travisprill

Many packers are highschoolers, so the food chain naturally goes up to the parents... High Schoolers?? 'Naturally' ? Both statements lend the audience to assume you don't spend a lotta time jumping & more with civil liability statutes...coincidence? While I'm not a permanent fixture at my local DZ, and I'm fairly new in the sport (2 years) I have seen a lot of high schoolers packing and, while I don't have kids myself, I do understand that parents are generally responsible financially for their kids... am I wrong? BTW I am not a lawyer, this comes from a concerned parent friend who has a 16 year old that desperately wants to be a packer, but the parent is worried about liability... I knew I'd get attacked as I am quite familiar with how people post here. It's cool. I can hold my own at the bonfire too. I saw you added to your post... Yes, at my DZ, All packing is done under the supervision of riggers. All packers must take the packing course and be signed off by the rigger.

Being called a lawyer... worst insult of the year for me. I'd sue, but then I'd have to talk to a lawyer.

Thanks! I guess I now have a reputation to uphold. Perhaps I should have set the bar lower. My initial inquiry was not so much for upjumpers as we understand the 'can't blame anyone if had the opportunity to do it yourself' mentality... however, what about student rigs or tandems? Which is where my original post was meant to be geared toward.

Many packers are highschoolers, so the food chain naturally goes up to the parents...

I'm curious if anyone has any data pertaining to an independent contractor working as a packer at a dz where a rig they packed was involved in an accident. Is there any precedence where the packer was sued or in any way held financially responsible for anything? I've dug through the forums here as well as elsewhere out on the interwebs, and can't find anything. In our highly litigious society, I'm curious if this is a concern since most dz's don't carry insurance and an independent contractor is not an actual employee.

Many universities have Skydiving Clubs. You should reach out to some of them for information to present to the people above this wuffo.

In my opinion, this thread is pointing out an issue in this industry related to standardized training. I was a ski instructor for a number of years in Tahoe. Quite some time ago, the governing body for Ski Instruction (PSIA) standardized the teaching methods so a person who has taken a first timer lesson on the East Coast should be able to do fine in a second time lesson on the West Coast, provided they did decent in the first lesson. Albeit, there is no logbook for skiing and the instructors can more easily determine the skill level of a skier than a skydiver by talking to them and observing, however the differences in equipment, terrain, chairlift operation, weather etc. is very similar to the O.P.'s situation. I recently got my A-license and had my own struggles with re-currency issues due to a crappy "travel-for-work-schedule". I didn't have the same struggle of changing DZ's, but I did have the issue of different coaches. My DZ was very accommodating in both looking out for my wallet as well as my safety. Neither was compromised for the other. There was reasonable compromise due to excellent documentation and a standardized program. In the middle of my AFF program I had a long stretch of being away from the program due to traveling for work. Upon my return, my original instructors were not available to verbally vouch for my skill level, but my logbook and proficiency card was. The DZ management requested that due to my absence that I observe the first jump-course at a discounted rate, and do a checkout dive for my last achieved level. Deep down, I know I probably would have been fine continuing on to the next level, but I know safety is paramount in this sport and I was happy to oblige, and didn't feel like I was being gouged. I felt, that in my situation, I was treated fairly, but it doesn't seem as an industry everyone is on the same page. I really feel that new students of this sport are excellent advertisers. I get the fact that the money is made in tandems and first time jump classes. The fact of the matter is, a tandem might rave about their skydiving experience and attract business to the sport for a couple of weeks after their jump. A skydiving student will continue to spout the coolness of this sport until they stop skydiving. Students of this sport are the future, and they should be handled by the industry a little better. The old adage of 'I put in my time in the dung pile, now you have to' is stupid. I'm not asking the industry put aside the money makers to suit the up-and-comers, but there needs to be a balance. Continuing to standardize the teaching programs will only make this sport safer and that much easier to get involved in. Adding more certified skydivers will only improve this sport. Those that try to hold on to the exclusivity of this sport by requiring newbies to crawl up through a 'dung pile' need a reality check. Just my two cents as a recent student coming from an instructor background myself.