Young Eagles and Background Security Checks

[Bret Steffen]

Just to answer a couple of the post-webinar questions --

A rally is something that is organized by a chapter YE coordinator or an individual field rep (there are only a couple dozen of those) to serve a large group of kids. As an individual pilot you would not host a rally. Rally "how to's" are available on the YE pages, and explain the various steps in a rally -- including getting an insurance certificate, ordering materials, etc. I would advise individual pilots that if you are planning to fly a large group to be extra cautious -- you have extra EAA coverage for your flight operations, however ground activities of people while you are up flying would not be a part of your extra EAA coverage. It probably isn't the best idea to have a bunch of folks wandering around a ramp or at your hangar unsupervised -- but that is a personal decision for you to make. If you are not a part of a chapter, but want to learn more about hosting a rally, Michelle in the YE office can help you understand what being a field representative is all about -- that way you could host a rally.

The Webinar will be posted at http://eaavideo.org/channel.aspx?ch=ch_webinars It takes Timm a couple of days to get those posted generally. The content part is pretty short -- around 20-25 minutes, but we answered questions for more than an hour to bring the entire thing to 1.5 hours.

Happy flying everyone!

[Jkan]

The more they try to explain it, the more confusing it becomes. Just go away!

[TomBush]

I'll say it again: there is simply no way to polish this turd of a program. Its complete elimination, as in "forget we ever brought it up," is the only acceptable solution. . .

[CarlOrton]

I was unable to watch the webinar live due to schedule. However, I'm concerned about a comment made on the prior page (sorry - don't recall by whom...) saying that add'l EAA insurance is provided to pilots and volunteers in case of accusation. Just curious - what about Chapter Officers & Board Members? All officers & boards are not always present at events, so I'm curious about coverage for them.

[Eric Cernjar]

I was unable to watch the webinar live due to schedule. However, I'm concerned about a comment made on the prior page (sorry - don't recall by whom...) saying that add'l EAA insurance is provided to pilots and volunteers in case of accusation. Just curious - what about Chapter Officers & Board Members? All officers & boards are not always present at events, so I'm curious about coverage for them.

Yes, same coverage applies for the chapter officers.

Thanks,
Eric

[deej]

At our chapter meeting last week, the primary topic of discussion was the new policy, which got a bit "lively" at times (Honestly it was the most heated debate we have ever had in the nearly 8 years I have been in the chapter). Out of the 3 YE pilots in attendance, 2 indicated that they would not be willing to undergo the background check, with 1 YE pilot saying that he already did. Out of the 12 people present at the meeting, only 4 indicated they would be willing to undergo the background check. In the ensuing discussion, it was felt that we no longer have enough people to hold a YE event on our own. We are going to contact other chapters around the state to see if we may be able to hold some sort of combined event in an effort to find a viable way to move forward.

FWIW, most people indicated that they would be willing to do an online training course, and that the major issues with the policy are the record keeping requirement for non-YE events and the background check overall.

Based on the prior comments in this forum thread, there are about 4000 people that have done the training and background check thus far. I believe we have somewhere on the order of 1000 EAA Chapters, giving an average of 4 people per chapter that have complied. There is concern that this isn't enough critical mass to maintain youth related programs in general, not just YE.

Also based on the prior comments, we are currently at a 53% loss of YE pilots, with seven weeks to go until the deadline.

Questions to EAA Staff:
1) What percentage of YE pilot loss is considered "acceptable" to keep the current policy, specifically the background check component?

2) How many currently paid EAA members are there, and what percentage does the 4000 that have already done the background check represent?

3) Related to 2), what percentage of acceptance by the membership is considered "acceptable" to keep the current policy, specifically the background check component?

Thank you,

-Dj

[Eric Cernjar]

Questions to EAA Staff:
1) What percentage of YE pilot loss is considered "acceptable" to keep the current policy, specifically the background check component?

2) How many currently paid EAA members are there, and what percentage does the 4000 that have already done the background check represent?

3) Related to 2), what percentage of acceptance by the membership is considered "acceptable" to keep the current policy, specifically the background check component?

Thank you,

-Dj

I don't think we're looking at this in terms of what is an acceptable loss. Ultimately, we had concerns about the lack of having a policy in place, and felt that going this route would provide improved protection for kids. As Rick said in the presentation last night, what if something did happen and it was avoidable? What would chapter leaders/EAA say when confronted by the media if something did happen? That we felt we were a group of good guys and didn't feel it was necessary? Or that we thought some pilots wouldn't participate so we didn't want to put a background check in place? The conclusion that we came to is that's what isn't acceptable, as much as we also don't want to create problems or heartburn for our dedicated volunteers.

Ideally we wouldn't lose any pilots over this, but when it comes to youth protection, I don't think we can justify walking away from the background check because some won't do it. We made revisions to make the process as painless as possible, but it is the expectation today that policies like this are in place when working with youth.

As far as your particular situation, feel free to lean on us to help mobilize the troops for rallies. We have a chapters team here at HQ that exists to support you guys, and we can help.

Thanks,
Eric

[TomBush]

So Eric, using the logic that some sort of 'policy' is required to uphold the appearance - because that's all it is - appearance - that a YPP is necessary, what is EAA's Lightning Policy (LP)? Since the chance of a sexual assault occurring between a YE Pilot and and a participating youth is about the same as that of being struck by lightning, EAA really ought to have a 'policy' concerning lightning strikes, don't you think? Maybe some training at least on how to avoid lightning by getting indoors, eh?

How about a No Crashing (NC) Policy? After all, we have in fact had 4 fatalities on YE flights and three wrecked airplanes, yet we didn't hear about any policies being stood up to combat this malady. . .

Ridiculous. . .

[cub builder]

What would chapter leaders/EAA say when confronted by the media if something did happen?

Pretty much says it all. It's all about good press vs bad press. Background checks have nothing to do with protecting children, pilots, or chapter officers.

By using policies such as a minimum number of 2 adults when escorting youth, you have eliminated the possibility of children being abused. The background checks are all about theatre in the press and nothing else.

-Cub Builder

[DanH]

....we had concerns about the lack of having a policy in place, and felt that going this route would provide improved protection for kids. As Rick said in the presentation last night, what if something did happen and it was avoidable? What would chapter leaders/EAA say when confronted by the media if something did happen? That we felt we were a group of good guys and didn't feel it was necessary? Or that we thought some pilots wouldn't participate so we didn't want to put a background check in place? The conclusion that we came to is that's what isn't acceptable, as much as we also don't want to create problems or heartburn for our dedicated volunteers.

Eric, look at what you just wrote. You start with the corporate line ("...improved protection for kids"), then launch into an argument to illustrate that the organization is at risk. Frankly, such presentation brings an impolite term to mind.

Here's a thought. A whole lot of us would not be upset with the idea of protecting our organization. We helped build EAA, we're proud of it, and we don't want to see it sued into oblivion by some dirtbag. Most would buy into a program sold as "EAA vs The Dirtbags", because it is the truth.

What most of us will never buy into is "protecting the kids", because as structured, (a) it doesn't protect them, and (b) if it did, it would be protecting them against us.