The online PDF is still showing a date of 24 February (code in the footer: 160224). Still says the EAA performs an employment history check.Originally Posted by Mayhemxpc
Ron Wanttaja
The online PDF is still showing a date of 24 February (code in the footer: 160224). Still says the EAA performs an employment history check.
Ron Wanttaja
Ron, we will never be able to determine, for sure, unless one actually goes onto the background check web page.
Any thing else can be misstated, etc.
Do not judge anything unless you actually see it posted on the printed page.
All I can give you is what I have already posted, and I repeat. Bret's statement must be verified. This can only be done one way.
My guess is that the changes relayed from Bret are probably true, but the official documents have not been updated to match, yet. As you say, it's not official until the appropriate documentation can be accessed by everyone.
I don't think anyone at EAA is deliberately trying to be deceptive. I'm suspecting that the EAA staffers were deeply shocked at the level of rancor these changes produced (and, to some extent, continue to produce). I'm thinking EAA now has fifty bazillion layers of review before anything gets formally published, and those at the pointy end can't do anything to speed things up.
Remember the definition of a bureaucrat: It's a person who CUTS red tape. Lengthwise.
Ron Wanttaja
[QUOTE=rwanttaja;55202]
Remember the definition of a bureaucrat: It's a person who CUTS red tape. Lengthwise.
And at headquarters, they do the same with a fingernail clipper.
The changes to the sign off are definitely there. There was a change made to try to remove as much financial sounding language as possible -- we do not want your financial information, but the old sign off seemed to indicate that. We also only do one background check, but the old sign-off gave us permission to do ongoing background checks. We are trying to be as transparent as possible with this one, and pushed hard with AmericanChecked to clarify the language for you all. The sign off is the most official document you can get -- I will go out and see what other advisory docs Ron is referring to and get them cleaned up.
The policy on this page:
http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-e...34624FCAD&_z=z
...still states the employment history check, as does the PDF.
Ron Wanttaja
By the way, configuration management of any document can be a nightmare when you publish it in differing locations in differing formats. Publish it in ONE place, in ONE format. That way, when it changes, updating is easy.
Ron Wanttaja
Bret,
where is is "there" where the changes definitely are?
i and others appreciate the effort to fix things. Right now, however, action on our part requires a little bit more than faith that "there" is really there.
Hoping to to be able to comply in time to make the next YE rally.
Chris
Plus one.
I want to continue to fly YEs but I have sidelined myself until there is sufficient consideration given to taking care of us members and our identities.
However, I will not go away and I will occasionally pop up at the most inopportune times in order to be the grain of sand that irritates the oyster into making the pearl. Can't wait till the annual membership meeting at OSH.
Ted
SOCATA Rallye N381
I have been an EAA member for over 25-years. Because of my legal background I have never participated in the YE program because I was/am keenly aware of the potential liabilities due to participation, but did believe that it is worthwhile effort.
I have followed all the concerns mentioned since the first salvo was fired. I am of the mind that EAA management made a serious tactical mistake in how this was initiated and subsequently handled. I hope it get resolved without permanent damage to the organization.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote