Youth Protection Policy

[VA Maule]

We are the EAA. The membership. The Chapters. You " eaa corporate " work & exist to support us not the other way around! We are not happy or satisfied with this situation!!!!

I find it inappropriate and heavy handed to LOCK the original ongoing discussion. You can't tell us to set down shut up and get with the program just because you don't like the way the conversation is going!!!!

E.M.Dunnavant , President Chapter 1202

[Chick]

I have been quiet during this entire fiasco. I have tried to give corporate a chance to straighten everything out. I do not fly Young Eagles as I have a two place experimental. My problem is the heavy handed way corporate has handled this. They are not treating members as the reason for EAA's existence. If we stop paying dues, they go home, as well. This is what I have decided to do. My membership is up in about a month. Corporate won't miss my or my wife's membership money; but, if enough people quit, they might notice. This is not the club I joined quite a while ago. This group was once about planes and the people who flew them. I realize that times change. In today's environment child abuse is an important issue. I don't have a problem with that idea. I do have a problem with being treated with the attitude that we have seen from corporate. It has been fun; but, I am through.

[rwanttaja]

I find it inappropriate and heavy handed to LOCK the original ongoing discussion. You can't tell us to set down shut up and get with the program just because you don't like the way the conversation is going!!!!
Well...I doubt that anyone expected that discussion on this topic would cease just by locking the original thread. If they start going through and locking each new thread on the topic as it starts, THEN they'll have a problem.

A large portion of the original thread was obsolete; it discussed aspects of the YPP that no longer existed. A lot of newcomers look at a thread from the start, and may get somewhat of a wrong impression reading the original thread. By starting this new thread, the discussion can focus on the CURRENT policy. Any discussion on the lame-brained way they shoved it out onto the membership is just a bonus. :-)

Coincidentally, my membership came due last month. I did renew... shoot, $40 a year is cheap for this kind of quality entertainment!

Ron Wanttaja

[Yooper Rocketman]

I sent an email last night to national about my disappointment in management over the last 6 weeks. Closing this thread further demonstrated the exact things we as members need to be concerned about. That said, some comments have been very repetitive, mean spirited, and essentially putting staffers in a position they do not deserve to be. If a staffer can't answer your question to your liking, take it further up the ladder with a personal email or phone call. That is exactly what I intend to do.

My chapter has provided just under 5,000 YE flights. While I understand the desire to have a policy in place, this one still needs a lot of work or our count rate will drop a ton. I suspect a lot of chapters will be in the same boat as ours. Have no doubt, we WANT to continue flying kids, and will support a reasonable YPP, but as a member based organization, the entire membership should have been involved with the drafting and acceptance of this policy. Had this route been taken, the dissention would have been against the membership majority, not our leadership at national. We truly need stronger management and leadership skills representing us. This is really the root issue we are dealing with.

Believing the current number of members having completed the YPP and background checks is indicative of acceptance by membership and future success of the YE program is likely not accurate. Maybe a good start in demonstrating true leadership skills at national would be to send out an objective questionaire to every chapter president in EAA about the YPP, it's current rules and what the suggestios are to make it more workable, as well as more palatable. This is not a "for profit" business, with leadership making decisions with little regard to the troops. This is a member organization, and leadership should be responding to membership input. Sadly, lately this is looking a lot more like a government run organization, with total disregard for the people they represent.

Tom Sullivan
EAA Chapter 439 President

[cub builder]

My first reaction to the closing of the other thread was the "shut up and go away" reaction. However, the previous thread had become a back and forth of EAA Staff repeating the company line ad nauseam in reply to every concern and had drifted away from any kind of real discussion. Upper management won't touch the forum as they don't want to get dragged into the muck. The staff clearly didn't have anything else to say other than "This is what we are doing. Like it or lump it.", which was clearly implied anyway. At least they were polite while telling many of us to buzz off. Yes, the entertainment value here is cheap, but I can't willingly put my energy or $$ into the EAA anymore. It's clearly not a member run organization. So I'll go away when my membership expires. Until then, I'll stick around for the entertainment.

-Cub Builder

[lyleapgmc]

As I read this I had a disturbing thought. AirVenture is a huge event and makes a lot of money for EAA. Could it be that the powers that be wish to shut down all chapter and individual activity and concentrate solely on AirVenture. Would previous to the change members fly to AirVenture to display their airplane and look at all the others on display?

Will enough folks attend the show just to see a few airplanes and watch the airshow?

Will the EAA members that fly the airshow continue to do so?

It's a disturbing thought but companies have changed direction the same as the wind does.

[Eric Cernjar]

As I read this I had a disturbing thought. AirVenture is a huge event and makes a lot of money for EAA. Could it be that the powers that be wish to shut down all chapter and individual activity and concentrate solely on AirVenture. Would previous to the change members fly to AirVenture to display their airplane and look at all the others on display?

Will enough folks attend the show just to see a few airplanes and watch the airshow?

Will the EAA members that fly the airshow continue to do so?

It's a disturbing thought but companies have changed direction the same as the wind does.


I can assure you there is no conspiracy theory. The investments EAA has made to put full-time staff on EAA Chapters is at a level that hasn't been seen in years. Completely opposite to what you're suggesting, chapter growth and revitalization is among the very top priorities in the entire organization, and it's not just words. They're putting the money and staff on it to back that up.

[djenders]

Well...I doubt that anyone expected that discussion on this topic would cease just by locking the original thread. If they start going through and locking each new thread on the topic as it starts, THEN they'll have a problem.

A large portion of the original thread was obsolete; it discussed aspects of the YPP that no longer existed. A lot of newcomers look at a thread from the start, and may get somewhat of a wrong impression reading the original thread. By starting this new thread, the discussion can focus on the CURRENT policy. Any discussion on the lame-brained way they shoved it out onto the membership is just a bonus. :-)

Coincidentally, my membership came due last month. I did renew... shoot, $40 a year is cheap for this kind of quality entertainment!

Ron Wanttaja

Thanks Ron, you expressed it well. There was a lot of discussion in that thread about the previous policy and we have tried to absorb that feedback as an organization to improve the policy while still working hard to protect youth, our YE pilots, volunteers, chapters, and of course the organization as a whole.

The point wasn't to shut down the conversation, per my last post, but to continue it in a respectable fashion so we do not continue to confuse people about any part of the policy.

Thanks for understanding.
Dennis

[djenders]

As I read this I had a disturbing thought. AirVenture is a huge event and makes a lot of money for EAA. Could it be that the powers that be wish to shut down all chapter and individual activity and concentrate solely on AirVenture. Would previous to the change members fly to AirVenture to display their airplane and look at all the others on display?

Will enough folks attend the show just to see a few airplanes and watch the airshow?

Will the EAA members that fly the airshow continue to do so?

It's a disturbing thought but companies have changed direction the same as the wind does.

Absolutely not. As Eric noted, the organization has invested heavily (time and people) to improve our support for chapters.

Regards,
Dennis

[djenders]

I sent an email last night to national about my disappointment in management over the last 6 weeks. Closing this thread further demonstrated the exact things we as members need to be concerned about. That said, some comments have been very repetitive, mean spirited, and essentially putting staffers in a position they do not deserve to be. If a staffer can't answer your question to your liking, take it further up the ladder with a personal email or phone call. That is exactly what I intend to do.

My chapter has provided just under 5,000 YE flights. While I understand the desire to have a policy in place, this one still needs a lot of work or our count rate will drop a ton. I suspect a lot of chapters will be in the same boat as ours. Have no doubt, we WANT to continue flying kids, and will support a reasonable YPP, but as a member based organization, the entire membership should have been involved with the drafting and acceptance of this policy. Had this route been taken, the dissention would have been against the membership majority, not our leadership at national. We truly need stronger management and leadership skills representing us. This is really the root issue we are dealing with.

Believing the current number of members having completed the YPP and background checks is indicative of acceptance by membership and future success of the YE program is likely not accurate. Maybe a good start in demonstrating true leadership skills at national would be to send out an objective questionaire to every chapter president in EAA about the YPP, it's current rules and what the suggestios are to make it more workable, as well as more palatable. This is not a "for profit" business, with leadership making decisions with little regard to the troops. This is a member organization, and leadership should be responding to membership input. Sadly, lately this is looking a lot more like a government run organization, with total disregard for the people they represent.

Tom Sullivan
EAA Chapter 439 President

Tom, thank you for the thoughtful post. The organization has really worked hard to answer calls and e-mails from our members, pilots, and YE volunteers to improve the policy. I highly recommend doing exactly what you did, share your thoughts and have a conversation with our team members.

The Young Eagles program has been safe to date, but we've had some close calls – as illustrated in our communications and the recent webinar. EAA is invested in keeping the program safe for everyone involved, and hope that all of you continue to support the program.

My personal thoughts....

The back and forth here in the forum isn't going to change the very important decision to keep youth safe. Even one incident is one too many. We value the feedback we've received here and elsewhere. It is clear the organization is listening and we have acknowledged that we could have done a better job communicating the policy and rollout. We care about how you feel, and truly appreciate your participation.

You do mention leadership, and I understand your perspective. Again, personally I think we have come to the conclusion that the risk to YE volunteers, chapters, and the organization is just too high. The policy is in place to protect you, as well as the youth.

I understand why some members took it personally. We did not intend to offend anyone with the background check or policy. It isn't a matter of trust, but the reality of the world we live in today. We have a responsibility to protect youth.

The Young Eagles program, and everyone who has participated, have much to be proud of. Nearly 2 million youth have been flown. That is an incredible number and success!

Thank you for your participation. I hope you and chapter 439 continue to support the program you have helped build.

[djenders]

My first reaction to the closing of the other thread was the "shut up and go away" reaction. However, the previous thread had become a back and forth of EAA Staff repeating the company line ad nauseam in reply to every concern and had drifted away from any kind of real discussion.

There was a lot of back and forth in the previous thread and we learned that it was causing confusion on the policy. A lot of people would start on page one and not realize that many of the questions / concerns with background checks, the provider, SSN requirements were changed.

Personally, I am saddened that you will not be renewing your membership. I hope nothing we've tried to communicate here on the forum has strengthened that position. We all care deeply about an organization that we feel we've built or invested in. I encourage you to call Oshkosh and have a conversation with the Young Eagles team or management. Maybe they can speak more clearly and specifically about some elements of our decision that will help you understand their position.

I'm happy to help make that connection if needed.

Best,
Dennis

[CarlOrton]

While I can't speak for everyone, I think I can say that this policy just broke the camel's back. As pilots, I like to think that we represent the upper crust of common-sense safe operation of our vehicles. Of course, we know that's not 100% true, but still....

Most here lament the intrusive nature of the policy because of it's similarity to the "security theater" aspects we see at our commercial airports. The TSA tries, but items still get on board aircraft. Yet most of the general population accepts it because we want the government to "DO something!!!". If you want travel security, do it like the Israelis. Yeah, like that would be acceptable in the USA.....

So, I view EAA's YPP as a response to the "DO something" mentality. Yet, as others have posted, the background checks really aren't going to turn up anyone that might be a risk because they're either not going to be around kids in the first place if they have a record, or figure they'd be stupid to try something during a flight if they don't.

Come up with something that *is* effective at uncovering the perps and I'm relatively certain that everyone will be happy. Perhaps strap on some biometric measuring instruments on each pilot / volunteer at the start of a YE Rally. Then show 'em pix of youngsters. Any increase in heartrate or breathing, give 'em the ol' "thanks for stopping by, but not today...." exit. I say this in jest, but you're either going to maintain the "theater" aspect of it, or you're going to get it right.

[FlyingRon]

Yeah, it's silly, but almost every organization that deals with kids has such these days from those places which were ripe for it (like catholic churches and schools) to those who weren't.

The major problem with the EAA was the rather half-assed and poorly introduced implementation of the policy rather than the fact that it exists.

[Mike M]

... I do not fly Young Eagles as I have a two place experimental...

I have a 2place experimental too, Chick. I'm convinced the YE kids who have taken the controls in my Avid Flyer or Mustang II had more fun than those who rode in the far back seat of a Cherokee Six. It's a comfortable and harmless delusion. :)

[FlyingRon]

This has been clarified. You can still fly them in your plane (unless this happens to be piggy backed with some organization that doesn't allow it like the Boy Sprouts).

[cub builder]

Personally, I am saddened that you will not be renewing your membership. I hope nothing we've tried to communicate here on the forum has strengthened that position. We all care deeply about an organization that we feel we've built or invested in. I encourage you to call Oshkosh and have a conversation with the Young Eagles team or management. Maybe they can speak more clearly and specifically about some elements of our decision that will help you understand their position.

I'm happy to help make that connection if needed.

Best,
Dennis

And I am saddened that an organization I spent so much time, energy and $$ to help build chose to betray it's membership. But with the current mentality of the EAA leadership, I no longer have any enthusiasm or desire to support the EAA. My and many others comments seeking to modify the new "policy" seem to make little difference to the EAA management. So the one thing I can do that will make a small difference is to withdraw my financial support from the organization.

Nobody is against protecting children from preditors. There really is no discussion about that. Many of us have long felt that there should be more oversight of the kids and a number of chapters implemented a common sense approach to address those issues. But the intrusion of demanding my personal information be turned over to some third party organization so the EAA won't look bad in the press is offensive. The background checks are completely useless and unnecessary, and put individual members at financial risk without providing anything more than a "feel good" for the EAA management. Meanwhile, the EAA staff continues to falsely attempt to equate background checks as Youth Protection.

