You get votes scheduled "strategically" including delaying them to
>another meeting if it will help exclude a number of people who may vote
>"against" your position. Any suggestions for modification can be met with
>"it's a bit late for these now, you should have been involved earlier". Of
>course there was no obligation to GET these people invovled earlier.

If you really believe that, you've never been to a USPA meeting! It's really not a bunch of cigar-smoking corporate DZO fatcats who plan votes to make sure that they get no opposition. It is people like Jan, and Scott, and Jesse, and DeSantis, and BJ. On the one hand I could claim they are all great people, but I'm sure DeSantis rubs someone the wrong way and Todd once grounded someone who was well-liked, so I won't try to do that, just to avoid the inevitable argument.

What I can tell you for sure is that they're just not organized enough, nor nefarious enough, to be able to pull that off! A strategized delay to intentionally exclude as much of the opposing membership as possible? Never happened that I've seen, and I don't think they even have the resources to plan that ahead of time.

I think what happens more often is that people stay home, hear what happens at a meeting, and then later decide "I know what happened! Their evil plans to exclude me worked, and I am a victim of the system!" When, of course, it's more a matter of that person simply not showing up.

>I do understand that anyone who actually tries to encourage and
>expand participation will probably be seen as someone who "just bitches
>and moans".

There's nothing wrong with bitching and moaning! You just get better results bitching and moaning to a regional director, a board director, a HQ staffer or at a board meeting than to me.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Overall, I support USPA and appreciate its efforts on our behalf. I have been critical of the leadership's willingness to accept the knee-jerk premise that the proper response to any unfortunate incident is more regulation. The creation of the "coach" rating not only was a solution to a problem that did not exist, but has only caused new problems by making it impossible for an experienced jumper without the rating to make fun jumps with recent graduates.

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

I disagree.
Just because you have made a million jumps and earned a chestfull of gold medals does not automatically qualify you to pass those skills on to junior jumpers.
IOW "Natural athletes" make lousy coaches.

If you were serious about passing your skills on to junior jumpers, you would attend a coaching course hosted by Skydive University, Australian Parachute Federation, Canadian Sports Parachuting Association, Coaching Association of Canada, Soccer Moms of America, USPA, etc. They all teach the same methods of instruction to aspiring coaches.

OTOH I have publicly disagreed with Jan Meyers - and told her to her face - that I supported a USPA motion that would allow Regional Directors to nominate a handful of load organizers (Garry Peek, Roger Ponce de Leon, Jerry Bird, etc.) to USPA Coach status.
Yes, there are a handful of senior skydivers, who poosess the leadership skills to become "automatic coaches." The rest of us could benefit from a course in "methods of instruction."

• Quote

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

OTOH I have publicly disagreed with Jan Meyers - and told her to her face - that I supported a USPA motion that would allow Regional Directors to nominate a handful of load organizers (Garry Peek, Roger Ponce de Leon, Jerry Bird, etc.) to USPA Coach status.
Yes, there are a handful of senior skydivers, who poosess the leadership skills to become "automatic coaches." The rest of us could benefit from a course in "methods of instruction."

Whoa - WTF are you talking about?
Maybe senility has hit me early, but I do not recall any discussion or motion about grandfathering in people (organizers) as Coaches.

BTW, my name is Jan Meyer - two e's and no s.
Gary only has one r.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[peek 21]

Quote

.... that I supported a USPA motion that would allow Regional Directors to nominate a handful of load organizers (Garry Peek, Roger Ponce de Leon, Jerry Bird, etc.) to USPA Coach status.

Hello? Rob, is that you, or some old guy with Alzheimer's that has stolen your identity? Hee, hee, hee!.

Maybe you meant Cary Peck?

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Last time I checked the American Federal Air Regulations, powered aircraft were forced to yield the right of way to unpowered aircraft.
airplanes must yield right of way to parachutes

zeppelins must yield right of way to (no-steerable) hot air balloons

That would be true if parachutes were considered aircraft. But they are not.

