Rich Winstock Swoop Incident Cover-Up

[Doug_Davis 0]

DSE

******First off I don't have a dog in this and don't care oneway or the other. From the outside what I see looks like maybe a few people got disciplined by Rich Winstock and see this as an opportunity for payback. I don't know Rich. But the viciousness of all the attacks on everyone that says wait for the findings or ask for information tell me there is someone has some other agenda than the truth.
just my 2cents worth.

But... why hasn't Rich resigned or the USPA not suspended him from his duties as S&TA chairman?


Winstock _did_ resign.
USPA doesn't have a mechanism for suspending a BOD member. If they did, there'd be a BOD member or two swinging in the wind too.



Actually thats not accurate. Under Section 1-2.3 of the USPA governance and bylaws, on page 10, all committee chairs are appointed and can be removed by the president. The president's power to do so is restated in section 1-2.4 on page 12. It does not take a BOD vote. So his committee chair position as chair of the S&T committee could have been easily suspended or removed.
http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_GovMan.pdf

Additionally the BOD can vote to impeach and remove BOD members at anytime.

[peek 21]

chuckakers

***It's best to write a BOD member that you know.

Wouldn't a member's Regional Director be the most appropriate person to make initial contact with? Seems to me the member's RD would have the most direct responsibility to assist a member from his/her region.

Chuck, I know Jan has already answered this for you, but here is my answer.

Over the years I have helped many members outside of my region because they have not been able to so much as get a reply from their Regional Director to a specific question or request. Some Regional Directors just don't care. I don't know if that is true of the current Regional Directors, but I know that it has been true of some in the past.

Over the years I have seen an incredible amount of disrespect shown to USPA members from both various BOD members and USPA headquarters staff.

Edited to add, at the request of USPA headquarters Executive Director Ed Scott:

I don't know if this is necessarily true of the current USPA headquarters staff, but I know that it has been true of some in the past.

[chuckakers 425]

peek

******It's best to write a BOD member that you know.

Wouldn't a member's Regional Director be the most appropriate person to make initial contact with? Seems to me the member's RD would have the most direct responsibility to assist a member from his/her region.

Chuck, I know Jan has already answered this for you, but here is my answer.

Over the years I have helped many members outside of my region because they have not been able to so much as get a reply from their Regional Director to a specific question or request. Some Regional Directors just don't care. I don't know if that is true of the current Regional Directors, but I know that it has been true of some in the past.

Over the years I have seen an incredible amount of disrespect shown to USPA members from both various BOD members and USPA headquarters staff.

That's really miserable. And to think USPA is a "membership" organization.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[stayhigh 2]

Rich Winstock is part of saftey and training advisor so he was in the pick of the BOD member to discuss and rule on almost exact same scenario.

Fucking bullshit is what it is.

If you aren't friends with BOD member you get rating suspended, and if you sit on one, your rating stays intact.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[jlmiracle 7]

skymama

For me, it comes down to this: the Chairman for Safety and Training for the whole damn country intentionally chose to swoop where there were spectators. Based on that action only, I don't think he deserves to hold his seat anymore. I'm fine with him keeping his seat as Chairman of Memberships Services. If he stepped down and wants to hold the seat of Safety and Training in the next election, he needs to earn it. Actually coming forward and talking about the incident would be a good start.

I spoke with a board member...I was told that in the "investigation" that people at the DZ said he wasn't swooping but landed short. I asked what the hell is he flying over a spectator area for anyway?

Sounds like Butcher and the rest of Rich's buddies are going to debate the meaning to the word "it".

J

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[DSE 5]

Quote

Additionally the BOD can vote to impeach and remove BOD members at anytime.

Yes, this is true that it "can" be done. Check out how that's worked out in past history at the USPA.
Swatting flies with a pencil might be easier.

Side note, kudos for reading the manual. That puts you at least 10 jumps ahead of most people.

Would your opinions be swayed if proof existed of who sent the original "anonymous" email?
Asked differently, what would it take for you to step back and take a concerned/factual vs angry/uninformed view, of the entire situation?

Would you be more angry if you were to learn the situation is being manipulated?