As for YE, I feel bad for the kids that won't get to fly. The positive effect the YE program had for the relations between the airport and community will be sorely missed. But, EAA management, YOU killed it. YOU chose to implement an ill-conceived policy without engagement or input of those who are affected by your policies. From what I have heard from many chapters and members of other chapters, with a few exceptions, only the large chapters will be able to muster enough pilots to fly kids. EAA management, your actions have consequences. I can only hope that my small action of walking away from the EAA is felt by the EAA management. I doubt they will care, but if a few thousand choose to do the same, perhaps that will get their attention.

-Cub Builder

[Jkan]

There was a lot of back and forth in the previous thread and we learned that it was causing confusion on the policy. A lot of people would start on page one and not realize that many of the questions / concerns with background checks, the provider, SSN requirements were changed.

For your information, Dennis, it was not so much the membership causing confusion but rather the policy itself, and the band aid fixex. Don't try to blame someone else for the complete inept program you and senior management is trying to push onto the membership

[ssmdive]

for your information, dennis, it was not so much the membership causing confusion but rather the policy itself, and the band aid fixex. Don't try to blame someone else for the complete inept program you and senior management is trying to push onto the membership


this +1

[vaflier]

Dennis, I have a suggestion that should be easily acheivable and may be a big help to begin putting out this fire. Bring the background checks in house. Have one or two EAA staffers conduct the checks which should take several minutes each to check the National Sex Offenders Registry for Young Eagles Volunteers. This would likely save money and you already have all of my info that you need to complete the checks. Young Eagles Volunteers would have to submit an authorization form to allow it every three years , or they cannot participate in any events with young people. Simple economical, and gives as much protection to both the organisation and the young people as the current policy will. In addition we, the membership will not need to divulge our personal information to any outside party, thereby placing ourselves at risk for identity theft. The form we would have to submit could easily be added as a check box to our annual membership renewal form and our membership cards could , assuming we pass the checks , have Young Eagle Volunteer imprinted on the card to show we are in compliance with current policy. Event sponsors should be asked to card all volunteers to verify their aproved status. I believe this would solve many but not all of the issues which are causing many to consider either not volunteering or to leave EAA entirely.

[deej]

Dennis, I have a suggestion that should be easily acheivable and may be a big help to begin putting out this fire. Bring the background checks in house. Have one or two EAA staffers conduct the checks which should take several minutes each to check the National Sex Offenders Registry for Young Eagles Volunteers. This would likely save money and you already have all of my info that you need to complete the checks. Young Eagles Volunteers would have to submit an authorization form to allow it every three years , or they cannot participate in any events with young people. Simple economical, and gives as much protection to both the organization and the young people as the current policy will. In addition we, the membership will not need to divulge our personal information to any outside party, thereby placing ourselves at risk for identity theft. The form we would have to submit could easily be added as a check box to our annual membership renewal form and our membership cards could , assuming we pass the checks , have Young Eagle Volunteer imprinted on the card to show we are in compliance with current policy. Event sponsors should be asked to card all volunteers to verify their approved status. I believe this would solve many but not all of the issues which are causing many to consider either not volunteering or to leave EAA entirely.


THIS +100!

Many of us have been saying for weeks now that a simple check to the National Sex Offenders Registry (https://www.nsopw.gov/en) would provide everything we need to know about a person rather than a background check, along with an online training course. I can say that this would definitely address the major concerns expressed in my chapter.

I truly like your suggestion of having something on the membership card indicating a pass for this check. This is something easily verified at an event.

EAA NATIONAL PLEASE LISTEN TO THIS SUGGESTION!

-Dj

[combahee]

Dennis, it was announced in the webinar that if a pilot or volunteer was accused of wrongdoing that the EAA policy would cover them same as Chapter officers. I can't find this anywhere. In addition we were told EAA would secure the attorney for volunteer/pilot. Again I can't find that in writing anywhere. Could you clarify this?

Please read the authorization for the background check. It gives Americhecked a lot more than what EAA was representing, I find it absolutely a non starter for the background check. Can the authorization be changed and tailored to the EAA program?

Third a single pilot giving rides does not need the two deep leadership/ monitors. Yet at a rally with dozens of parents, friends, Chapter members, kids etc. we do need the two deep. That just doesn't make sense. Anyone who knows anything about child abuse/ molestation knows the perp wants a one on one with a child, not a group situation. The two deep just doesn't make sense and could stop a rally if enough vetted volunteers are not in attendance.

Thank you for your time.

[Copapilot]

Please read the authorization for the background check. It gives Americhecked a lot more than what EAA was representing, I find it absolutely a non starter for the background check. Can the authorization be changed and tailored to the EAA program?:thumbsup:

The document at the link below is from the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), the "nationally recognized consumer education and advocacy nonprofit dedicated to protecting the privacy of American consumers". It explains the need for and the pros and cons of background checks/ screening for volunteers. Everyone should read it. EAA "corporate" should STUDY IT THOROUGHLY, as it points out rather starkly that those who are objecting to the YPP as it is currently implemented are correct and EAA management's blanket dismissal of the volunteers' concerns relative to the background check requirement is FLAT-OUT WRONG. Not only should EAA change the consent form, volunteers should demand such and all members should refuse to comply with background checks at all until management makes the change. If AmericanChecked won't comply, EAA should fire them and find a vendor who will comply. This is only one of the several things EAA got wrong relative to nationally accepted practices. If you read the PRC guidelines you will find many other things EAA can and should do to make this onerous requirement better for the membership.

https://www.privacyrights.org/volunteer-background-checks-without-giving-up-privacy (https://www.privacyrights.org/volunteer-background-checks-without-giving-up-privacy)

ESPECIALLY RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION ON THESE BOARDS are section 6 and section 8 (tip #4 in section 8 is especially relevant to the above quote).

Section 6 lists the nationally accepted MINIMUM expectations that volunteers should insist on from their requesting organization.

Section 8 lists the steps that volunteers should take to pro-actively protect his or her own privacy. If the requesting organization and / or the organization's external background screening company will not assist / comply with these requirements, the volunteer should refuse to continue volunteering, up to and including severing ties with the requesting organization. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should a volunteer agree to an all-encompassing and / or open-ended notice and consent form. The EAA policy is a direct contradiction to this nationally-accepted guideline.

Also note that the PRC guidance is for the requesting organization to conduct a minimally invasive check, acquiring only the least amount of data needed to make an "informed decision", and that data should be specifically tailored to the role of the volunteer within the organization. (See section 5) E.G. if you're not driving for them, there is no reason for them to access the national driver registry. If you are not handing money, there is no need for them to access any financial records or finance-related court records. Etc.

$0.02

[djenders]

Dennis, I have a suggestion that should be easily acheivable and may be a big help to begin putting out this fire. Bring the background checks in house. Have one or two EAA staffers conduct the checks which should take several minutes each to check the National Sex Offenders Registry for Young Eagles Volunteers. This would likely save money and you already have all of my info that you need to complete the checks. Young Eagles Volunteers would have to submit an authorization form to allow it every three years , or they cannot participate in any events with young people. Simple economical, and gives as much protection to both the organisation and the young people as the current policy will. In addition we, the membership will not need to divulge our personal information to any outside party, thereby placing ourselves at risk for identity theft. The form we would have to submit could easily be added as a check box to our annual membership renewal form and our membership cards could , assuming we pass the checks , have Young Eagle Volunteer imprinted on the card to show we are in compliance with current policy. Event sponsors should be asked to card all volunteers to verify their aproved status. I believe this would solve many but not all of the issues which are causing many to consider either not volunteering or to leave EAA entirely.

The organization vetted a variety of vendors before making the decision to go with AmericanChecked. I do not see this changing as we are following guidelines and best practices that have already been established by other organizations like the Boy Scouts of America.

Speaking for myself, and not the organization, I imagine there are considerations beyond just executing the check on a website, as it becomes a question of data retention, security, potential of additional staff costs, etc. Having a trusted partner that understands the process, legalities, and governance involved shouldn't be understated.

[djenders]

Dennis, it was announced in the webinar that if a pilot or volunteer was accused of wrongdoing that the EAA policy would cover them same as Chapter officers. I can't find this anywhere. In addition we were told EAA would secure the attorney for volunteer/pilot. Again I can't find that in writing anywhere. Could you clarify this?

Please read the authorization for the background check. It gives Americhecked a lot more than what EAA was representing, I find it absolutely a non starter for the background check. Can the authorization be changed and tailored to the EAA program?

Third a single pilot giving rides does not need the two deep leadership/ monitors. Yet at a rally with dozens of parents, friends, Chapter members, kids etc. we do need the two deep. That just doesn't make sense. Anyone who knows anything about child abuse/ molestation knows the perp wants a one on one with a child, not a group situation. The two deep just doesn't make sense and could stop a rally if enough vetted volunteers are not in attendance.

Thank you for your time.

Eric and I have both shared this question (tailoring the authorization) with senior leadership and it is something we are investigating.

I'll also check in on having anything available online, or elsewhere, about covering Chapter Officers.

As for two-deep leadership, I don't see that changing and I believe that has been communicated in a few different ways.

Will get back to you when we have answers.

Dennis

[djenders]

For your information, Dennis, it was not so much the membership causing confusion but rather the policy itself, and the band aid fixex. Don't try to blame someone else for the complete inept program you and senior management is trying to push onto the membership

I think you've seen Jack as well as employees agree that the roll out could have been better. But we are focusing on moving forward with the feedback that has been collected and the revisions we've made because of it.

All I was referencing is the confusion some members have had when they call / e-mail / post here after reading old information. It just confuses them, hence the reason to close that thread. It was much easier for people to hop into a new thread vs. getting lost in the original.

Dennis.

[lyleapgmc]

This is a bit off topic but is relevant.

I submitted this question to the forum moderators and got no answer.

How long is one logged in and able to post messages in this or any other thread in the forum without having to log in again?

The reason I asked is that I have been logged out while in the middle of composing a posting.

Many forums keep you logged in as long as you at least read a post on their forum. eBAy is one.

[Mike M]

This has been clarified. You can still fly them in your plane (unless this happens to be piggy backed with some organization that doesn't allow it like the Boy Sprouts).

Correct, Ron. I understood Chick to mean he's never flown YE in 2place EAB. Fly Baby built to original plans remains a non-YE aircraft, I think. :)

[Eric Cernjar]

This is a bit off topic but is relevant.

I submitted this question to the forum moderators and got no answer.

How long is one logged in and able to post messages in this or any other thread in the forum without having to log in again?

The reason I asked is that I have been logged out while in the middle of composing a posting.

Many forums keep you logged in as long as you at least read a post on their forum. eBAy is one.


Have you tried clicking the 'remember me' button when logging in? I've done that and haven't had any issues.

Thanks,
Eric

[FlyingRon]

If American Checked was so vetted, why couldn't someone explain why our personal information was sent to some clandestine third party? It took only three seconds as a person who has been out of the network security biz for a decade for me to notice that things were NOT as stated.

Why did EAA stonewall the dissimeniation of what was really going on?

[combahee]

Eric and I have both shared this question (tailoring the authorization) with senior leadership and it is something we are investigating.

I'll also check in on having anything available online, or elsewhere, about covering Chapter Officers.


Dennis, I realize the Chapter officers have some coverage. What I was referring to was the explicit statements made in the webinar where as the volunteers and pilots would be afforded legal representation if accused. It was also stated the EAA would get the attorneys. This is what I want in writing.
Up to now the question has been and continues to be "whats in it for the volunteers and pilots". If the statements are true then this changes things by covering the volunteers/pilots. However I'm not holding out hope that this was an accurate statement.

[deej]

The organization vetted a variety of vendors before making the decision to go with AmericanChecked. I do not see this changing as we are following guidelines and best practices that have already been established by other organizations like the Boy Scouts of America.

Speaking for myself, and not the organization, I imagine there are considerations beyond just executing the check on a website, as it becomes a question of data retention, security, potential of additional staff costs, etc. Having a trusted partner that understands the process, legalities, and governance involved shouldn't be understated.



Hi Dennis,
I think you missed the crux of the suggestion, so I will try to clarify. EAA already has our names and mailing addresses, which is all the information needed to do a check on the National Sex Offenders Registry (https://www.nsopw.gov/en). Please go check out this website if you have not done so already. You simply type in a name, it does the query, and if there are matches, presents a list with the corresponding mailing address.

This is somewhat of an oversimplification, but the changes at EAA National would involve adding the checkbox on the member renewal web page, modifying the already existing database to add fields related to the sex offender query, and slightly redesigning the membership cards to print the results of the query. Fairly simple given the resources that EAA has available.

There is no need for an external vendor, and this check provides an equivalent to the paid-for background check in terms of limiting exposure of youth to sex offenders.

It also addresses the major concerns of most of our membership.

I would kindly ask that this be brought up to senior management and taken under serious consideration. It protects the kids and is a reasonable process for our members. What's not to like? :-)

-Dj

[Bret Steffen]

Dj,

Your idea is a good one, and one that we talked about for a long time at the beginning of the process. Unfortunately the background check we do goes beyond the sex offender registry to other criminal convictions that EAA is not equipped to handle by ourselves. Obviously the first thing that comes to mind with youth protection is sex offenses, but there are other criminal behaviors that are also inappropriate to expose youth to beyond sex offences. We do appreciate the thougts.

I hope you consider flying Young Eagles someday DJ, as many out there can tell you, it is a wonderful experience!

Bret

[deej]

I hope you consider flying Young Eagles someday DJ, as many out there can tell you, it is a wonderful experience!


I don't fly YE personally, but there is a lot more work to be done than just the flying, as I'm sure you know. I have worked as ground crew for every single YE event we've had since I joined the chapter several years ago, and I spend many hours in the months beforehand organizing our annual fly in (of which a part is also a YE rally).

