Andy9o8 2 #276 July 3, 2014 Doug_Davis *********He did and Sherry did not accept his resignation. I still can't figure out how that works. Rich: "Sherry, I'm resigning." Sherry: "I won't accept your resignation." Rich: "Ok, I quit." End of story Under Bylaws Article III, the resignation of any USPA Director's resignation shall be tendered to the BOD. (No provision for approval or rejection, either by the President or the BOD. Also no express provision for the resignation to necessarily need to be in writing.) Under Article IV, the resignation of any officer shall be tendered to the BOD and may be voted on by the BOD at any regular or special meeting. Unless what he was resigning was his cmmt chairmanship. In which case, Sherry, as President is the sole arbiter. Under the by-laws the President has all authority on appointing or removing cmmt chairs. Ah, ok, I'll take that, if it applies. But then, of course, that returns us to Chuck's point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krip 2 #277 July 5, 2014 Doug_Davis *********He did and Sherry did not accept his resignation. I still can't figure out how that works. Rich: "Sherry, I'm resigning." Sherry: "I won't accept your resignation." Rich: "Ok, I quit." End of story Under Bylaws Article III, the resignation of any USPA Director's resignation shall be tendered to the BOD. (No provision for approval or rejection, either by the President or the BOD. Also no express provision for the resignation to necessarily need to be in writing.) Under Article IV, the resignation of any officer shall be tendered to the BOD and may be voted on by the BOD at any regular or special meeting. Unless what he was resigning was his cmmt chairmanship. In which case, Sherry, as President is the sole arbiter. Under the by-laws the President has all authority on appointing or removing cmmt chairs. With all respect, I disagree. The pres of USPA has the authority for Quote appointing or removing cmmt chairs But each cmmt chair has the right to rseign. With or without the presidents approval or acceptance. A real resignation is what it is. Anything less is politics.One Jump Wonder Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JFish 0 #278 July 5, 2014 stayhigh He did and Sherry did not accept his resignation. If the chair of the safety and training committee believes that what he did was cause for his removal as chair, who are we to argue with him? If he did nothing wrong as some people are suggesting he would have no reason to tender his resignation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #279 July 7, 2014 JFISH - this response is not directed at you... I think we are asking the USPA for the wrong things. We want transparency, correct? but according to the bi-laws they have a bunch of confidentiality crap in them, so we can only go off rumors and what is posted here, because they won't/can't share with the rest of the USPA members. They (some of the BOD's, not all) think DZ.com is a joke, but they don't/can't give us any information to defuse the rumors and all the stuff they think is "crap" on dz.com. I may be completely off base, but if the board wants to shut us up they have the ability to do that by changing their way and bi-laws. We will never agree with everything they do, but it sure would be nice to be able to really support an organization that is more transparent. If people don't like their bad behavior being aired in the skydiving community then they should just not act that way. Not that all mistakes/accidents are on purpose. People who are arrested are publicly listed even before they are convicted. Why can't this little organization do the same? Why can't we have a better way to communicate with them, without EVERYONE having to call/write and ask the same questions. JBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topdocker 0 #280 July 8, 2014 jlmiracleJFISH - this response is not directed at you... I think we are asking the USPA for the wrong things. We want transparency, correct? but according to the bi-laws they have a bunch of confidentiality crap in them, so we can only go off rumors and what is posted here, because they won't/can't share with the rest of the USPA members. They (some of the BOD's, not all) think DZ.com is a joke, but they don't/can't give us any information to defuse the rumors and all the stuff they think is "crap" on dz.com. I may be completely off base, but if the board wants to shut us up they have the ability to do that by changing their way and bi-laws. We will never agree with everything they do, but it sure would be nice to be able to really support an organization that is more transparent. If people don't like their bad behavior being aired in the skydiving community then they should just not act that way. Not that all mistakes/accidents are on purpose. People who are arrested are publicly listed even before they are convicted. Why can't this little organization do the same? Why can't we have a better way to communicate with them, without EVERYONE having to call/write and ask the same questions. J I have served on the BOD. This isn't about transparency, we all know what happened. The eye witness accounts were