Dave

[zipplewrath 1]

Quote

>You collect a group of like minded people, including a few folks
>on key committees and move forward without much notice to anyone at
>all. You get votes scheduled "strategically" including delaying them to
>another meeting if it will help exclude a number of people who may vote
>"against" your position. Any suggestions for modification can be met with
>"it's a bit late for these now, you should have been involved earlier". Of
>course there was no obligation to GET these people invovled earlier.

If you really believe that, you've never been to a USPA meeting! It's really not a bunch of cigar-smoking corporate DZO fatcats who plan votes to make sure that they get no opposition. It is people like Jan, and Scott, and Jesse, and DeSantis, and BJ. On the one hand I could claim they are all great people, but I'm sure DeSantis rubs someone the wrong way and Todd once grounded someone who was well-liked, so I won't try to do that, just to avoid the inevitable argument.

Well, actually, this process was explained to me by a BOD member. They apparently saw it differently. It isn't really a "nefarious" process to so speak. It is a natural reaction to the larger structure and process. Inclusion easily means things take longer. It can result in the addition of POV that don't align with the original intent. And everyone is aware in any such organization that it merely takes one person to act strategically in opposition to make ones job difficult. It is human nature really. And a single act by the executive committee can set a process back by months if not years and they can act outside of the regular meetings.

That's the point of critiquing the basic structure. The organization is structured to encourage people to not seek wide participation and consensus but instead assume leading roles as a replacement for concensus. The result is people taking actions outside of the awareness, or even contrary to the wishes of, the larger membership.

There is a general implication that some how "good people" can't do self serving things. They can. At the very least it colors their definition of what is good and bad. It can even lead them to believe that the way things are also are the way things "should be". The nature of USPA has been to attract the participation of people who think the way the organization is also is the way it "should be" and that attempts to alter the basic structure away from that is counter-productive.

[zipplewrath 1]

Quote

Quote

How would you restructure the organization so that everyone from the smallest DZ to the largest, most active DZ in the world has an equal voice?

We are living in the 21st century.... anyone ever heard of the INTERNET

It would be very easy to use technology for a wired USPA meeting with each region holding a regional meeting locally tied into the national meeting. With video conferencing this would get more people involved, and have their voices actually heard....MEMBERS.. not DZO's who write off the trips as a business meeting.

From my personal experience, little actually gets accomplished at meetings, especially ones as large as a membership meeting. Such meetings are predominately for final votes and major decisions. In an inclusive structure, proposals wouldn't even be eligible for consideration at such meetings without establishing a fairly wide scope of consensus and participation. Tools such as the internet would be used to develop and document the level of participation and consensus. It would be used to establish over arching priorities and doctrines. Participation (and the encouragement thereof) would be the incentive for moving projects forward. No one person, or region, or committee could move projects forward without demonstrating appropriate levels of participation and concensus of the affected membership.

[riggerrob 643]

Maybe I meant Cary Peck.

[riggerrob 643]

I apologize for miss-spelling your name.

My memory is vague ... I may have had this disagreement with John DeSantos ... but it definitely was on the Perris DZ.

The point - that I was trying to make - is that the top one percent of load organizers should be grand-fathered as USPA coaches - while the rest of us would benefit from some form of formal instruction (i.e. a USPA Coach Course) on coaching methods.

[pilotdave 0]

Why should a load organizer that hasn't ever held an instructional rating or taught skydiving to students automatically get a coach rating?

Dave

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Overall, I support USPA and appreciate its efforts on our behalf. I have been critical of the leadership's willingness to accept the knee-jerk premise that the proper response to any unfortunate incident is more regulation. The creation of the "coach" rating not only was a solution to a problem that did not exist, but has only caused new problems by making it impossible for an experienced jumper without the rating to make fun jumps with recent graduates.

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

I disagree.
Just because you have made a million jumps and earned a chestfull of gold medals does not automatically qualify you to pass those skills on to junior jumpers.
IOW "Natural athletes" make lousy coaches.