Assuming we can get enough participants after the new policy is in effect, I will continue to do so. Unfortunately at present it looks like we will not have enough pilots to continue our YE rallies. :-(

This makes me quite sad as there are some very clear and easy modifications to the policy that would prevent this, hence, my participation here trying to convince the "powers that be" that they've messed up badly, and hope we can make the changes before we lose membership critical mass.

Sadly, it looks like our pleas are for naught.

-Dj

[vaflier]

[QUOTE=Bret Steffen;54416
Unfortunately the background check we do goes beyond the sex offender registry to other criminal convictions that EAA is not equipped to handle by ourselves. Obviously the first thing that comes to mind with youth protection is sex offenses, but there are other criminal behaviors that are also inappropriate to expose youth to beyond sex offences. We do appreciate the thougts.

Bret[/QUOTE]

So please explan what exactly the background checks are searching for and what info are you digging into.
financial, criminal, marital, physcological, medical, sex offender, driving records, Or other ?????????.
Just how deep does this go ???? Property ownership perhaps , How much of our privacy are we really giving away ??????

Randy

[Jkan]

So please explan what exactly the background checks are searching for and what info are you digging into.
financial, criminal, marital, physcological, medical, sex offender, driving records, Or other ?????????.
Just how deep does this go ???? Property ownership perhaps , How much of our privacy are we really giving away ??????

Randy

If you take into consideration the wording for the "Authorization" for the background check, you must assume that what they are collecting is ALL of the above and as often as they want!

[rwanttaja]

Unfortunately the background check we do goes beyond the sex offender registry to other criminal convictions that EAA is not equipped to handle by ourselves. Obviously the first thing that comes to mind with youth protection is sex offenses, but there are other criminal behaviors that are also inappropriate to expose youth to beyond sex offences. We do appreciate the thougts.

So please explan what exactly the background checks are searching for and what info are you digging into.
financial, criminal, marital, physcological, medical, sex offender, driving records, Or other ?????????.
Just how deep does this go ???? Property ownership perhaps , How much of our privacy are we really giving away ??????

Randy

I gotta admit, I'm curious, too. This was billed as a "Protect the children from predators" action, but you're collecting other data NOT RELATED TO CHILD PREDATION???? Who is making the decision as to what is sufficient to ban someone from YE?

What does EAA get from the background check agency? I had assumed it was a go/no go as to child predation history. But sounds as if EAA receives a full dossier on each individual. Who at headquarters has access to this data? What specific criteria is used for elimination of someone from Young Eagles?

Y'know what's scary about this? Imagine the chapter Young Eagles coordinator contacts a pilot, and asks him to participate. The pilot, never having abused a child in his life, agrees and enters his name. But, 30 years ago as a teen, he shoplifted and got caught. An arrest record? EAA rejects him.

Everyone in the chapter will believe he was rejected as a sexual predator...because THAT'S what EAA claims the program is supposed to detect.

OK, time for some answers, EAA staffers:

1. What are the specific criteria used to reject someone as a Young Eagles pilot?

2. SPECIFICALLY, what information about each applicant does EAA receive from the background-investigation company?

3. Who at headquarters has access to this data?

4. What protections are in place to prevent other employees from accessing this data?

5. What are EAA's PII Protection policies? Do they specifically address this data?

6. What procedures are in place for EAA members to review their Dossier, and correct faulty information?

Ron Wanttaja

[Copapilot]

I gotta admit, I'm curious, too. This was billed as a "Protect the children from predators" action, but you're collecting other data NOT RELATED TO CHILD PREDATION???? Who is making the decision as to what is sufficient to ban someone from YE?

What does EAA get from the background check agency? I had assumed it was a go/no go as to child predation history. But sounds as if EAA receives a full dossier on each individual. Who at headquarters has access to this data? What specific criteria is used for elimination of someone from Young Eagles?

Y'know what's scary about this? Imagine the chapter Young Eagles coordinator contacts a pilot, and asks him to participate. The pilot, never having abused a child in his life, agrees and enters his name. But, 30 years ago as a teen, he shoplifted and got caught. An arrest record? EAA rejects him.

Everyone in the chapter will believe he was rejected as a sexual predator...because THAT'S what EAA claims the program is supposed to detect. (emphasis added)

OK, time for some answers, EAA staffers:

1. What are the specific criteria used to reject someone as a Young Eagles pilot?

2. SPECIFICALLY, what information about each applicant does EAA receive from the background-investigation company?

3. Who at headquarters has access to this data?

4. What protections are in place to prevent other employees from accessing this data?

5. What are EAA's PII Protection policies? Do they specifically address this data?

6. What procedures are in place for EAA members to review their Dossier, and correct faulty information?

Ron Wanttaja

NOW you're beginning to see exactly how deep this rabbit-hole goes...(apologies to Morpheus)

[Bret Steffen]

Ron, all of your questions are covered in the policy. eaa.org/youthprotection Simply stated above is the fact that sexual molestation is not the only bad thing to happen to kids, so we are looking for things like felony battery charges in addition to sexual molestation. That kind of information would not show up on the sexual predator list, you need to do a criminal history check.

I understand some folks are still unhappy that the world has come to this. I understand that the initial roll out was poorly executed. And I understand that there are a few out there who would like this to go away. I sincerely wish this was not something necessary for our youth programs, but it is. Please understand that all of the staff at EAA are working hard to serve our fellow members, and that we bleed blue too, even on a Friday night at the start of my vacation. We come on the forums to help you understand, not to get into fights. We try to stay away from the forums because it is for you to talk with each other. I will pm you to talk more about your questions offline as well.

[Jkan]

Ron, all of your questions are covered in the policy. eaa.org/youthprotection Simply stated above is the fact that sexual molestation is not the only bad thing to happen to kids, so we are looking for things like felony battery charges in addition to sexual molestation. That kind of information would not show up on the sexual predator list, you need to do a criminal history check.

I understand some folks are still unhappy that the world has come to this. I understand that the initial roll out was poorly executed. And I understand that there are a few out there who would like this to go away. I sincerely wish this was not something necessary for our youth programs, but it is. Please understand that all of the staff at EAA are working hard to serve our fellow members, and that we bleed blue too, even on a Friday night at the start of my vacation. We come on the forums to help you understand, not to get into fights. We try to stay away from the forums because it is for you to talk with each other. I will pm you to talk more about your questions offline as well.

I must remind you also that it is not so much that some folks are upset with the way the world is today, but rather the way this program is worded. I do wish you a very happy vacation, I'm sure you need it, and I can not wait to see what can be done about the insanely worded "Authorization" statement on the background page, we talked about. We well not forget.

[vaflier]

Ron, all of your questions are covered in the policy. eaa.org/youthprotection Simply stated above is the fact that sexual molestation is not the only bad thing to happen to kids, so we are looking for things like felony battery charges in addition to sexual molestation. That kind of information would not show up on the sexual predator list, you need to do a criminal history check.

I understand some folks are still unhappy that the world has come to this. I understand that the initial roll out was poorly executed. And I understand that there are a few out there who would like this to go away. I sincerely wish this was not something necessary for our youth programs, but it is. Please understand that all of the staff at EAA are working hard to serve our fellow members, and that we bleed blue too, even on a Friday night at the start of my vacation. We come on the forums to help you understand, not to get into fights. We try to stay away from the forums because it is for you to talk with each other. I will pm you to talk more about your questions offline as well.

Bret, I think the rest of us would like to have answers to those same questions as well. It would be nice to see a response posted here on the forums replying directly to each of the qustions that Ron posted.

Thank you for your efforts to be responsive to our concerns and I hope you have a fantastic vacation.

[rwanttaja]

Ron, all of your questions are covered in the policy. eaa.org/youthprotection Simply stated above is the fact that sexual molestation is not the only bad thing to happen to kids, so we are looking for things like felony battery charges in addition to sexual molestation. That kind of information would not show up on the sexual predator list, you need to do a criminal history check.

I realize you're on vacation, but maybe some of those still in the office can give us the specifics.

I downloaded the new policy and looked at it. For those interested, the parameters for disqualification are on Page 3.

http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program/~/~/media/3fadad113cb747c4a28a8a105f48e0d2.ashx

I noted that if one is rejected, you have the right to dispute the report.

This covers a couple of the items I brought up, thank you.

However, I'd still like to know what, exactly is provided to EAA by the company performing the investigation. I notice the updated policy states that the background check is "a criminal and employment history report."

Employment History Report? The only thing I see in the Disqualifying Criteria list related to employment is, "Were previously terminated from a paid or volunteer position because of misconduct with a youth." Seems reasonable...but not something a previous employers tend talk about, without a definitive legal case to point at.

A little more disquieting, I did a Google search for "Employment History Report" (http://www.employmenthistorycheck.com/), and found this definition:

"An Employment History Check is an attempt to contact previous employers to verify job title, dates of employment, salary, and eligibility for rehire."

Does the investigating company gather that information? Is our salary information provided to EAA as part of the Employment History Report? If the company hired by EAA is doing a "standard" employment history check, they would be getting that data.

Again, the YPP doesn't tell us what is collected. It lists the criteria that would lead to rejection, but nothing says the data gathered is limited to those factors. I'm not asking EAA to confirm or deny that salary data is included in the Employment History Report, I want EAA to tell us everything that they get in both the criminal and employment investigations.

The YPP still doesn't address how our information is protected. How many people have access to it? If someone receives a letter from EAA requesting a donation, how can they be sure the letter was random instead of triggered by salary history information in the Employment History Check?

The YPP allows rejected applicants to view the information gathered about them. Nothing is said about letting ANYone access the information gathered about them. ALL members should be allowed to see all information EAA has collected about them....and its source.

And, again: What is EAA's PII Protection Policy, and how does it cover material gathered as part of the background checks?

Ron Wanttaja

[Janine Diana]

Ron,

The reference in the policy on "a criminal and employment history report" references the definition of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I apologize if that was confusing. We do no employment check.

The background check includes ONLY a nationwide criminal check and multi-state sex and violent offender report. We would be more than happy to send you a copy of your completed report. You can request this through EAA and/or AmericanChecked, our provider. The human resources department maintains all records.

I would be more than happy to address any additional questions you may have regarding the background check. Please feel free to give me a call at EAA.

[TedK]

The YPP still doesn't address how our information is protected. How many people have access to it?
...
And, again: What is EAA's PII Protection Policy, and how does it cover material gathered as part of the background checks?

Ron Wanttaja

Thank you Ron for being the calm, rational and persistant advocate for those of us who understand the pain associated with Identity Theft or dissemination of information we would rather keep in ancient history.

ted

[rwanttaja]

Ron,

The reference in the policy on "a criminal and employment history report" references the definition of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I apologize if that was confusing. We do no employment check.

Thank you, Janine. It is indeed confusing wording, as it follows the reference to the Fair Credit Reporting Act by disassociating itself with it: "However, please note that this is not a credit report – it is a criminal and employment history report."

I trust this will be clarified in the next iteration.

Speaking updating the document, EAA needs to add document configuration management to the YPP update process. The first page needs to include the release date or a Revision Number to help know what's the most current version. Yes, there's a date code buried on the second and later pages ("160224") but how about putting a clear indication right up front.

Also, when a new version comes out, most of us are primarily interested in the changes. I am wise in the ways of the force and can do a version comparison between PDF documents, but a lot of folks can't and would still like to compare them. I'm presuming EAA is managing this using Microsoft Word, which has a dandy "compare documents" mode that marks the changes. How about ALSO releasing the marked version (as a PDF) so we can instantly see what the changes are?


The background check includes ONLY a nationwide criminal check and multi-state sex and violent offender report. We would be more than happy to send you a copy of your completed report. You can request this through EAA and/or AmericanChecked, our provider. The human resources department maintains all records.

And what offenses are included in the national criminal check? Misdemeanors? Crimes as a minor? Traffic violations (uh-oh)? Are crimes for which the convictions have been reversed included? Crimes for which one has been pardoned?

EAA has put itself in the business of collecting and managing its members'...excuse me, its paying customers'...criminal records. This seems...well, a bit of a reach, considering the purpose of the organization.

It's good to know that this data is being managed by EAA's HR department; that's the right place for it. However, the bigger question is still there: How does HR protect our PII? Is it on the same server as everything else? Do folder permissions deny access to anyone but HR personnel? Does it take a special password to access? When the "EAA Vice President" receives records to review, how is he or she given access?

Now, normally, EAA could just tell me to jump in the lake...how EAA Corporate handles its HR processes is none of my business. But now that EAA has started maintaining criminal records on its members, I think it is.

I am glad to know that EAA will give me access to my records, though. But where is this policy formally documented? Say I show up at the front desk at Headquarters Monday morning and ask to see an HR representative. If I hand the HR person my driver's license and say, "I want to see all EAA records related to me," will the HR rep say, "Yes, sir,"...or "Huh?"?

Please document in the YPP the process for obtaining our own records, whether or not we are rejected.


I would be more than happy to address any additional questions you may have regarding the background check. Please feel free to give me a call at EAA.

Ah, well, the problem with that, is that I don't believe I'm the only member with these questions. If that's the case, it's best to do it out in the open.

Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

Thank you Ron for being the calm, rational and persistant advocate for those of us who understand the pain associated with Identity Theft or dissemination of information we would rather keep in ancient history.
Thank you, Ted. I'm one of the millions caught up in the OPB data breech last year, and am still really torqued off by it. And not just because I had to write up two separate SF86 submissions due to the change in vendor.

It's ironic that the EAA redoes the background check ever three years. If you've got a Top Secret clearance (definition: given access to data which, if exposed, will cause grave harm to the security of the United States), the US Government only re-checks you every five years.

