USPA in contempt of court

This has been brought up to my attention a number of times. I dont know whats more concerning to the membership, the fact USPA is getting a lawsuit pending against them, or the fact they are choosing not to pay the debt, with what i assume would be memberships money. Does anyone know if they hold a separate fund to pay these legal fees?

65-main.pdf

That's some major pot stirring there, whoever you may be!  Well, I'll take a bite....

Interesting to see these "secret" things about the USPA be opened up to view.

While the PDF above has a pages of legalize about why the USPA is obligated to pay up the $150,000 as agreed, it all came about because of the stuff described below:

(Which must be about the Lodi tandem fatality and all the shady stuff going on there when it comes to fake certifications of instructors.)
 

Quote

Mr. Garmashov is a professional skydiving instructor and was a member of
USPA—a self-governing association for the sport of skydiving—from 2000 through
2016. See Compl. at ¶¶ 12, 25 [ECF Doc. # 3].

On or around August 6, 2016, and prior to the suspension of Mr. Garmashov’s
USPA membership, a former skydiving instructor named Rob Pooley, whom the
USPA had previously suspended, forged Mr. Garmashov’s signature on certification
paperwork for an instructor involved in a tandem skydive jump in California. Mr.
Garmashov was out of the country when Mr. Pooley forged his signature. That jump
resulted in two fatalities.

By letter dated October 13, 2016, Jan Meyer, USPA’s National Secretary at
the time, informed Mr. Garmashov, that the USPA Board had revoked his
membership and terminated all instructor “ratings.” See Oct. 13, 2016 USPA Letter
from Jan Meyer to Yuri Garmashov. The USPA did not, however, follow the
suspension procedures set forth in the 2016 USPA Governance Manual. Mr.
Garmashov was not provided with any of the evidence used against him in that
decision-making process nor was he allowed to have an attorney represent him.
Thereafter, Mr. Garmashov initiated the instant breach of contract action. All
claims set forth in Mr. Garmashov’s Complaint arise from this 2016 revocation and
termination. Subsequent to October 13, 2016, Mr. Garmashov has never been a
USPA member.

Mr. G sued the USPA, the court sent it to Mediation and came to an initial sort-of agreement, but the USPA wanted one more change, but Mr G didn't agree. The court then decided that the initial agreement was legally an agreement. So the USPA had agreed to pay the $150,000.

Part of the deal was also confidentiality on both parties -- One of those things that's common in the legal world but often seems really slimy to someone not in that profession. The case involves the USPA and so USPA members should have a right to know if something got screwed up, that's costing their organization.

I have no dog in this fight but just wanted to summarize what's hidden away in the PDF. Others are free to do a better job.

Anyone got a link to the old Lodi fatality thread, or some thread that gets into whatever license suspensions took place, and all that mess with Tandem Instructors having to requalify because their instructor wasn't considered to have been properly rated?

One thing I'm wondering about is the statement:

Quote

Rob Pooley, whom the USPA had previously suspended, forged Mr. Garmashov’s signature on certification
paperwork for an instructor involved in a tandem skydive jump in California. Mr.
Garmashov was out of the country when Mr. Pooley forged his signature. That jump
resulted in two fatalities.

I suppose that has been previously established, and agreed to by the USPA prior to the court case?  Is there info to that effect available publicly?

It sounds like the USPA was pretty upset with all the Lodi stuff, and in effect did an "emergency revocation" of ratings.... but didn't pull out the manual to do so in the prescribed manner, allowing the defendant to make a proper defense.

57 minutes ago, pchapman said:

57 minutes ago, pchapman said:

...It sounds like the USPA was pretty upset with all the Lodi stuff, and in effect did an "emergency revocation" of ratings.... but didn't pull out the manual to do so in the prescribed manner, allowing the defendant to make a proper defense.

Not the first time they've screwed up a situation like that.

One thing I'd add is that this is a motion, not a final decision. I'm not a legal beagle, but I'm pretty sure that a judge has to sign the last word in the case, not the plaintiffs lawyer. So I wouldn't expect USPA to hand over a dime until ordered to do so and after exhausting all options. 

6 hours ago, Deisel said:

One thing I'd add is that this is a motion, not a final decision. I'm not a legal beagle, but I'm pretty sure that a judge has to sign the last word in the case, not the plaintiffs lawyer. So I wouldn't expect USPA to hand over a dime until ordered to do so and after exhausting all options. 

to me it looks like a motion to enforce the agreed upon settlement.......i think all members should have transparency on where "our" money goes. the fact multiple settlements have been given out and hidden with the idea that , if we pay you we dont admit any fault per the suite. it also seems making disciplinary actions confidential and hidden from the membership could protect the wrong doing of the USPA while ironically claiming to protect the abused party. this is a non profit organization who holds responsibility to the sponsors aka you and ironically at the time mr garmashov

I agree that transparency is a must. But there is something to be said about protection of the individual being subjected to a disciplinary hearing. Some things should be probably should be handled in private. Perhaps we should give the accused the option of making their case public. 