If you were serious about passing your skills on to junior jumpers, you would attend a coaching course hosted by Skydive University, Australian Parachute Federation, Canadian Sports Parachuting Association, Coaching Association of Canada, Soccer Moms of America, USPA, etc. They all teach the same methods of instruction to aspiring coaches.

OTOH I have publicly disagreed with Jan Meyers - and told her to her face - that I supported a USPA motion that would allow Regional Directors to nominate a handful of load organizers (Garry Peek, Roger Ponce de Leon, Jerry Bird, etc.) to USPA Coach status.
Yes, there are a handful of senior skydivers, who poosess the leadership skills to become "automatic coaches." The rest of us could benefit from a course in "methods of instruction."

And not having a rating does not make someone with 500,1000 or 2000 jumps unsafe to jump with a new person. The coach rating was invented to funnel more money to the DZs and staff.

• Quote

[DSE 5]

Quote

Tools such as the internet would be used to develop and document the level of participation and consensus. It would be used to establish over arching priorities and doctrines. Participation (and the encouragement thereof) would be the incentive for moving projects forward. No one person, or region, or committee could move projects forward without demonstrating appropriate levels of participation and concensus of the affected membership.

Well said. The internet *should* absolutely be a tool for drawing consensus, allowing bi-directional information flow, and moving the organization forward. And am willing to do my part whatever it might be, to assist to that end.

[billvon 3,116]

>And am willing to do my part whatever it might be, to assist to that end.

THAT will accomplish what 100,000 posts on the Internet will not do. Actually doing something to make what you want happen beats complaining any day.

[zipplewrath 1]

Quote

>And am willing to do my part whatever it might be, to assist to that end.

THAT will accomplish what 100,000 posts on the Internet will not do. Actually doing something to make what you want happen beats complaining any day.

However, dropzone.com can be an easy place to figure out what folks actually want to do prior to approaching USPA more formally. Of course someone might complain about the process. They'd probably do better to participate in it than just complain.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Why should a load organizer that hasn't ever held an instructional rating or taught skydiving to students automatically get a coach rating?

Dave

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

I will repeat myself: the top one percent of load organizers deserve to be grand-fathered in as USPA Coaches.
Most of those guys (and girls) learned their teaching/coaching/mentoring/motivating skills somewhere else.
For example: Craig Gerard learned plenty of leadership skills - via the US Army and is an excellent coach.

My second point is that teaching experienced skydivers is not the same as teaching beginners. Some load organizers are brilliant at motivating up-jumpers but lack the patience to instill the basics in beginners.
Who cares if they are any good at teaching beginners ... as long as they can relate to their target audience?

[Krip 2]

Hi A

Have you seen a copy of USPA liability policy you like so much?

Has anyone seen a copy of the policy? Know where it's posted on USPA's websight?

Not interested in makeing a claim just need the facts to know if it's realy a good deal.

[SwampThing 0]

Quote

Hi A

Have you seen a copy of USPA liability policy you like so much?

Has anyone seen a copy of the policy? Know where it's posted on USPA's websight?

Not interested in makeing a claim just need the facts to know if it's realy a good deal.

Call Susan at the insurance company and ask for a copy (866) 585-4590.

The Pessimist says: "It can't possibly get any worse!"
The Optimist says: "Sure it can!"

[billvon 3,116]

>Of course someone might complain about the process. They'd probably
>do better to participate in it than just complain.

Exactly.

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

Hi A

Have you seen a copy of USPA liability policy you like so much?

Has anyone seen a copy of the policy? Know where it's posted on USPA's websight?

Not interested in makeing a claim just need the facts to know if it's realy a good deal.

Call Susan at the insurance company and ask for a copy (866) 585-4590.

Thanks ST for the info you rock.

If anyone wants to know how good their USPA liability insurance is they can get a copy from susan.

Gotta like the free phone call.