Ron "another squirrel" Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

Speaking updating the document, EAA needs to add document configuration management to the YPP update process. The first page needs to include the release date or a Revision Number to help know what's the most current version. Yes, there's a date code buried on the second and later pages ("160224") but how about putting a clear indication right up front.
Oh, and while it's on my mind: Might I gently suggest that such revisions be first released to the membership as drafts, for review prior to them becoming ironclad EAA policy?

Ron Wanttaja

[combahee]

As most of you who read these forums I have been a very vocal critic of the roll out of the program.
I had a long, real long conversation with a staffer at hdqtrs. I firmly explained each of my concerns. Instead of hiding behind corporate gobble gook he explained the program and we discussed options and recommendations.
He reiterated what I heard in the webinar, that they screwed up but good on the roll out and formation of the policy. That some of the EAA Chapter members they consulted with may have been more friendly than critical of the program.
SO.....
They are looking at a change to AmericanChecked boilerplate authorization if possible.
Only criminal history is looked at. See the post above for some details, or read the whole policy.
The background check is here to stay.
EAA's HR dept has the information and is basically a pass or fail on the criminal check. The vendor already has your information and doesn't have to go outside to do a check! So they are merely checking their databases.
Most of the "bad" parts of the program have already been changed. The one area I am concerned about is the need for two deep at a rally but not a single ride deal. I did make a suggestion to EAA on this, so we'll see what happens.
The information needs to be disseminated but EAA will back the volunteer and pilot if there is a civil action. There is no insurance for a criminal action (doesn't exist). So if you are actually arrested it's your dime. But a strictly civil action we are covered same as Chapter officers are covered for errors and omissions.
The Chapter officers are not required to check credentials, but it is possible for them to do so.

We covered a number of other things. The long and short of it is I did the online course( still think it needs a lot of work) and the background check. I'm not sure when I'll fly YE's. My Chapter needs to get on board. But I see light at the end of the tunnel.

I want to thank the EAA staffer for his time and dedication and reaching out to me. For those still on the fence or with concerns, lets see if we can get things worked out. I believe EAA still has a way to go to get the program 100% back on track, but believe it can be done with all of us working constructively together. Keep in mind there will probably be more changes but it takes some time.

Finally, I was told, without any details, that a number of members that did the background check failed, and not for little stuff. I was not given any details but the staffer and I was very surprised they would even go ahead with the process.

No I haven't gone over to the "dark side" GRIN, just want to fly kids.

[nesincg]

As a former YE chairman, it was so damn hard as it was to get volunteers to fly. Now with the additional hassle, so many fewer are going to do it. I'm also not going to coordinate the additional hassle of making sure two volunteers are roaming around watching kids who should have parents with them while also being sure two volunteers are confirmed at each aircraft not touching any bathing suit areas.

Perhaps this society has come to this, but it isn't something I want to be a part of. Good luck to those who continue.

[rwanttaja]

We covered a number of other things. The long and short of it is I did the online course( still think it needs a lot of work) and the background check.

Good, hope it works out for you.


Finally, I was told, without any details, that a number of members that did the background check failed, and not for little stuff. I was not given any details but the staffer and I was very surprised they would even go ahead with the process.

Perhaps some of those applicants didn't realize that non-youth-related offenses were included in the evaluation...shoot, I didn't know that, either. A lot of the "YPP Deadly Sins" have the statement, "Regardless of date of conviction." Seems as if something like buying beer for your underage buddies ("Contributing to the delinquency of a minor") shouldn't matter fifty years later, but it apparently does, to EAA.

Sure, they could appeal. But they're probably highly offended to be rejected in the first place. Why beg for forgiveness just so you can burn your own money and time on an organization that's already told you they don't want your help?

I'm guessing that many of these people were currently active Young Eagle pilots (vs. someone starting from scratch). Wonder how many kids they'd flown over the past ~24 years, without a single complaint?

Ron Wanttaja

[cub builder]

Perhaps some of those applicants didn't realize that non-youth-related offenses were included in the evaluation...shoot, I didn't know that, either. A lot of the "YPP Deadly Sins" have the statement, "Regardless of date of conviction." Seems as if something like buying beer for your underage buddies ("Contributing to the delinquency of a minor") shouldn't matter fifty years later, but it apparently does, to EAA.

Sure, they could appeal. But they're probably highly offended to be rejected in the first place. Why beg for forgiveness just so you can burn your own money and time on an organization that's already told you they don't want your help?

I'm guessing that many of these people were currently active Young Eagle pilots (vs. someone starting from scratch). Wonder how many kids they'd flown over the past ~24 years, without a single complaint?

Ron Wanttaja

That's one of the problems. Anyone with youthful mistakes in their past is going to get caught up in the EAA's "dragnet". Yep, that 19 year old that thought he was in love with his 16 year old girlfriend is a registered sex offender. That 21 year old that got caught up in a bar fight and won when he was in the service is a violent offender. That 18 year old that was dumb enough to look at child porn on the internet is a sex offender. A lot of people have youthful mistakes in their past. They are no longer pure enough for the EAA.

The EAA called it a near miss when a sex offender was a member of a chapter, but didn't participate in youth activities. I'd call it the SO Registry working as designed.

IMHO, this is a politically blessed witch hunt that's all about appearance. One needs to remember that our legal system is not about right and wrong or innocence and justice. It's about building a case and making numbers without regard to justice. Right or wrong, those that get caught up in the legal system get labeled for life. Many should be. Many should not. But to the EAA, they are all unpure.

-Cub Builder

[TedK]

Perhaps we should form the Real Aviators Association for those who will no longer be saintly enough for the EAA?

ted

[rwanttaja]

IMHO, this is a politically blessed witch hunt that's all about appearance. One needs to remember that our legal system is not about right and wrong or innocence and justice. It's about building a case and making numbers without regard to justice. Right or wrong, those that get caught up get labeled for life.
"Caught"? My dear Cub Builder, to get rejected by EAA, all you need is to be accused.

Page 3 of the YPP, under "Disqualifying Criteria":

"Are under pending charges, incarceration, or allegations by law enforcement officials in any jurisdiction involving a sex offense as described above, force or threat of force against a person, cruelty to animals, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, controlled substances, or misconduct with a youth. The period of ineligibility will end if and when the relevant charges, incarceration or allegations are dropped or otherwise terminated by said law enforcement officials without a conviction."

If a cop says you did something, then EAA rejects you...unless the cop recants and thus lays himself wide open to a lawsuit.

For that matter, I'm curious as to how the Background Investigation determines that some cop has accused you. It wouldn't be listed in any conviction records, of course. Are they scanning newspapers? Accessing police reports? Sounds like EAA's getting a lot of value for that $5 cost of the investigation.....

Ron Wanttaja

[vaflier]

Politically correct bullXXXt run amuk.

[lyleapgmc]

"Caught"? My dear Cub Builder, to get rejected by EAA, all you need is to be accused.

Page 3 of the YPP, under "Disqualifying Criteria":

"Are under pending charges, incarceration, or allegations by law enforcement officials in any jurisdiction involving a sex offense as described above, force or threat of force against a person, cruelty to animals, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, controlled substances, or misconduct with a youth. The period of ineligibility will end if and when the relevant charges, incarceration or allegations are dropped or otherwise terminated by said law enforcement officials without a conviction."

If a cop says you did something, then EAA rejects you...unless the cop recants and thus lays himself wide open to a lawsuit.

For that matter, I'm curious as to how the Background Investigation determines that some cop has accused you. It wouldn't be listed in any conviction records, of course. Are they scanning newspapers? Accessing police reports? Sounds like EAA's getting a lot of value for that $5 cost of the investigation.....

Ron Wanttaja

They probably can access arrest records. An arrest does not constitute a conviction. A conviction does not necessarily constitute the truth.

As cub builder said, "IMHO, this is a politically blessed witch hunt that's all about appearance. One needs to remember that our legal system is not about right and wrong or innocence and justice. It's about building a case and making numbers without regard to justice. Right or wrong, those that get caught up get labeled for life. Many should be. Many should not. But to the EAA, they are all unpure."

There have been a number of convictions that were reversed when DNA proved the convicted person was not the guilty person. There was an individual recently convicted in an automobile accident. It had to do with the accelerator having a defect that caused uncommanded acceleration. Evidence uncovered later proved the conviction to be wrong.

Prosecutors justify their existence with convictions and their promotions are performance based.

Sounds like EAA chose the cheapest available background check. They say they vetted to company. Just what was their criteria for vetting? Was it the flashy and colorful web site at Americanchecked? Was it price? Did they read the fine print when they went to the special for volunteers. It may be that that isn't the choice they made.

All of the background checks offered by Americanchecked promise turn around in 72 hours or less, some even instantly. Just how much checking can be done in less than three days for a five dollar bill? How is the accuracy and appropriateness of the information verified?

Did they know before it was pointed out by someone on this forum that Americanchecked was not actually doing the checks but was handing the information over to a fourth party? During the webinar they claimed Americanchecked was doing the checks. Do they know better now?

Is anyone at EAA concerned about the decreased security of the information when it is passed to the fourth party for investigation.

How is the Vice President at EAA vetted to be allowed to view and pass judgement on the results of the background check?

I have volunteered in many ways for the chapter and at Oshkosh. That has ended. I don't need the hassle and unwarranted exposure just to donate my time and money.

I have been to every Oshkosh/Airventure for the last 31 years. I am seriously considering finding a different and interesting destination for my summer travels. I feel already that passing through the gates at Airventure will feel like entering a tainted zone. Maybe I will go to Sturgis where everything is clean, decent and above board. Will all the Harley riders welcome a Honda rider in their midst?

In the interest of political correctness and best practices, what ever those may be, the EAA has gone far too far.

Too much, too soon, too little research done by EAA, too little protection for members.

[rwanttaja]

All of the background checks offered by Americanchecked promise turn around in 72 hours or less, some even instantly. Just how much checking can be done in less than three days for a five dollar bill?

Somebody else posted recently that Americanchecked does not perform any new investigations when they are tasked by customers like EAA. That, basically, when given $5, they shove an ice-cream scoop into already-collected foul tub of personal information and slap it onto EAA's mess tray.

Personally, a business model of maintaining databases of private citizens' information for sale is NOT an activity I'd personally encourage. But EAA does; they're helping to make it profitable. Using our membership dues.


How is the accuracy and appropriateness of the information verified? Verified? Shoot, why should Americanchecked have to worry about that? EAA will take the heat if the data's wrong.

Or is there some provision for accountability in the agreement between EAA and Americanchecked? We wouldn't know, since the content of the agreement isn't something our organization has shared with us.

Ron Wanttaja

[martymayes]

Maybe I will go to Sturgis where everything is clean, decent and above board. Will all the Harley riders welcome a Honda rider in their midst?

Ya, you'll be welcome but lower your expectations with regard to clean family fun......lol




See ya there!

[lyleapgmc]

Ya, you'll be welcome but lower your expectations with regard to clean family fun......lol




See ya there!

It's too bad sarcasm doesn't come through in text. At least I'll know for sure what to expect.

[mikey]

every week seems to uncover a new aspect of this program that we did not know before. wonder how much else we don't know (yet)? what a fiasco

[Chick]

Correct, Ron. I understood Chick to mean he's never flown YE in 2place EAB. Fly Baby built to original plans remains a non-YE aircraft, I think. :)

Take a look at my M-Squared. It's built like a bank vault; but, convincing a non-engineer that they could trust their little angels in it is futile. I have taken quite a few people for their first flights in this and other planes; but, they have all known me well and for some reason figured I was safe. I think that it's because they know how much I love me and that I would never do anything to harm myself! :)

[Janine Diana]

And what offenses are included in the national criminal check? Misdemeanors? Crimes as a minor? Traffic violations (uh-oh)? Are crimes for which the convictions have been reversed included? Crimes for which one has been pardoned?

Every state has different criteria on what they include. Any convictions reverses or expunged do not show up.




It's good to know that this data is being managed by EAA's HR department; that's the right place for it. However, the bigger question is still there: How does HR protect our PII? Is it on the same server as everything else? Do folder permissions deny access to anyone but HR personnel? Does it take a special password to access? When the "EAA Vice President" receives records to review, how is he or she given access?

No data is kept on file at HQ with a few exceptions.




Say I show up at the front desk at Headquarters Monday morning and ask to see an HR representative. If I hand the HR person my driver's license and say, "I want to see all EAA records related to me," will the HR rep say, "Yes, sir,"...or "Huh?"?

I would suggest you call ahead of time as not everyone in the HR department has access.



Please document in the YPP the process for obtaining our own records, whether or not we are rejected.

This is documented in the disclosure notification when completing the background check. This is required by law.
[/QUOTE]

[Jkan]

No data is kept on file at HQ with a few exceptions.
[/QUOTE]

"With a few exceptions" is like saying, I'm a gentle person, I don't beat my wife, with a few exceptions.
It's amazing that the longer the excuses the more sad it becomes.

[Janine Diana]

We have made exceptions to those that can provide external documentation from CAP, Boy Scouts, church groups, etc. If those organizations are willing to share prior documentation on the screening and the results completed, we are happy to accept the documentation. However, because this practice is outside our standard, we do keep these records on file.

[dsabney]

I took the training and submitted to a background check and received my letter that I "passed". However, don't count me as a pilot who intends to fly Young Eagles anymore. I wanted to see what the trng was about. The following comments pertain only to Young Eagle flights not camps or other EAA programs that involve longer duration contacts with youth. Those programs that involve overnight stays, spending time with youth alone in some activities "may" justify a background check but NOT Young EAgle flights.