But at any rate, pontification in cyberspace doesn't actually do anything. Maybe you should put together a motion and present it at the next BOD meeting that outlines exactly how matters of personal privacy and transparency should be handled in the future. 

On 2/12/2023 at 9:45 PM, pchapman said:

I have no dog in this fight but just wanted to summarize what's hidden away in the PDF. Others are free to do a better job.

 No dog in this fight? i do not know whats worse, USPA paying out for lawsuits for not following the Governance manual...... Or violating our own members, making them legally stand up for their rights.  If we the membership cant trust USPA to follow their own governance manual when wrongfully accused, we me need to rethink if we want to accept the USPA as our governing body and the licenses it issues. While the FAA is not the most up to date agency, they do striclty follow the book, and that i am for 100%.

doesn't about half the dropzones in canada use the uspa as a governance body?  i know they have the cspa but thought i had heard many use the uspa.  it was a while back, when i was a member of uspa.  i maybe should renew my membership this year.

2 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

doesn't about half the dropzones in canada use the uspa as a governance body?  i know they have the cspa but thought i had heard many use the uspa.  it was a while back, when i was a member of uspa.  i maybe should renew my membership this year.

Of the 28 dropzones in Canada (listed on cspa.ca) these are the the ones that are also affiliated with USPA (as listed on uspa.org)

Canadian DZs affiliated with USPA enjoy two benefits: first, they get free advertising in PARACHUTIST Magazine. This advertisement encourages travelling sport jumpers to visit USPA-affiliated DZs.

The second benefit is avoiding scrutiny by CSPA officials. A few of those CSPA officials can be arrogant jerks.  I know because I briefly served on CSPA's Technical Committee. After Tom McCarthy (Gananoque, Ontario) got tired of CSPA officials telling to teach via static-line methods, Tom revived Instructor Assisted Deployment (circa 1979). A few years later, most CSPA DZs adopted IAD and most USPA DZs adopted IAD another couple of decades later.

CSPA's original mandate was to lend an air of respectability to Canadian skydivers jumping in Canadian air space. IOW CSPA's original role was to keep the Canadian Ministry of Transport (now Transport Canada) at arm's length. CSPA's secondary roles include training instructors, riggers, judges and competitors.

A number of years back (perhaps 30) those renegade Canadian DZs founded Canadian Association of Parachutists (or variations on that name) to distance themselves from CSPA. I have worked for a few CAPS DZs, but the only CAPs DZO that I respected was Tom McCarthy because he was one of the few DZOs who truly knew more than CSPA.

A disadvantage of USPA membership is a lack of USPA oversight. IOW USPA group membership is little more than a cash-grab by USPA as they never seem to inspect USPA-affiliated DZs in Canada. The last time I got into a "disagreement" with a USPA-affiliated DZO in Canada, I called Chuck Aikins and dropped the problem in his lap. I told Chuck that USPA's credibility was at stake.

credibility.  that's a good one. 

I've read through the PDF twice and unless I missed something why was Garmashov revoked in the first place? It was Pooley who forged Garmashov's name to the tandem certification. And unless Garmashov told Pooley to forge his name, I don't get it.

 

2 hours ago, NickDG said:

I've read through the PDF twice and unless I missed something why was Garmashov revoked in the first place?
 

I assume that it looked like Garmashov was part of the malfeasance, that on the face of it he signed off the improperly trained/rated TI who died with his student at Lodi. So the USPA came down hard on him, pulling ratings. Before he had any chance to defend himself. Without following proper procedure.  Only LATER did it become understood that the signature must have been forged. (Luckily Garmashov had a good alibi, that he was out of the country at the time.) There's no evidence presented about that but hopefully that has been established as a true fact.

I wonder what the timeline is. The Lodi fatality was August 2016 and now it is 2023. How long did it take to start finding out about the whole system of forgeries and bad TI certification?  And that Garmashov's signature was forged?  Could the USPA have headed off this whole mess by a quick turnaround, "We thought we were doing the right thing but we didn't follow all our procedures and were deceived by Robert Pooley; we're sorry to Mr. Garmashov who is again a member in good standing"?

I wonder what UPT did when it came to tandem ratings. Did they follow USPA's lead? Or do something entirely different?

For reference, the original tandem fatality thread /forums/topic/26768-fatality-x2---lodi,-ca---7-august-2016/   (I haven't gone through it all!)

Pooley's arrest in 2021 (short thread with no followup): /forums/topic/272535-instructor-arrestedwas-lodi-tandem-fatality/

The galling thing is that the USPA covered it up (rather than apologizing publicly), and in mediation still wanted to prevent Garmashov from ever being a USPA member (figuratively saying "you may be right but we still think you're an asshole for fighting us, you'll never work in this town again, that is, you'll never hold a USPA rating again").

EDIT:

One does find some stuff when searching for Rob Pooley on DZ.