[normiss 798]

Blaming the messenger won't address the issue.
No matter what that person's intent was, the message is clear.
Rich is not safety oriented and shouldn't be head of safety if he's going to selectively ignore it. Mindset was not safety.
If not for the mean spirited email, the general membership would not have even seen this as a blip on the radar. It would have been successfully swept under the rug.

I could have sworn the USPA pushed us to create high performance landing areas.
I would like to think they didn't include picnic tables and observers in those landing areas.

[topdocker 0]

DSE

Would your opinions be swayed if proof existed of who sent the original "anonymous" email?
Asked differently, what would it take for you to step back and take a concerned/factual vs angry/uninformed view, of the entire situation?

Would you be more angry if you were to learn the situation is being manipulated?

Who sent what email is immaterial to the real issue here: The Chair of the Safety and Training Committee through his own actions injured a person on the ground. Rich has been vilified so much here, and that is unfair, but the Safety and Training committee as a whole asks members, and especially instructors, to be more professional in appearance and behavior.

Anger isn't the word, it's disappointment. Disappointed with Rich, how this was handled, Sherry, and everyone involved. This could have been a real opportunity for USPA to show the membership that the BOD was going to set the bar for professional behavior, set a standard for taking responsibility for actions, live up to the expectations the membership has of its leadership to truly lead.

Instead this has devolved into politics and finger pointing.

This whole incident along with some of the recent changes to BSR's, has devalued my time I served on the BOD, and will probably mean I won't run again. If someone truly wants to serve the membership, be an instructor, coach, or SnTA.

top

Jump more, post less!

[Doug_Davis 0]

DSE

Quote

Additionally the BOD can vote to impeach and remove BOD members at anytime.

Yes, this is true that it "can" be done. Check out how that's worked out in past history at the USPA.
Swatting flies with a pencil might be easier.

Side note, kudos for reading the manual. That puts you at least 10 jumps ahead of most people.

Would your opinions be swayed if proof existed of who sent the original "anonymous" email?
Asked differently, what would it take for you to step back and take a concerned/factual vs angry/uninformed view, of the entire situation?

Would you be more angry if you were to learn the situation is being manipulated?

I think Normiss and Top already covered it in their replies.

[DSE 5]

Doug_Davis

***

Quote

Additionally the BOD can vote to impeach and remove BOD members at anytime.

Yes, this is true that it "can" be done. Check out how that's worked out in past history at the USPA.
Swatting flies with a pencil might be easier.

Side note, kudos for reading the manual. That puts you at least 10 jumps ahead of most people.

Would your opinions be swayed if proof existed of who sent the original "anonymous" email?
Asked differently, what would it take for you to step back and take a concerned/factual vs angry/uninformed view, of the entire situation?

Would you be more angry if you were to learn the situation is being manipulated?

I think Normiss and Top already covered it in their replies.


Truth doesn't matter because it doesn't fit the "facts" as reported by an anonymous source who created a falsified email address.

Nice.

[normiss 798]

The "facts" nobody is willing to tell the populace.
Hence the thread title.

It's sad seeing you defend this system Douglas.
I had previously been convinced that safety was your primary concern.
It would appear that politics and drama are somewhat more important.

[DSE 5]

Safety is my primary concern, and you of all people know this, Mark.

You'd really suggest that I'm changing my view of safety because I'm defending how an organization investigates incidents? Confidentiality is very important to any organization. Always has been, always will be. Confidentiality of information is needed in order to foster a culture for good decision making.
The issue (for me) isn't about Winstock's safety, or how he made a bad judgement/error. It's about protecting the integrity of a process that works for thousands of organizations (like DZ.com for example) every day. USPA isn't unique, and the cause of this issue being managed differently, goaded by an anonymous source is a huge distraction to how USPA and this community interact, operate, and achieve results. At the end of the day, Winstock is already done and over with but no one sees that because they want blood. Putting a man in the modern-day equivalent of a town square stock so that people can throw rotten vegetables at him isn't enough to satisfy the masses.

I've got nothing more of value to add once it's been said that facts and truth don't matter. The diversion of a sacrificial lamb is more important. The real issue doesn't matter so long as blood is on the ground for the passers-by that would rather not see what's ahead.
Meanwhile, check out the car wreck on the corner while the tornado approaches from behind.