I spent 32 years in law enforcement. I have seen the pain and anquish that child abuse causes. It is not to be minimized. Nevertheless, subjecting pilots and ground personnel, paperwork handlers to a background check will not prevent anything except thousands of kids from getting a chance to fly in an aircraft and even take the controls sometimes. This so called "best practices" defense by EAA is a big smoke screen. Best practices is corporate speak for what is trending today. We are NOT Boy Scout leaders, Little League coaches etc that have contact with youth without another adult or parent nearby in some cases. No overnight campouts, taking kids home etc.

I will not participate in another Young Eagles flight but I will still fly kids. I don't care about getting credit for it, a pin, a shirt etc and really did not do it so EAA could set some record. I will not quit EAA because EAA does many other things that I enjoy, Airventure being one.

"EAA management scrap the background checks for pilots and ground personnel. You have lost your minds and sense of reason on this one!"

[rwanttaja]

It's good to know that this data is being managed by EAA's HR department; that's the right place for it. However, the bigger question is still there: How does HR protect our PII? Is it on the same server as everything else? Do folder permissions deny access to anyone but HR personnel? Does it take a special password to access? When the "EAA Vice President" receives records to review, how is he or she given access? No data is kept on file at hq with a few exceptions.

Someone else has pointed out the folly of ending one's comment with "a few exceptions," so I won't go there. The one exception you noted seems reasonable. Any others?

If EAA doesn't keep records, though, what happens when someone appeals? Do you have to request another copy?



Say I show up at the front desk at Headquarters Monday morning and ask to see an HR representative. If I hand the HR person my driver's license and say, "I want to see all EAA records related to me," will the HR rep say, "Yes, sir,"...or "Huh?"?

I would suggest you call ahead of time as not everyone in the hr department has access.
Where do I find documented the proper procedure to obtain/review my records? Thank you for the reference to the appeals package if one is rejected, but how can I access my EAA records, whether or not I entered my name for the background check? Is there an formal EAA procedure?

And what happens if I *do* apply for a background check...and want to see what the privacy-gouge company says about me, even if I pass? Surely I have a right to that material.

And, still, I'd like to see EAA's policies for protecting member data. If I apply for a background check, and three days later an email goes around headquarters titled, "Look What Ron Wanttaja Did with a Hot Air Balloon, a Pool Noodle, and Twenty-Three Gallons of Tempura Batter," I'd like to know what EAA would do. Other than buy cases of shrimp.

Ron Wanttaja

[cub builder]

And, still, I'd like to see EAA's policies for protecting member data. If I apply for a background check, and three days later an email goes around headquarters titled, "Look What Ron Wanttaja Did with a Hot Air Balloon, a Pool Noodle, and Twenty-Three Gallons of Tempura Batter," I'd like to know what EAA would do. Other than buy cases of shrimp.


They would all be busy on the internet looking for the video! :D

-------
dsabney---+1

You're right on the money. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any interest in taking a reasoned approach.

-Cub Builder

[Glory Aulik]

Someone else has pointed out the folly of ending one's comment with "a few exceptions," so I won't go there. The one exception you noted seems reasonable. Any others?

If EAA doesn't keep records, though, what happens when someone appeals? Do you have to request another copy?


Where do I find documented the proper procedure to obtain/review my records? Thank you for the reference to the appeals package if one is rejected, but how can I access my EAA records, whether or not I entered my name for the background check? Is there an formal EAA procedure?

And what happens if I *do* apply for a background check...and want to see what the privacy-gouge company says about me, even if I pass? Surely I have a right to that material.

And, still, I'd like to see EAA's policies for protecting member data. If I apply for a background check, and three days later an email goes around headquarters titled, "Look What Ron Wanttaja Did with a Hot Air Balloon, a Pool Noodle, and Twenty-Three Gallons of Tempura Batter," I'd like to know what EAA would do. Other than buy cases of shrimp.

Ron Wanttaja

Working on getting answers for you.

Thanks!
Glory

[ssmdive]

Ron, all of your questions are covered in the policy.

Simple avoidance. If they are in there, then it will be short order for an EAA employee to point out exactly where and provide quotes to the members.

Simply put, I'd really like to know what information you try to dig up and especially WHO gets to see what data. So now I'd have some EAA employee knowing that Bob ran a red light in 1971 and sharing that information to his buddies at the water cooler.

I'd like to know who has this data, what the data is, and what penalties are in place for misuse of this data. In my job if I share personal data to someone else, I get fired, maybe prosecuted. What is the EAA's stance?



We try to stay away from the forums because it is for you to talk with each other.

Well, that is a mistake. I want all communications with HQ in writing so there can be no mistakes or changes to what they claim was communicated.

[Janine Diana]

If EAA doesn't keep records, though, what happens when someone appeals? Do you have to request another copy?

An appeal process typically involves documentation outside of the background check. There are a number of variables that could apply during an appeal it is hard to be specific on what, if any documentation, may need to be kept but EAA does not keep background checks on file in-house, with a few exceptions:D, previously noted. An individual can definitely ask, should they need to pursue this option.



Where do I find documented the proper procedure to obtain/review my records? Thank you for the reference to the appeals package if one is rejected, but how can I access my EAA records, whether or not I entered my name for the background check? Is there an formal EAA procedure?

There is no formal procedure. You can always call membership services and they are available to help you and/or direct you to the right individual internally.1-800-564-6322. In addition, you can follow the steps noted in the disclosure form and AmericanChecked also outlines your rights on their website. www.americanchecked.com (http://www.americanchecked.com). This is noted in their privacy statement, if you are interested.

Consumers may call AmericanChecked, Inc., at 800.975.9876 or write to AmericanChecked, Inc., 4870 South Lewis, Ste.120, Tulsa, OK 74105 to request a copy of their information or to file a dispute regarding information that they feel was reported incorrectly. They will be required to provide proper identification before information is provided to them.

I am not sure I understand your comment, "how can I access my EAA records, whether or not I entered my name for the background check?." When you login to your EAA web profile, the status of your completed training and Youth Protection card and be found. Or call membership services and they can direct you to the human resources department for assistance. Does that help?



And, still, I'd like to see EAA's policies for protecting member data. If I apply for a background check, and three days later an email goes around headquarters titled, "Look What Ron Wanttaja Did with a Hot Air Balloon, a Pool Noodle, and Twenty-Three Gallons of Tempura Batter," I'd like to know what EAA would do.

EAA has steps in place to protect member information from IT systems to internal processes. We understand the importance of protecting member data, even beyond this issue. However, we recognize the world we live in. EAA, as well as AmericanChecked, has insurance coverage should a breach of data be found tied to a faulty system or process. This, unfortunately, has become a standard coverage in businesses nowadays. AmericanChecked also has a detailed Privacy Policy that can be found directly on their website, if you are interested in additional information. They also have a contact number or email address for your convenience.

[Bill Greenwood]

It is a shame that the times we live in have made EAA take this step or even think it was necessary. And it may be necessary, but the main result seems to have put a split between the members, many of whom like myself have flown a number of kids, willingly on our own costs. and and the management of EAA. I can see the side of many who feel the it is an us vs. them situation between members and headquarters.
I once read in the paper the a local kid, with a terminal disease, had a wish to fly. I contacted the Make A Wish people from the article and got a cold reception. I never found out why, but I never got to work with them and the child never got to fly. I don't know how much he would/could have enjoyed it, but I sure would have made an effort.
In some cases, even with what should be charities, there is a lot of money at stake, and I think sometimes those near the money are wary of outsiders.
I don't know if this has an similarity with EAA, but it doesn't feel too good to offer to do something which EAA began some years ago, and be told that first we have to prove we aren't perverts.
There might be more to this than the public knows, I hope not in the negative sense.

[Jased]

I was shocked by the arrogant tone of the letter EAA sent, and the disastrous policy that followed. Yes there is a need to discuss youth protection, but this is completely out of touch with the reality of anyone that has participated in the program. I have flown several hundred Young Eagles with three different Chapters.

The "training" itself is a joke. Poorly presented and amateurish. And then the webinar said two deep is required at rallies but not required if a YE pilot wants to fly kids one at a time. WHAT?????? Anyone with an ounce of knowledge of child predation knows this is completely a** backwards.

All confidence has been lost. This policy needs to be suspended immediately and replaced by something that is workable. Until then, add me to the list of people that will not be flying Young Eagles. Also, I will be withdrawing my financial support from the Gathering of Eagles fundraiser. Financial pressure is the only way to get the attention of a management that is financially motivated.

[QUOTE=Bill Greenwood;54489]there is a lot of money at stake.[/mQUOTE]

Bingo!

The six senior managers listed by EAA appear to be taking $1.7 million out of the organization each year. None actively flies Young Eagles, and four of them, including the President, have never flown a single one.

[vaflier]

Our mission…
To grow participation in aviation by promoting the “Spirit of Aviation.”
We serve the community by:
Inspiring new participants in aviation


Inviting the public to experience flight
Providing a compelling view of possibilities
Nurturing interest in aviation
Supporting clear pathways to participation

Enriching the participation experience


Protecting rights and the freedom to fly
Encouraging affordable flying in a local environment
Cultivating and providing knowledge, information, and resources
Embracing diverse interests, camaraderie, and fun
Supporting and promoting aviation events and activities

Does this new program truly promote the spriit of aviatian ?
Does this program Inspire new participants ?
Does this Program enrich the participation experience ???

The mission statement copied above came directly from The EAA website. It would seem that management needs to be reminded of the mission statement they themselves created. Is this new program in keeping with any of the above worthy goals, does it in any way help to reach these lofty goals ?.

I think not !!!!.

[Bill Greenwood]

When I wrote that a lot of money is involved, I wasn't thinking specifically about anything wrong with EAA financially. I was thinking of organizations which are charities and is sometimes turns out that a fine sounding cause is not really passing most of the funds on to the needy, such as one that was just in the news. I have no info on any detalis of EAA finances, though what Jased wrote concerning salaries is interesting.
The main point I was trying to make was that this latest qualification from headquarters can make one feel an us and them situation, and THAT IS SAD, and not in keeping with how I would like to feel about EAA.
The other sad point is that in the world as it is today, who can say that the new program is not needed? There could be a few bad folks even in EAA, though it seems unlikekly to be a problem in Young Eagles on just a short flight as we have been doing for years, especially with parents usually on hand.
I have included a parent on the flight several times when I had room in a four seat plane and they were very excited about it.

[lyleapgmc]

We have made exceptions to those that can provide external documentation from CAP, Boy Scouts, church groups, etc. If those organizations are willing to share prior documentation on the screening and the results completed, we are happy to accept the documentation. However, because this practice is outside our standard, we do keep these records on file.

Where is that documented? It seems to me that such documentation wasn't going to be accepted.

[lyleapgmc]

Every state has different criteria on what they include. Any convictions reverses or expunged do not show up.



No data is kept on file at HQ with a few exceptions.



I would suggest you call ahead of time as not everyone in the HR department has access.



This is documented in the disclosure notification when completing the background check. This is required by law.
[/QUOTE]

Answer only "Yes" or "No." Do you still beat your wife?

[Mayhemxpc]

We have made exceptions to those that can provide external documentation from CAP, Boy Scouts, church groups, etc. If those organizations are willing to share prior documentation on the screening and the results completed, we are happy to accept the documentation. However, because this practice is outside our standard, we do keep these records on file.

Hold on…. Why would you even have such documentation? According to the published YPP Policy, "If you are a Young Eagles Pilot (either in Chapter Rallies or individually flown), Chapter Young Eagles Coordinator, Field Representative, or Two-Deep Leadership Supervisor, you must complete both Training and a Criminal History Background Check (U.S. residents only*), with acceptable results in EAA’s judgment, before you may work with youth in the Young Eagles program, even if you have previously participated in services to youth."

That kind of indicates that you must go through the EAA/AmericanChecked screening, regardless of previous YPP screening with these other organizations. This leads to one of two logical possibilities: That despite the text of the published YPP, EAA DOES accept documentation of successful completion through other sources or that the AmericanChecked system is not limited to a criminal history (and employment history) but is also digging into records outside of those. Again, if not one of these why would EAA have that information or why would those organizations share it with you?

If this is clearly stated in the background check application, please forgive my ignorance. In an effort to keep my private information private, I have not gone past the training section of the program.

[deftone]

I have stayed away from these discussions as I have been waiting to see how EAA staff members reacted to the backlash....turns out that as expected they act as if they dont care, EAA takes another step down the path to forgetting that it is a member based organization, not a business. I said time and time again that Jack Pelton would lead us down this road.

Which leads me to an interesting question......Jack was found to have lied regarding his educational qualifications while at Cessna, why does EAA find him fit to be CEO/Chairman but the EAA member who got into a fight 30 years ago as an 18year old is not fit to fly YE flights?

Are we going to start rolling this out to Airventure volunteers? Kidventure? Where does this end? I ended my membership with AOPA for losing track of its mission, I have already considered ending my EAA membership this year.

[Jkan]

The following quote from the background check page of their website indicates it may not stop with the Young Eagles.

"public record information such as, but not limited to: my driving record, judgments, bankruptcy proceedings, evictions, criminal records, etc., from federal, state, and other agencies that maintain such records.

Authorization
I hereby authorize procurement of consumer report(s) and investigative consumer report(s) by Company. If hired (or contracted), this authorization shall remain on file and shall serve as ongoing authorization for Company to procure such reports at any time during my employment, contract, or volunteer period. I authorize without reservation, any person, business or agency contacted by the consumer reporting agency to furnish the above-mentioned information."