posted shortly after the original incident. Unless the Regional Director or some other BOD member asks for an investigation to be done in an incident, it just isn't done. It's like getting your bike stolen but figuring the police paperwork is more of a hassle than getting a new bike. But, this isn't just some toggle jockey who screwed the pooch, this is THE guy you go to when you screw up and start the begging process to get a rating(s) back! This is THE guy that supposedly not only administers the rules of our organization, but is instrumental in writing them. (Like high performance landing areas being away from regular jumpers and objects). By the co-owner of the DZ's own admission, this was a pattern of behavior for the DZ. This is not about transparency, its about credibility. Rich lost his as THE safety guy when he pounded into a table and then into another jumper. Sherry lost hers in trying to take the heat off of Rich and refused his resignation from the chair of the Safety and Training committee. The entire Board is losing its credibility because two of its key members are not working in the best interest of the organization. topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #281 July 8, 2014 Yahtzee! Sadly, in the end, it won't matter one bit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topdocker 0 #282 July 8, 2014 normissYahtzee! Sadly, in the end, it won't matter one bit. Sadly, I concur. The BOD doesn't care and most members don't care. topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #283 July 8, 2014 Thank you topdocker. I was just thinking in a "going forward" type deal. We are never going to hear Sherry's reasoning or even Rich's side of this incident. When someone is disciplined, its closed door meetings. I want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. Not saying people don't learn from their mistakes because many do but many do not so I think we, as jumpers, should have access to information about unsafe jumpers for our own safety. jBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topdocker 0 #284 July 8, 2014 jlmiracleThank you topdocker. I was just thinking in a "going forward" type deal. We are never going to hear Sherry's reasoning or even Rich's side of this incident. When someone is disciplined, its closed door meetings. I want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. Not saying people don't learn from their mistakes because many do but many do not so I think we, as jumpers, should have access to information about unsafe jumpers for our own safety. j Interesting, but I don't think it will happen. Mostly because the people who are disciplined are Instructors, not average jumpers. USPA is trying to protect the general public from screw-ups, not save its membership from them. USPA cares about numbers of members, not the individual members. Also, that is the procedure that has been established. Maybe the Chair of the Safety and Training will contact the Constitution and Bylaws committee chair and see about making the meetings open..... doubt it! topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #285 July 9, 2014 jlmiracleI want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. I guess I don't understand that statement. The facts in this incident have been pretty widely reported and confirmed by the Co-DZO. Knowing what disciplinary action does or foes not occur wouldn't provide you with anything that you don't already know. Did I miss something?Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cutaway68 4 #286 July 9, 2014 jlmiracleI want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. Well, I'd stay away from the spectator area at Skydive Sussex. I hear they tend to swoop the crowd there. Don't Pull Low... Unless You ARE!!! The pessimist says, "It can't get any worse than this." The optimist says, "Sure, it can." Be fun, have safe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #287 July 9, 2014 jlmiracle.... We are never going to hear Sherry's reasoning or even Rich's side of this incident. When someone is disciplined, its closed door meetings. I want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. ..... Well you could go to the General Membership Meeting this Friday, July 11 at Springhill Suites, located at 85 West Court Avenue, Memphis, TN 38103; (901) 522-2100 at 7 pm. You can ask any BOD member any question. just saying... .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #288 July 9, 2014 QuoteYou can ask any BOD member any question. 1. True, but the don't have to respond. 2. It has been brought up several times in this thread - why should several hundred people go begging one at a time hat in hand to get answers. I don't really have a dog in this fight. I don't know enough about the incident to form an opinion. The lack of communication about the incident is disturbing though. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #289 July 9, 2014 chuckakers***I want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. I guess I don't understand that statement. The facts in this incident have been pretty widely reported and confirmed by the Co-DZO. Knowing what disciplinary action does or foes not occur wouldn't provide you with anything that you don't already know. Did I miss something? Possibly. Or maybe I am. See, to repeat what I said above, the problem is that after the co-DZO and others "reported" what happened, other people have essentially said, "Well, I've spoken privately to person/people in the know, and what was previously reported.... isn't what really happened." Period, full stop. But no further info to fill-in that gap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #290 July 9, 2014 chuckakers***I want to know who might be a danger to me in the sky and on the ground. I guess I don't understand that statement. The facts in this incident have been pretty widely reported and confirmed by the Co-DZO. Knowing what disciplinary action does or foes not occur wouldn't provide you with anything that you don't already know. Did I miss something? No, you didn't miss something, I was just thinking in a "going forward" idea. Not just this incident. jBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #291 July 9, 2014 DiverMikeQuoteYou can ask any BOD member any question. 1. True, but the don't have to respond. 2. It has been brought up several times in this thread - why should several hundred people go begging one at a time hat in hand to get answers. I don't really have a dog in this fight. I don't know enough about the incident to form an opinion. The lack of communication about the incident is disturbing though. My point of wanting more transparency in this little organization. I probably will be at the General Membership meeting, but they still won't tell me anything that I don't already know or the facts on things we want to know. jBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catfishhunter 2 #292 July 14, 2014 Remster******Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit? It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident. No, but a public statement from USPA with some sort of punitive action would surely be a great asset in a lawsuit against the jumper. So, if you want to protect your friend... You are the only person that gets it. Amazing really. I read this WHOLE thread and the only one that gets what is really happening is Remi. Care custody and control. Andy should get it but maybe he doesn't want to chime in and feed the sharks but this is about CYA. If he was disciplined he would be served up on a silver platter to the sharks which he still may very well be. A spectator isn't beholden to any "waiver" and they don't cover gross negligence which is what it would be considering he was/is the head of Safety for the whole sum of skydiving in the US let alone a DZO which puts him in care,custody and control. I don't have a law degree and would be able to walk in and win this in 10 minutes if he was found guilty and punished by the USPA. Nothing else matters no matter what DSE or "Twardo was told you guys have my utmost respect and I get the smoke and mirrors but we are all grown ups and being scared of losing everything SHOULD keep one from doing stupid shit and when you do STUPID shit that injures others it should be extremely painful.. Still amazed only Remi figure that out.. 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #293 July 14, 2014 catfishhunter*********Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit? It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident. No, but a public statement from USPA with some sort of punitive action would surely be a great asset in a lawsuit against the jumper. So, if you want to protect your friend... You are the only person that gets it. Amazing really. I read this WHOLE thread and the only one that gets what is really happening is Remi. Care custody and control. Andy should get it but maybe he doesn't want to chime in and feed the sharks but this is about CYA. If he was disciplined he would be served up on a silver platter to the sharks which he still may very well be. A spectator isn't beholden to any "waiver" and they don't cover gross negligence which is what it would be considering he was/is the head of Safety for the whole sum of skydiving in the US let alone a DZO which puts him in care,custody and control. I don't have a law degree and would be able to walk in and win this in 10 minutes if he was found guilty and punished by the USPA. Nothing else matters no matter what DSE or "Twardo was told you guys have my utmost respect and I get the smoke and mirrors but we are all grown ups and being scared of losing everything SHOULD keep one from doing stupid shit and when you do STUPID shit that injures others it should be extremely painful.. Still amazed only Remi figure that out.. I hate to pat myself on the back, but I think I was the first to mention the USPA's reluctance to speak about this was probably due to a possible lawsuit, against them, their buddy, or most likely both. I'm just saying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #294 July 15, 2014 Quote Still amazed only Remi figure that out.. Hey now! You're making it sound unprobable that I are smart. Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topdocker 0 #295 July 15, 2014 catfishhunter*********Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit? It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident. No, but a public statement from USPA with some sort of punitive action would surely be a great asset in a lawsuit against the jumper. So, if you want to protect your friend... You are the only person that gets it. Amazing really. I read this WHOLE thread and the only one that gets what is really happening is Remi. Care custody and control. Andy should get it but maybe he doesn't want to chime in and feed the sharks but this is about CYA. If he was disciplined he would be served up on a silver platter to the sharks which he still may very well be. A spectator isn't beholden to any "waiver" and they don't cover gross negligence which is what it would be considering he was/is the head of Safety for the whole sum of skydiving in the US let alone a DZO which puts him in care,custody and control. I don't have a law degree and would be able to walk in and win this in 10 minutes if he was found guilty and punished by the USPA. Nothing else matters no matter what DSE or "Twardo was told you guys have my utmost respect and I get the smoke and mirrors but we are all grown ups and being scared of losing everything SHOULD keep one from doing stupid shit and when you do STUPID shit that injures others it should be extremely painful.. Still amazed only Remi figure that out.. You are right, you are not an attorney. In my mind, this was not about punishing someone, but keeping the integrity of the role of Chairman of Safety and Training. Do you think Rich will be able to fulfill his duties in that role with this clouding it? What happens if next year Rich plows into a four year old girl and injures her at a demo? Do you think USPA's failure to do anything will play a role in sucking USPA into another lawsuit? Again,the BOD is exposing USPA to lawsuits by protecting others instead of the constitutional responsibility of protecting USPA. YOU don't get it. topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catfishhunter 2 #296 July 15, 2014 I get why your upset and agree with you :) So yes I get why everyone else is upset :) What my SWAG is concerning is why the certain folks are reluctant to take action against a friend because of the ramifications that will open that friend up to. I would bet dollars to donuts I'm right AND I agree 100% with what your saying. He should have been removed immediately but again doing so proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not only negligent but grossly negligent because he had total care custody and control of not only the dropzone but the safety and training of all skydivers in the USA. Just one of those puts him at a higher risk both pretty much guarantees he loses in court. Should that matter? Nope he should be held to the exact same standards as any other ratings holders. Notice I didn't say skydiver as ratings holders are by the very nature held to a much higher standard as it can be proven they know better and being the top dog an even higher standard as you have stated over and over. So again YES I get it :) 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catfishhunter 2 #297 July 15, 2014 Remster Quote Still amazed only Remi figure that out.. Hey now! You're making it sound unprobable that I are smart. You said it not me 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #298 July 15, 2014 stayhighIt is amazing to see when other lower class member causes mistakes they get punished, like 60 day suspension of all instructional ratings, and this guy Rich gets nothing. He is still tandem I/E and aff I/E. give Dennis his tandem rating back. I don't know the details of the situation you're referring to about Dennis, but is it possible that the difference between the two is that Dennis was exercising the privileges of his rating when an offense occurred (which I don't know to be the case) and Rich was not? In a related thought, is it possible that USPA isn't taking action against Rich because his actions at the time of the incident were that of an individual USPA member and not connected in a literal sense to his duties at HQ or his role on the board? Not choosing sides, just wondering.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CJosJumper 0 #299 July 15, 2014 I have read every post up to now and this the first time I feel moved to comment. I think John ( catfishhunter) and Remster may have it right. Rich obviously made a big mistake for which there could be serious financial consequenes (sp ?). His position with the USPA along with being a DZO ( the one who sets the rules) at the DZ where the accident occured) places the bulls eye directly on him. So if the USPA publicly faulted him, it could be like throwing him, and possibly the DZ, under the bus. Did I read it correctly that this all happened on Safety Day? Ironic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #300 July 15, 2014 Quoten sucking USPA into another lawsuit? We're not talking about the USPA being sucked into a lawsuit. We're talking about the BOD not wanting to throw their friend under the bus of civil lawsuits if they do any kind of action against him.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