[skypuppy 1]

rwieder

Quote

Ssssh. We're not supposed to know ANYTHING or discuss ANYTHING. It's NOT a cover-up - never mind all the secret talks and handshakes and NDA's. It's NOT a cover-up. Call everybody and talk to them. Then say nothing.

Right now, it's on a "need to know" basis, and I reckon right now you just don't need to know. Respectfully.

Th best judge of future behavior is past behavior. And past behavior tells us we will never know what happened here...

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

investigations found this was an unfortunate anomaly and not some despicable pattern of endangering the public and doing irreparable damage to the sport as a whole?


With all respect, it seems there was a certain organizer who at several different times seemed to be violating certain safety rules. Looks like he was never really made to account for his actions. And then one day he flew into Bob Holler and killed them both. People at the forefront of the sport do need to be accountable for their actions, and the people they represent need the facts to decide whether they have been.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

At the College of Teachers, if there's a disciplinary investigation it is published in the magazine and on the website along with the findings and an explanation of the action (or inaction) that results. And this is not just for severe infractions. In cases where discipline is found appropriate the name is usually published along with revocation notice or other actions required, such as anger management course, classroom management course, etc.

In some minor cases and in cases where it is decided no action is necessary, the names are sometimes left out. But the findings and reasoning of the result are still published. Why shouldn't uspa do the same?

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[topdocker 0]

DSE

Putting a man in the modern-day equivalent of a town square stock so that people can throw rotten vegetables at him isn't enough to satisfy the masses.

I've got nothing more of value to add once it's been said that facts and truth don't matter.

First sentence: remember, Rich isn't a regular member, he is the guy that helps decide if another member keeps their ratings/membership after an incident/infraction. Will he be able to do his job as effectively since this occurred? Will the system be as effective? Do we wait to find out?

Second sentence: What I would like is some facts and truth to be told to me by those who know them. Instead, after initial reports of the incident, everything has become hush hush. Some people are privy to inside info, others aren't. Okay, then the rest of us get to speculate until someone comes out and clears the air.

This isn't complicated. A guy hit a person in the spectator area while he was flying his fully-functioning parachute. Is there a penalty for that? In most cases I would say no, but this isn't your average doofus with more balls than brains. This is the guy that decides who gets to keep flying when they screw the pooch.

This thread title is wrong, it's not a cover up, it's a total screw up from the get go. Screwed up landing, screwed up response by USPA, screwed up moves by some BOD members, more screw ups by those involved. And it just becomes an indictment of all those involved! Me included.

More than one BOD member reads this forum including Rich, and staff members from USPA read it also. They know we are unhappy and want to know things, several have messaged me during this time.

Every incident I have been involved in, I have tried to provide the most facts in as timely a fashion as possible. It may take a few days, but I posted sometimes very difficult to write passages because the easiest way to squelch rumors and innuendo is to get here and post first-hand facts. Poster may throw a few rocks at you, but most just want to know what happened and why. They want to know it will not happen to them or to one of the friends because no one changed the situation.

I don't want Rich in some stockade, I want to know it will not happen again. Ever. Anywhere. Anyone.

top

Jump more, post less!

[Southern_Man 0]

DSE

the real issue doesn't matter so long as blood is on the ground for the passers-by that would rather not see what's ahead.

Meanwhile, check out the car wreck on the corner while the tornado approaches from behind.

It's disgusting to use this sort of poetic imagery when talking about an incident which sent a person to the hospital and put her blood on the ground. Let's not lose sight of who the victim was here.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Southern_Man 0]

topdocker

[he easiest way to squelch rumors and innuendo is to get here and post first-hand facts.

top

Yup.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[airtwardo 7]

normiss

The "facts" nobody is willing to tell the populace.
Hence the thread title.

It's sad seeing you defend this system Douglas.
I had previously been convinced that safety was your primary concern.
It would appear that politics and drama are somewhat more important.

And that kinda zeros in on the point but not the way you probably want.

Never before has the information been made available to the populace and nary a snuffle was heard.

In several instances people holding the reigns have knowingly and purposely by design done things that effectively resulted in injuries of a permanent nature and even death - preventable if not for disregarding general safety practices.

Nobody knows if there even was an investigation much less the facts of the incident.

I'm not saying the not knowing is either right or wrong... My point is why is this Winstock thing being handled differently?

Why would a member if the BOD purposely break with the way things are always handled and create all this drama but remain silent all the other times when every factor was significantly worse?