This authorization is, with out a question, "data diving 101", and this unbelievable irresponsibility is totally endorsed by Jake Pelton and senior management. This Authorization alone sets the website up as a data diving operation. Again I ask the question: How much did American Checked pay EAA for this opportunity.

I am told the lawyers are working on having the wording, in the authorization, changed and it may take some time. We have been waiting and will wait a short time longer, however, with the past performance of, in our mind, an inept president and senior management, we can only hope for the best.

[Antique Tower]

Are we going to start rolling this out to Airventure volunteers? Kidventure? Where does this end? I ended my membership with AOPA for losing track of its mission, I have already considered ending my EAA membership this year.

From the EAA Youth Protection web page (emphasis mine):

All of the following persons are required to complete both the online training and background check by May 1, 2016. Both steps are necessary and the cost is covered by EAA.


All Young Eagles pilots
All Chapter Young Eagles Coordinators and Field Service Representatives
Two-deep leadership supervisors
Volunteers who will work with youth in ongoing programs other than Young Eagles
EAA staff

[deftone]

From the EAA Youth Protection web page (emphasis mine):

All of the following persons are required to complete both the online training and background check by May 1, 2016. Both steps are necessary and the cost is covered by EAA.


All Young Eagles pilots
All Chapter Young Eagles Coordinators and Field Service Representatives
Two-deep leadership supervisors
Volunteers who will work with youth in ongoing programs other than Young Eagles
EAA staff



I know the wording in the policy, I am requesting clarification on what "ongoing programs" are included in this policy. I guess all volunteers for Kidventure now need to sign up weeks in advance to ensure everyone has their background checks? What about Airventure volunteers in general? They come into contact with kids all week long (depending on role)

ps...off-topic...but I just noticed you are in Trussville, I will be moving to the area this summer, hope there are plenty of homebuilders up there!!

[Eric Cernjar]

I know the wording in the policy, I am requesting clarification on what "ongoing programs" are included in this policy. I guess all volunteers for Kidventure now need to sign up weeks in advance to ensure everyone has their background checks? What about Airventure volunteers in general? They come into contact with kids all week long (depending on role)

ps...off-topic...but I just noticed you are in Trussville, I will be moving to the area this summer, hope there are plenty of homebuilders up there!!

I'd recommend starting here. The requirements are different for AirVenture vs Young Eagle flights vs ongoing youth programs

http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program/youth-protection-policy

[vaflier]

Eric, have there been any further updates to the program in the last few weeks ?.

[Eric Cernjar]

Eric, have there been any further updates to the program in the last few weeks ?.

No there have not been any additional changes made in the last few weeks. I do not anticipate any further modifications going forward.

Thanks,
Eric

[Jkan]

No there have not been any additional changes made in the last few weeks. I do not anticipate any further modifications going forward.

Thanks,
Eric


Eric, lets hope you are completely wrong..........there had better be major changes in the "authorization" statement on the background check page of the website.

[PaulDow]

This question was originally brought up on message 15 of the locked thread on January 20, 2016, and again on March 18 in this thread. We still don't have an answer.

It's been almost three weeks since the web seminar on this topic.

The web seminar had the question:
"Is it true that American Checked does not do the actual background check, but forwards the actual information to another entity? Who does the actual check?"

The answer to that question was:
"I do not believe that is the case, correct?
No. AmericanChecked does the background check.
Correct.
And I thought that was something that needed some clarification."

The background authorization and information web page goes to 8f7.com

The SSL security certificate for 8f7.com is owned by a company called BackChecked LLC.

Who is BackChecked LLC?
What is their relationship with AmericanChecked LLC?
If as Rick Larsen says, AmericanChecked LLC is doing the check, why is our information going to a web site owned by BackChecked LLC?
Is, as I suspect, AmericanChecked LLC just a reseller of BackChecked LLC services? If that's the case, then our information is being shared with a 3rd party company. Why is it taking so long to just say that?

The answer to this question is not something addressed in a policy that needs lots of discussion. It's just a fact that we need to know about where our personal information is going.

After almost four months, why don't we have an answer to this simple issue yet?

[Eric Cernjar]

This question was originally brought up on message 15 of the locked thread on January 20, 2016, and again on March 18 in this thread. We still don't have an answer.

It's been almost three weeks since the web seminar on this topic.

The web seminar had the question:
"Is it true that American Checked does not do the actual background check, but forwards the actual information to another entity? Who does the actual check?"

The answer to that question was:
"I do not believe that is the case, correct?
No. AmericanChecked does the background check.
Correct.
And I thought that was something that needed some clarification."

The background authorization and information web page goes to 8f7.com

The SSL security certificate for 8f7.com is owned by a company called BackChecked LLC.

Who is BackChecked LLC?
What is their relationship with AmericanChecked LLC?
If as Rick Larsen says, AmericanChecked LLC is doing the check, why is our information going to a web site owned by BackChecked LLC?
Is, as I suspect, AmericanChecked LLC just a reseller of BackChecked LLC services? If that's the case, then our information is being shared with a 3rd party company. Why is it taking so long to just say that?

The answer to this question is not something addressed in a policy that needs lots of discussion. It's just a fact that we need to know about where our personal information is going.

After almost four months, why don't we have an answer to this simple issue yet?

This has been answered a few times, and I'm directly pulling the verbiage we have in our FAQ. If you have any questions over and above this, I'd encourage you to contact us directly.

Thanks,
Eric

Who is the company doing the background check? Can I trust them?
AmericanChecked http://americanchecked.com/ is a nationally accredited background check company who provides secure screening services to a variety of industries. The U.S. Forest Service, as well as colleges, public school systems, and businesses of every size utilize its services. EAA went through an exhaustive process to find the right vendor that would providing outstanding service while treating our volunteers’ data with the utmost security and sensitivity.

How is my data protected once it’s submitted?
Your data is never shared with any outside vendor at any time. The highest levels of security are also maintained at all levels. If you’re technically oriented, that includes: All data transmission, including XML traffic, is encrypted using SSL certificates issued and monitored with 24/7 security. Servers are protected with multi-level firewall technology and intrusion detection software. Vulnerability scans are conducted on a regular basis by a PCI Approved Scanning Vendor, housed in a SAS 70 Type II audited data center with high-definition cameras. EAA demanded the highest levels of security for any company with access to our volunteers’ information.

Why is there an odd-looking URL address on the background check form’s web page?
That is a specialized URL created by AmericanChecked to encrypt and protect your personal information when you log in. It is an extra step taken by this company to prevent anyone from scanning websites for such information.

https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program/youth-protection-program-faqs

[lnuss]

...and I'm directly pulling the verbiage we have in our FAQ
I've stayed out of this, 'til now, since lots of folks have done fine with their questions, but this last post of Eric's needs some additions. Presumably anyone interested has read the FAQ, so a repetition, in and of itself, isn't much good. And apparently no one has been on the forum who has the authority to actually answer the question, rather than either weasel-wording around it or quoting something already published. Or perhaps they don't want us to know. The FAQ is still a bit ambiguous, after all, about the answer to Paul's question (below).

I thought Paul's question was pretty straightforward, and could be answered "yes" or "no":

Is, as I suspect, AmericanChecked LLC just a reseller of BackChecked LLC services? If that's the case, then our information is being shared with a 3rd party company. Why is it taking so long to just say that?

[PaulDow]

I called Eric this morning to discuss the 8F7 issue. He called AmericanChecked, and the answer he got from them is that they purchased and use BackChecked software to conduct the check, so that's why their certificate is on the web page. They claim it adds a layer of obfuscation to the process to prevent the hacking of the data.

It seems like an unusual way to handle the process to me, but it doesn't look to be a weak spot. I know my bank, stock broker, and even EAA have web sites where the domain names match the SSL certificate owners. That's the purpose of SSL certificates; to verify what we see on the screen belongs to the company we think it does.

So while I don't agree with what they're doing since it doesn't give the user the confidence that they're dealing with who they think they are, I guess it's not harmful as far as the threat of potentially stolen data.

[Jkan]

[QUOTE=Janine Diana;54466]Every state has different criteria on what they include. Any convictions reverses or expunged do not show up.
No data is kept on file at HQ with a few exceptions.
I would suggest you call ahead of time as not everyone in the HR department has access.
This is documented in the disclosure notification when completing the background check. This is required by law.
[/QUOTE


I, among many others, would be very interested in knowing the progress you are making, in having the wording in the following "Authorization" statement, changed from the current "data mining" procedure, into a common sense data gathering authorization.

Data to be gathered - "public record information such as, but not limited to: my driving record, judgments, bankruptcy proceedings, evictions, criminal records, etc., from federal, state, and other agencies that maintain such records.

"Authorization
I hereby authorize procurement of consumer report(s) and investigative consumer report(s) by Company. If hired (or contracted), this authorization shall remain on file and shall serve as ongoing authorization for Company to procure such reports at any time during my employment, contract, or volunteer period. I authorize without reservation, any person, business or agency contacted by the consumer reporting agency to furnish the above-mentioned information."

[deftone]

This has been answered a few times, and I'm directly pulling the verbiage we have in our FAQ. If you have any questions over and above this, I'd encourage you to contact us directly.

Thanks,
Eric





Wouldnt it be better to address questions here where everyone can see the answers? The lack of information during this rollout is what has caused 90% of the pushback you are experiencing.

[FlyingRon]

I called Eric this morning to discuss the 8F7 issue. He called AmericanChecked, and the answer he got from them is that they purchased and use BackChecked software to conduct the check, so that's why their certificate is on the web page. They claim it adds a layer of obfuscation to the process to prevent the hacking of the data.

It seems like an unusual way to handle the process to me, but it doesn't look to be a weak spot. I know my bank, stock broker, and even EAA have web sites where the domain names match the SSL certificate owners. That's the purpose of SSL certificates; to verify what we see on the screen belongs to the company we think it does.

So while I don't agree with what they're doing since it doesn't give the user the confidence that they're dealing with who they think they are, I guess it's not harmful as far as the threat of potentially stolen data.

Yep and if the EAA had come clean when I first pointed this out back at the beginning of the other thread, I'd have felt a lot better about it. However, they chose to stonewall the answer with "we're the EAA you can trust us, yeah sure" and ignore the issues and an bunch of flacks chose to belittle me over the privacy concerns.

[rvmike]

Simply stupid, Just spoke with our chapter YE coordinator about up coming flights. Told him I will not be doing the check and he said sorry. Our next flight was scheduled for the 9th but was rescheduled for the 30th because of weather. The event was for a Girl Scout troop. What is the diff between 1 day? Have been doing this for 20+ years but am now done. He did say there where 2 incidents last year but would not say what they where. If EAA does not want to come clean I am done and going to AOPA

Mike

[PaulDow]

Gee, I hope Harrison Ford, our former Young Eagles Chairman, will be able to pass his background check after this...

Revealed - how Harrison Ford was mistakenly given criminal record for battery: Actor's name was entered by rookie cop during training but he forgot to delete the data afterwards

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3533609/how-Harrison-Ford-mistakenly-given-criminal-record-battery-Actor-s-entered-rookie-cop-training-forgot-delete-data-afterwards.html

[rvmike]

The Collins Foundation is coming to our airport in May. They are asking for extra volunteers because of the 200 kids coming from our Middle and High schools not to mention the General public that will be there. These 200 kids will be escorted around the airport and airplanes by the volunteers. No mention of background checks. Since I am not doing YE any longer I will have free time to volunteer here..

Mike

[gbrasch]

5443
The Collins Foundation is coming to our airport in May. They are asking for extra volunteers because of the 200 kids coming from our Middle and High schools not to mention the General public that will be there. These 200 kids will be escorted around the airport and airplanes by the volunteers. No mention of background checks. Since I am not doing YE any longer I will have free time to volunteer here..

Mike

Get ready for a big crowd, Mike, the were here in Tucson last weekend, big turnout. Their P-51 taxied by me while I was in the run-up area.

[tsslater]

We have made exceptions to those that can provide external documentation from CAP, Boy Scouts, church groups, etc. If those organizations are willing to share prior documentation on the screening and the results completed, we are happy to accept the documentation. However, because this practice is outside our standard, we do keep these records on file.

What about EAA pilots who have been issued security badges at airports through the TSA? These are typically issued at air carrier (Part 139) airports. I take from your response that means I am all set; no background check needed. By the way... you typically have to update your airport security badge every year or two by filing a new application as TSA is not allowed to keep certain information beyond the initial check. They check for criminal, drug or firearm violations and citizenship, but do not check financial or employment records and other information that EAA allows AmericanChecked to gather and keep... How is it that EAA requires this information at all -- and do so perpetually?


Tom Slater
President, EAA 506 Chapter

[FlyingRon]

The TSA doesn't screen for child abuse or sexual offenses. It seems that they are entirely orthogonal to things like what the YPP would care about (https://www.tsa.gov/disqualifying-offenses-factors).

Amusingly between my DC-3 clearance, TSA PreChek, and my TWIC card it seems that the TSA doesn't even bother to realize they've already done the exact same background check. I got no better than the standard delay on the subsequent applcaitions.

[skyfixer8]

Tom, I would have to add, how about Concealed Carry Permit as well as TSA security badge. CPL puts you through a pretty serious background check.

Bill L

[FlyingRon]

Michigan indeed has a rather profound list of crimes that disqualify you from a CPL, but it's hardly universal. In Virginia, as long as you only have a single misdemeanor (shall issue) or two misdemeanors when only one is a class 1 (judges discretion).

[martymayes]

What about EAA pilots who have been issued security badges at airports through the TSA? These are typically issued at air carrier (Part 139) airports. I take from your response that means I am all set; no background check needed.

Are you referring to a SIDA badge? I have a SIDA badge - it has nothing to do with TSA. It was issued by the airport police. TSA considers SIDA badge holders a security threat.