For example, a copy of the announcement by USPA at about the start of Sept 2016 that some of Dause, Pooley and Germashov's ratings had been pulled:  /forums/topic/87-so-you-think-you're-a-ti%3F--are-you-sure%3F/?do=findComment&comment=4520528   Plus the whole TI investigation ("About 120 must undergo a new USPA-developed refresher course (some immediately and most by September 30), while some 20 others have had their ratings suspended and must undergo a full and complete tandem instructor rating course ")

On 2/15/2023 at 1:10 PM, pchapman said:

I assume that it looked like Garmashov was part of the malfeasance, that on the face of it he signed off the improperly trained/rated TI who died with his student at Lodi.

He worked for Dause and therefore must be guilty, (in the eyes of the Dause hating USPA) This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

On 2/15/2023 at 7:48 AM, wmw999 said:

It’s like any other organization (as opposed to regulatory body). Its credibility is only as good as we let it be, and even then there are limits. Just like any regulatory body is limited by its monitoring and enforcement budgets. It’s up to USPA members as well as the leadership — and it’s up to the members to elect the leadership

Wendy P. 

Do you mean the 15% voting capacity of the USPA members who even care to vote. Ironically watching over the voting options alot of the time you have ONE candidate to vote for, so much for getting the right guy in there. It seems people who hold some sort of business in the sport really pushes for these power trip positions to push their business above the rest. I bet they could even kill a USPA member and just say it was an accident with no real action taken against them, hahhhmmmm

10 hours ago, Anti-USPA said:

It seems people who hold some sort of business in the sport really pushes for these power trip positions to push their business above the rest.

Some people call it a "power trip posistion". Other people would say that they are people who care enough about the sport that they want to do the work required to move the organization forward. Most people don't care enough to even bother voting. USPA could use a good shot of openness on this and some other matters. USPA seems to have over reacted here and appears to be dragging their heels and refusing to admit to making a mistake. 

8 hours ago, gowlerk said:

 USPA seems to have over reacted here and appears to be dragging their heels and refusing to admit to making a mistake. 

As mentioned above by miss Wendy, the members or sponsors as you will of this organization are the only people of interest to hold USPA accountable. The legal governing organizations are required by law to follow the regulations. If they did such acts, they are held accountable to a legal degree. Seeing as most skydivers have no intention of holding USPA to an honest standard, they have given the USPA free reigns to violate their own regulations and bylaws with no repercussions.

Even recently a questionnaire was asked to members, what does USPA do for them? It was expressed by that same questionnaire that most people have no idea what the USPA does for them, they are only aware that if they do not pay for membership, the dropzone in which they jump at will not allow them to manifest on any load.

So why would USPA ever admit any fault if the sponsors over them never question what they do for them? Mr. G was forced into litigation because we the members just trusted USPA to "do the right thing."  I think if we made a stand and DEMANDED better from an organization then and only then can a real change begin to take place.

3 minutes ago, Anti-USPA said:

I think if we made a stand and DEMANDED better from an organization then and only then can a real change begin to take place.

Yeah, good luck with that. We both know that most skydivers simply do not care unless they are directly affected. Pointing things out here may make a few more people aware and that may help a little. No organization ever voluntarily increases it's own accountability. Although they may decide to hold others accountable.

If you read the original document (as linked in the first post on this thread) it is Mr. G.'s "motion for contempt."

It is not a judge's decision.

So it is still the two parties (Mr. G. versus USPA) debating.

A huge part of this debate is whether Mr. G. knew that someone lese was forging his signature on T.I. certification documents.

@riggerrob, you are mistaken. The motion for contempt means that there is an existing Court Order (aka FOAH or similar) that instructs a party or both parties to do something (e.g. pay for damages, reinstate membership and/or ratings, etc.), and that one of the parties has been refusing to follow the court order (e.g. shell out $150K, reinstate membership and/or ratings, etc.) So the other party, in this case Mr. G, had to file said Motion for Contempt in order to enforce the judgement/Court Order/FOAH/blah-blah-blah. There is no "debate" between Mr. G and USPA.   

On 2/16/2023 at 11:26 AM, gowlerk said:

He worked for Dause and therefore must be guilty, (in the eyes of the Dause hating USPA) This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

A few years prior to this mess,, another jumper from Lodi was caught signing off multiple students without any ratings. He was "disciplined" by USPA by being allowed to get an AFF rating.

Consistency and transparency are top of the list when one thinks of USPA. /s

On 2/21/2023 at 5:07 AM, skybytch said:

A few years prior to this mess,, another jumper from Lodi was caught signing off multiple students without any ratings. He was "disciplined" by USPA by being allowed to get an AFF rating.

Consistency and transparency are top of the list when one thinks of USPA. /s

Perhaps earning an AFF rating was USPA's way of "bringing him back into the fold." If he conformed to USPA standards during an AFF rating course, hopefully he will continue to follow USPA standards after he is no longer under close scrutiny.