Regardless of ones opinion of what happened with Winstock, surely they must realize on some level that something ELSE is also taking place...

I mean in simple terms some office holder had an incident and it was looked into just like it is every other time that happens - the judgement of a panel of peers found no reason for the axe - again just like in the past.

Someone for some reason wasn't satisfied with that - maybe felt they saw a way to knock some fellow bod members down, so a drama was scripted and there seems to be no shortage of extras willing to play the part without looking an inch deeper.

This stinks on many levels. The greatest one being what was put fourth as having happened - didn't in the way alleged. Put away for a minute if you believe that or not - and try to recall any other time some bod member made a statement about the facts of any incident under investigation.

Then wonder why if by chance what I said is true and the allegations that were made aren't accurate - why would someone do THAT?

Gotta figure if that anonymous person will disregard the process then disregarding factual truth is no great leap...question is why here why now.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Doug_Davis 0]

airtwardo

***The "facts" nobody is willing to tell the populace.
Hence the thread title.

It's sad seeing you defend this system Douglas.
I had previously been convinced that safety was your primary concern.
It would appear that politics and drama are somewhat more important.

My point is why is this Winstock thing being handled differently?

Why would a member if the BOD purposely break with the way things are always handled and create all this drama but remain silent all the other times when every factor was significantly worse?

Regardless of ones opinion of what happened with Winstock, surely they must realize on some level that something ELSE is also taking place...

I mean in simple terms some office holder had an incident and it was looked into just like it is every other time that happens - the judgement of a panel of peers found no reason for the axe - again just like in the past.

You keep saying this. As if every protocol in the in the manual on how to do investigations was followed.

Yet you have had at least one board member state publicly right here in this thread that this isnt true. That the President attempted to take matters into her own hands and bypass the DG and investigation process, and that this is what caused the beginnings of the problems with BOD members.

So since you keep ignoring that or dismissing it, let me flat out ask. Do you think Jan is lying? Because it appears that is what you are implying.

[airtwardo 7]

Jan lying ? About what ?

Don't understand the reference but I've certainly never know her to intentionally lie - it that's what you're asking

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Doug_Davis 0]

airtwardo

Jan lying ? About what ?

Don't understand the reference but I've certainly never know her to intentionally lie - it that's what you're asking

Okay maybe Im misunderstanding you. But you said....

airtwardo

it was looked into just like it is every other time that happens

Which to me makes it sound as if a normal above board investigation was completed following proper procedure, with no irregularities.

And Jan claims that at least initially...

MakeItHappen

After an improper investigation by the President, that was objected to by numerous BOD members after the President informed us about what she did, a formal 1-6 aka DG investigation was done.

So unless its normal business for the President to ignore the rules on how investigations are carried out within the USPA, it doesnt sound like this was looked into "just like it is every other time."

So your statement and Jan's statement seems to be mutually exclusive. It appears as if either you are wrong or she is. Things were either done normally and by the book, or someone (the president) attempted to ignore procedure until board members lodged their complaints. Which is it?
Or maybe Im just not fully understanding what it is you are saying, so Im just trying to clarify and understand.

[ti2013 0]

From what I've been told, this isn't the first time Sherry has tried to protect one of her buddy/BOD members. She recently tried to squash a problem with an RD, but Jay heard about it and got things done right. Last couple of NC RD's seemed to follow this "me and my friends" thing. Our new RD is a breath of fresh air. Michael will do the right thing.

[kallend 2,026]

topdocker

***Putting a man in the modern-day equivalent of a town square stock so that people can throw rotten vegetables at him isn't enough to satisfy the masses.

I've got nothing more of value to add once it's been said that facts and truth don't matter.

First sentence: remember, Rich isn't a regular member, he is the guy that helps decide if another member keeps their ratings/membership after an incident/infraction. Will he be able to do his job as effectively since this occurred? Will the system be as effective? Do we wait to find out?



"Caesar's wife must be above suspicion" (J. Caesar, about 61BC)

So should the USPA BOD's Director of S&T.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

This stinks on many levels. The greatest one being what was put fourth as having happened - didn't in the way alleged.

Which, again, compels the simple question: Then what did happen?

With all due respect to you, Jim (which is considerable), that still hasn't been answered.