[rwanttaja]

No there have not been any additional changes made in the last few weeks. I do not anticipate any further modifications going forward.

Just accessed the YPP via the EAA links. It appears the Feb 24th, 2016 version is still active. However, this version still has the language that states the background check includes an employment history report...which EAA has denied in this forum.
__________________________________________________ _________________________________
We may only proceed with a background check if you give us permission through a release.

The release we use complies with the high standards of the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and is designed to inform you of your rights, for your protection (however, please note that this is not a credit report – it is a criminal and employment history report).
__________________________________________________ _________________________________
YPP, Pages 2 and 3 (emphasis added)

Is EAA is going to correct this? Or is EAA indeed performing employment history checks?

Ron Wanttaja

[Glory Aulik]

Hello All –

Bret Steffen is currently updating the language regarding the background check – this update will be posted to the website as soon as possible. To clarify, we are not using employment history within the background check.

Thanks,
Glory

[Jim Heffelfinger]

Could you have Bret take as look at the elements on the blue side bar ( left) to see if they are worded as is current policy. Specific to "Other... activities"... http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program
Thanks,
BTW - You guys deserve a purple heart for this. Even if some of the wounds were unintentionally self inflicted.

[tsslater]

Are you referring to a SIDA badge? I have a SIDA badge - it has nothing to do with TSA. It was issued by the airport police. TSA considers SIDA badge holders a security threat.

The normal airport security badges are issed by the airport police or security office. SIDA stands for "Security Identification Display Area" which is a special security area designated by an airport operator in the US to comply with FAA's requirements directed by the Federal Aviation regulation (FAR) part 107.205. An identification system must be used in these special secure areas. Before allowing unescorted access within the SIDA area, all persons must be trained and their background investigated. These background checks are conducted by TSA from the information collected by the airport. Normally, the flight ramp and other sensitive operational areas of a US commercial airport are designated as a SIDA. You'll know if you are issued a SIDA badge because the airport will obtain your fingerprints along with other identity information including your SSN. Some airports may issue GA pilots access badges that allow them to enter hangar areas that are not deemed security critical. My post refers to a SIDA badges issued by a commercial airport.

Also in response to an earlier post by FlyingRon about TSA background checks -- refer to Part B offenses as noted below. They most certainly do check for sexual misconduct and rape. If convicted of a sexual offense, TSA will not approve your security application without a special hearing. See Below.

PART BINTERIM DISQUALIFYING CRIMINAL OFFENSES
Conviction for one of the following felonies is disqualifying if the applicant was convicted, pled guilty (including ‘no contest’), or found not guilty by reason of insanity within seven years of the date of the application; OR if the applicant was released from prison after conviction within five years of the date of the application.




Bribery.
Smuggling.
Immigration violations.
Distribution, possession w/ intent to distribute, or importation of a controlled substance.
Arson.
Kidnapping or hostage taking.
Rape or aggravated sexual abuse.
Assault with intent to kill.
Robbery.

Tom Slater
EAA 506th

[Larry Lyons]

While I'm not sure were we will end up our chapter (475) has forgone Young Eagle flights for the time being. One of our pilots is the pilot that flew the one millionth eagle, he is still flying them but he is the only one. So you/we lost about a dozen pilots. Pilots by nature are independent thinkers and do not take well to being lead by the nose on what is basically a non-issue, my opinion only, I know it is not a good thing at all! But with almost two million kids flown why toss out the baby with the bath water. I can't imagine another effort that got that many kids involved has had the quality of volunteers we've had. With that many people involved you are going to have a bad apple show up but all this hand wringing and "more regulation" won't change that fact one bit!

[Mayhemxpc]

Back on March 17th I got an email from an EAA staff member asking me changing the blanket authorization language would get me to change my mind. I responded yes, it would. This same proposal -- and concern about the authorization language -- has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread. However, there has been no further information about it and my emails to that particular staff member asking about it have gone unanswered. (It is one thing to say it is still being worked or that it couldn't be done. It is another thing to blow off any follow-up to an email that was was initiated by that staff member.)

Changing the open authorization statement to American Checked would not have solved all of the problems, but it would have given me the confidence that EAA was committed to making necessary corrections. I would have then done my part in turn. No movement and no response?

Our chapter is having a YE rally this Saturday. I will fly, but then it becomes May 1 and that ends it for me…unless something changes for the positive. It has really become a matter of principle. I guess that principled pilots are not wanted.

[Jkan]

I also have had communications with a certain EAA staff member for some time now, and have been promised a positive solution to the "data mining" authority which is now in effect with the present wording of the authorization paragraph. If this is not resolved soon, there will hopefully be a severe and extremely harsh explosion, on this forum, against EAA management and staff. Considering the many negatives we have learned about the inter-workings at headquarters, including management, etc., we would be very happy to add to this response. Stand by as I have been requested, by this staff member, to "keep his feet to the fire" in response to this item.

[Jkan]

Finally, the language has been updated.

The latest sign-off. Several things have changed, including the language that talks about bankruptcy and of course the on-going language.

Bret

Summary of Rights (http://americanchecked.com/wp-content/uploads/forms/Summary-of-Rights.php)


DISCLOSURE AND AUTHORIZATION FOR CONSUMER REPORTS


In connection with my application for employment (including contract or volunteer services) or application to rent a dwelling, I understand consumer reports will be requested by you. These reports may include, as allowed by law, the following types of information, as applicable: Nationwide Criminal Database, Multi-State Sex and Violent Offender Report, Social Security Number Verification, Address Locator Report. I further understand that such reports may contain public record information such as, but not limited to: my driving record, criminal records, etc., from federal, state, and other agencies that maintain such records.

Authorization
I hereby authorize procurement of criminal background and sex offender report(s) by Company. I authorize without reservation, any person, business or agency contacted by the consumer reporting agency to furnish the above-mentioned information.

This authorization is conditioned upon the following representations of my rights:

I understand that I have the right to make a request to the Consumer Reporting Agency: AmericanChecked Inc., 4870 South Lewis Avenue, Suite 120, Tulsa, OK 74105; telephone: 800-975-9876 upon proper identification, to obtain copies of any reports furnished to Company by the Agency and to request the nature and substance of all information in its files on me at the time of my request, including the sources of information, and the Agency, on Company's behalf, will provide a complete and accurate disclosure of the nature and scope of the investigation covered by any investigative consumer report(s). The Agency will also disclose the recipients of any such reports on me which the Agency has previously furnished within the two year period for employment requests, and one year for other purposes preceding my request (California three years). I hereby consent to Company obtaining the above information from the Agency. I understand that I can dispute, at any time, any information that is inaccurate in any type of report with the Agency. I may view the Agency's privacy policy at their website: http://americanchecked.com/privacy-policy. I understand that if the Company is located in California, Minnesota or Oklahoma, that I have the right to request a copy of any report the Company receives on me at the time the report is provided to the Company.

I understand that I have rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and I acknowledge receipt of the Summary of Rights.

NOTE: If I wish a printed copy of this notice, I will print it now using the File / Print selection on my browser. Click on "I agree" and then click on "SUBMIT ORDER" to complete order.

End Quote


Many members have perceived irresponsible and devastating elements in the proposed Young Eagles Protection Program and particularly in the website, and in their concern for the Young Eagles Program and Young Eagles all across the country, took it on themselves to do something about it. From the time this program was announced, in January, members started petitioning headquarters to correct such absurdities, and these petitions continued, non-stop for the last 3 months, and rightful so.

I want to thank all members who constantly bombarded headquarters with emails, phone calls, and postings on the EAA Forums, because the mess was beginning to be cleaned up, and more needs to be done. First, there were responsible changes to the program itself, with the relaxing of some elements to the complete limitation of others. Second concerning the website, there was the extremely important adjustment of making the posting of ones SS number optional. Thirdly, and again concerning the website, there was the rewording of the Acknowledgement and Authorization, which originally gave American Checked your authorization to collect your data at any time and for as many times, whenever they saw fit.

Again I cannot thank you enough, and a special thanks to Bret Steffen for his work in securing this very important change. There are rewards, both seen and unseen, for all your efforts to improve this program.

[TomBush]

None of this matters to me and thousands of others who formerly flew YE's, as we are done with the program in its entirety. No matter how you slice it, the program itself remains unnecessary, intrusive, and insulting.

[Mayhemxpc]

Jkan,

How did you come by that information? I still have not received an answer to my inquiries to Bret about it. Where is that change posted?

[Wilfred]

I just got my sport aviation monthly mag and I did find any comment re the ypp. A bit strange.

[Chris In Marshfield]

None of this matters to me and thousands of others who formerly flew YE's, as we are done with the program in its entirety. No matter how you slice it, the program itself remains unnecessary, intrusive, and insulting.

Thousands??

[lyleapgmc]

I just got my sport aviation monthly mag and I did find any comment re the ypp. A bit strange.

It is not at all unusual for the EAA not to enter a conversation in public about that can be perceived as negative. I was at AirVenture several years ago when a pilot died during the airshow. I came out of an exhibit building and noted the expressions on the faces of people coming away from the show line. I knew immediately that something very bad had happened. The announcer's only comment was to admonish people not to run out to the crash site. At the Theater in the Woods that evening Tom Poberezny asked for a moment of silence for the pilot. That was all that I saw or heard from the EAA. The media was tasked with telling the public and EAA members about the crash.

For some reason I am reminded of the fully automated airliner. At the start of the flight a recording is played that explains that the airplane is fully automated and, "Nothing can go wrong.....can go wrong..... can go wrong.....can go wrong."

I recently learned that the Boy Scouts will not allow scouts to ride in experimental or home built aircraft at Young Eagles Rallies.

I still question the "best practices" claim. Just who on this planet has the wisdom, insight and knowledge to determine what "best practices" really are. The phrase somehow suggests that following such "best practices" will eliminate the possibility of of any intentional or accidental misconduct during a Young Eagles Rally.

I just had a background check for employment. I passed. The check uncovered nothing as it only went back "minimum of seven years." The background company did claim they checked the federal records, the No Fly List and other sources. I seriously doubt the value of any background check by any company no matter how well vetted by EAA. (Does vetted mean that the company got a Corvette for their efforts?)

There are laws regarding sexual misconduct with youth yet it still happens. Are those laws "best practices"? Adding another layer of enforcement will not deter those bent on harming a child. The entire YPP is meant to cover the collective asses in Oshkosh. It will accomplish nothing more than that. It will make a good talking point in any court procedure. It may or may not sway a judge or jury.

What "best practices" were in place at Cessna when Jack Pelton was there?

[Mike Switzer]

What "best practices" were in place at Cessna when Jack Pelton was there?

In my experience "Best Practices" is corporate speak meaning "We wasted at least 6 months in Six Sigma meetings coming up with this process". Considering Cessna is one of the US corporations that has bought into the Six Sigma system hook, line, & sinker, well... I am going to stop there.

[Jkan]

Jkan,

How did you come by that information? I still have not received an answer to my inquiries to Bret about it. Where is that change posted?

You will need to talk to Bret....that is where I received the information. If the information is incorrect, then Bret is lying.

[rwanttaja]

I just got my sport aviation monthly mag and I did find any comment re the ypp. A bit strange.
You have to remember that the magazine goes to print about 2-3 months prior to your receiving it. So anything it said would reflect the program status back in February or so...and as we all remember, there was a heck of a lot of change in that time period. Not surprising they didn't comment, when any policy statement they make may have been replaced a half-dozen times by the time the membership saw the magazine.

Ron Wanttaja

[cub builder]

Thousands??

The numbers won't be known until someone figures out a year from now how many memberships were not renewed, as well as those that were cancelled. Of course there won't be any proof of why people didn't renew. I doubt the EAA will add it up, and I'd bet $$ they will never publish a number, but I would guess the number will be significant. EAA will be happy to be rid of us unwashed former volunteers that refuse to prove we aren't perverts. After all, everyone is now a pervert until they prove otherwise. A number of us can't support a group with this kind of thinking at the top. :mad: There's a reason why this kind of policy didn't happen when Paul was still alive.

Cub Builder

[Mayhemxpc]

Jkan,

I am not doubting you or Bret. My concern is that this is a significant change and very important to addressing a concern raised by many (former) YE pilots. One would think that this would have been provided some sort of official notice. I just checked and there is nothing about it on the YE Volunteers pages. The FAQ has not been updated since February and I cannot determine that any change was made in the text of the policy. That last we heard from officialdom on this was Glory posting that they were trying to get it changed. Nothing since then except in a personal email to you.

Where is this documented? (Jkan, I don't expect an answer from you, but from EAA staff.)

I really do try to think positively about EAA management, but this does not seem to be a best practices approach in information management/message control/keeping your members (stakeholders) informed, etc.

[Jkan]

I'm with you Chris, somehow we must have this verified as soon as possible. There would be evidence if one would go onto the background page, but as of this time, I will not go near the site. If Bret is not telling the truth, I would hope that all h... would break loose.

[Jkan]

Chris, I have been in contact with Bret, concerning this matter, for quite some time. We emailed about every couple of weeks concerning the progress. My post @ #107 is the complete email, and the last email which I have received from Bret. Lets hope someone can verify this for us.

[TomBush]

Thousands??

Unfortunately, I don't think it's a stretch to say it'll be in the thousands, Chris. Heck, at my little airfield in Texas alone there are about 20 pilots who won't be participating in YE events anymore. Read the other threads if you haven't already, and you'll see that there are many, many chapters that have bowed out of the YE program in its entirety.

[rwanttaja]

Jkan,

I am not doubting you or Bret. My concern is that this is a significant change and very important to addressing a concern raised by many (former) YE pilots. One would think that this would have been provided some sort of official notice. I just checked and there is nothing about it on the YE Volunteers pages. The FAQ has not been updated since February and I cannot determine that any change was made in the text of the policy.
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

[Jkan]

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.

[rwanttaja]

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

[Jkan]

[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.

[Bret Steffen]

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.

[rwanttaja]

... 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-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program/~/link.aspx?_id=F713C61B4BB94E6094885A434624FCAD&_z=z

...still states the employment history check, as does the PDF.

Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

The policy on this page:

http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/youth-protection-policy-and-program/~/link.aspx?_id=F713C61B4BB94E6094885A434624FCAD&_z=z

...still states the employment history check, as does the PDF.
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

[Mayhemxpc]

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

[TedK]

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

[Wilfred]

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.

[Bret Steffen]

'There" is the actual agreement on the actual sight-off page when you actually do the background check. The other materials were intended as informational/advisory. Hope that helps, if you have questions let me know.

[Bret Steffen]

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

We tried that one at the start Ron, which is a large part of what confused and angered folks, so we had to split the policy and have three places where much of the language lives. Best intentions and all...

[rwanttaja]

'There" is the actual agreement on the actual sight-off page when you actually do the background check. The other materials were intended as informational/advisory. Hope that helps, if you have questions let me know.
Umm....you cannot find out what the policy says, unless you start the background check? This seems...a bit like a pig in a poke. Since another company is handling the background check does this mean that the official EAA policy is *not* available on an EAA web site? Considering the controversy about the program, that's bizarre.

Ron Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

We tried that one at the start Ron, which is a large part of what confused and angered folks, so we had to split the policy and have three places where much of the language lives. Best intentions and all...
Splitting the policy into three pieces is fine, as they're referring to three different circumstances. I'm referring to ONE of the pieces (the YE one) being available both in an HTML version and a PDF version.. When it gets updated, one has to ensure both versions reflect the same text.

And....the true *official* version isn't even on an EAA-controlled location. Hmmmm.....

Ron Wanttaja

[ssmdive]

We tried that one at the start Ron, which is a large part of what confused and angered folks, so we had to split the policy and have three places where much of the language lives. Best intentions and all...

So it is better to have three places for info and the one claimed to be "correct" is only on a third party website and only AFTER you have started the process?

[rwanttaja]

So it is better to have three places for info and the one claimed to be "correct" is only on a third party website and only AFTER you have started the process?
Not only that, but EAA *disavows* the versions on their own web page.

If it's wrong, TAKE IT DOWN and provide a link to the true version. Better still, the Background Check company should give a link the true version ON THE EAA WEB PAGE instead of having their own local version.

Ron Wanttaja

[Mayhemxpc]

'There" is the actual agreement on the actual sight-off page when you actually do the background check.
Is that kind of like, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it?"

[FlyingRon]

Yeah, it's just a further indication of how much of a half-assed and ill-planned effort the EAA gives. It's such a half-assed cavalier approach that causes the problems that this is trying to solve to begin with. My wife, a professional in the aviation industry (she's the education department for the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum and a school teacher by training), came up to me yesterday and asked "what the **** is going on with the EAA. The crap is rolling down from Oshkosh all over the aviation community and the EAA rather than smelling like roses for protecting children is smelling like ****

It's going to take a concerted effort rather than the pathetic lip service response to keep support for the EAA from running like droves because they look like either a bunch of pathetic idiots or outright dishonest liars with their current behavior. Neither is really something anyone should aspire to.

[Bret Steffen]

Gents -- no the policy is the policy -- it is in PDF and web text. The sign off on the background check that I was referring to is the sign off -- not the policy. Sorry for your confusion on this.

[Mayhemxpc]

Up until last night I thought I understood. Now I am confused. Where is the statement that limits the background check?

[Mayhemxpc]

Bret called me. He explained that the information is found at the sign off for the background check. I will continue the process and see. I informed him that this needs to be made clear on the EAA YPP page, and it should be noted as a change. I also send him a little information about the BSA's program, and how that restriction (limited to the NCI check) is clearly stated on their YPT information page.

It really seems like the EAA program was developed based on what someone told them the BSA program was like, rather than doing any serious research into that program.

[Hstaton]

Young Eagles Day today at Haller Field, Green Cove Springs, FL Chapter 1379 - we flew more than 70 Young Eagles today. I am not terribly happy with the protection policy myself, but I won't give up the joy I see in their eyes. They are the future of GA. The wrinkles need to be worked out, but let's not lose the kids!

[Mayhemxpc]

Based on what has been done to begin to respond to important issues, and in particular the limitations and restrictions on the background check, I completed the process. I am not happy with the way it is right now. I am especially unhappy with the lack of information about the process, what information will be collected, how, and what will be done with it. This includes the back door method of informing us about the change. That language still needs to be tightened. It also need to be published up front in sections describing the screening and training requirements on the YE volunteers webpage. Whether or not AmericanChecked agrees to language changes proposed in the best interest of EAAs members is irrelevant. If American Checked does not like the restrictions, limitations, and restrictions required by the EAA then EAA HQ should find another provider. The language used for other programs, such as the BSA's, provides an excellent example of what a good program can look like. (Or use. The BSA allows other organizations to use their program.)

Nonetheless, I told Bret that I would complete the process if the proposed changes were made to the language describing what information was authorized to be accessed. It changed, so I did my part. Not for EAA HQ but for my chapter's YE program and the kids we fly.

But I don't feel good about it.

[Mark van Wyk]

Young Eagles Day today at Haller Field, Green Cove Springs, FL Chapter 1379 - we flew more than 70 Young Eagles today. I am not terribly happy with the protection policy myself, but I won't give up the joy I see in their eyes. They are the future of GA. The wrinkles need to be worked out, but let's not lose the kids!
Fantastic. Great to hear your Young Eagles event was a success.
Let's hear some more positive reports.

[TomBush]

Let's hear some more positive reports.

Here's one: I am POSITIVE that I and hundreds of others won't be flying YE's anymore due to this abomination of a program!

[combahee]

We held our first event under the new rules. We have lost 50% of the pilots. We also had to cut short the program as we didn't have enough vetted personnel for the two deep on the ground. This sucks. We are cancelling the June 11 event.

[Aviatrexx]

I know this is a stale thread but EAA HQ needs to know that this issue is not dead. Perhaps it will generate a more thoughtful approach when some other pearl-clutcher identifies a problem that simply must be fixed.

Our chapter was an early YE sponsor and I was one of the first pilots. We held rallies all over the state on behalf of other chapters who lacked the resources or expertise. Most summers, we held a YE rally nearly every weekend, somewhere. Few rallies were for less than a hundred kids; many were multiples of that. We pioneered the computerization of rally registration, big-grin photos, instant printing of certificates, and many other organization standards and tools. Our chapter bought tables, chairs, tents, stanchions, and an enclosed trailer to haul them. We have a "Rally in a Box" that can be set up at any airport and be ready to fly kids in an hour.

Our YE Chapter Coordinator became the State Coordinator and has been given every Young Eagle award possible. For over a decade, until this year, he presented the YE Forum at Airventure. I set up a state-wide discussion listserver for pilot coordination and scheduling. You couldn't find a more committed group of YE pilots; one of our members has over 3000, many flown one at a time in his Cub.

The YE program took a gut-punch when he-who-shan't-be-named sat in his high tower and fired Steve Buss, among many other valuable staffers. But our YE pilots soldiered on because it was good for kids, good for EAA, and good for general aviation. We were sad for Steve but, other than losing a tireless advocate and friend at HQ, it didn't affect our operations.

Then the word came out about the YPP. To say that its design and promulgation was stupendously mishandled is a thesaurus exercise. This forum alone is evidence that there are only so many synonyms for "brain-dead", "insulting", and "unnecessary".

All the nibbling around the edges of exactly what would be included in the background check, the platitudes, and all the other ways that HQ has attempted to pat us on the head and hand us a sucker, all miss a fundamental point:

It is not perfectly safe to go up in an airplane.
In fact, we've already killed at least one Young Eagle (probably more, but you know how hard it is to get numbers on that sort of thing from HQ).

So EAA HQ has mandated an intrusive vetting of volunteer pilots, who are giving out of altruism, not to fix a known problem but one that has yet to be in evidence. One could make a better case (but only barely) that requiring pilots to display proof that they are current and that their aircraft is airworthy might have a greater effect on the safety of the children than a background check. But EAA HQ doesn't require that, despite at least one YE fatality.

So the real problem is the attitude at EAA HQ, as eloquently stated by Dennis Jenders back in March, "The back and forth here in the forum isn't going to change the very important decision to keep youth safe. Even one incident is one too many."

Allow me to parse that for you:

1. There was a decision to keep youth safe.

Therefore, before this "very important decision" was made, no one (besides the YE pilots of course) had made any decision to keep youth safe. One has to wonder why we had absolutely no issues with child molestation despite such an obvious abrogation of corporate responsibility.

2. Nothing said in this forum will change the "decision to keep youth safe".

Well, fair enough. I don't recall anyone suggesting that such a decision by EAA HQ was wrong, if surely twenty years late. Who doesn't think we should keep them safe? What sticks in the craw is the presumption that we YE pilots, who have been keeping the youth safe all along, should be subjected to invasive scrutiny in order to continue to keep them safe for another generation or two.

3. "Even one incident is one too many."

And there it is.

In a futile attempt to achieve the unattainable perfect safety, all YE pilots will be sacrificed on the altar of "Do SOMETHING, even if it's wrong, won't work, and alienates the very core you depend on." Can we anticipate an equivalent approach to safety at Airventure? Lord knows, "even one accident is one too many" there!

You know what else will achieve the not "even-one-incident" goal? Stop flying Young Eagles. Problem solved.

At least it has been for our chapter. We have not held a rally since the rule went into effect. Our YE State Coordinator (ex-mil, lifetime FAA) called HQ to discuss it and was told "my way or highway". He decided the highway looked better. We now have no YE Chapter Coordinator, our state has no State Coordinator, no pilots willing to submit to the YPP requirements, and no rallies scheduled. The loss of experience holding a safe YE rally is staggering.

Anyone want to put in a bid on a "YE Rally-in-a-Box"?

-Chip-

[cub builder]

Hmm. I'm guessing you haven't been reading the positive YE press releases. "Nothing to see here. Everything is business as usual."

Our chapter has cancelled three of the four annual events. The fourth was postponed due to lack of pilots, but they plan to try again. I expect I'll be dropped from the list here as my membership expires in a couple of months and I won't be renewing. Sorry to see what was once such a solid promotional program and great association go under due to corporate mismanagement. I already miss the EAA, but it's no longer what it once was, and I miss what it once was. The current abomination of corporate managers won't be missed.

-Cub Builder

[rwanttaja]

I know this is a stale thread but EAA HQ needs to know that this issue is not dead. Perhaps it will generate a more thoughtful approach when some other pearl-clutcher identifies a problem that simply must be fixed.
It's kind like politicians, Chip...if you don't CONTINUALLY remind them, they'll naturally slip back into Omnipotent Mode and do the same damn thing again.

In this age, something like the YPP was inevitable. But EAA's refusal to involve the membership in its development (except for one or two tame chapters) was inexcusable, and their failure to wait to announce it until after the symbolic two-millionth YE is inexplicable.

Ron Wanttaja

[Mark van Wyk]

I think the EAA YE Youth Protection policy is just fine. Don't change a thing, EAA.

[djenders]

I think there is a pretty cynical view of EAA shared here, far too often. At the end of the day its about keeping children safe (who can argue with that), protecting our pilot members (from lawsuits, etc), and continuing to find a way to share aviation with a younger demographic (which we desperately need). e

[FlyingRon]

I think there is a pretty cynical view of EAA shared here, far too often. At the end of the day its about keeping children safe (who can argue with that), protecting our pilot members (from lawsuits, etc), and continuing to find a way to share aviation with a younger demographic (which we desperately need). e

Well, the first point is arguable whether there is a problem that needs solving.
The second is certainly NOT accomplished nor even a goal of the YPP. The purpose of the YPP, first and foremost, is to protect the EAA (the organization) not the pilots and not the children.
The third point the essential point. The YPP is KILLING YE. If you can't fly the YE, you can't operate your youth outreach, then whether you have a YPP is moot.

[Mayhemxpc]

1st to Mark: NOTHING in life, and especially aviation, can not be improved. (Except maybe a Piper Cub.) Continual improvement is the hallmark of a healthy organization.

2d to Dennis -- mostly rephrasing Ron: Cynical. To believe that we are cynical of EAA is to say that we think that it is corrupt or insincere. Some may think that, others may think that some in the EAA senior levels are just wrong, without judging their motivation for being wrong. I would hope that those who believe it is corrupt or insincere are a small minority. In both cases, I believe, that most or all of the posters here do so with the intent of improving EAA. Therefore, since we have hope and expectation of improvement we are not cynical.

The language of the YPP and EAA management has been quite clear. The YPP program protects the EAA as an organization. Not its members. From reading the processes, it may not be effective at protecting the kids -- at least no more so than in pre-YPP days. It certainly does not reflect best practices of other organizations with a history of implementing similar policies (e.g., BSA and CAP.)

Now, if I were a LITTLE more cynical, I might argue that the reduction in YE flights might even be an intended effect of the YPP program. After all, basic risk management is that risk is a combination of exposure and effect. If you limit exposure, you reduce risk. I am NOT saying that was the intent, but curiously, it is a likely outcome: Reduce risk to EAA corporation by reducing the exposure/the number of youth participating in the program.

[cub builder]

I think there is a pretty cynical view of EAA shared here, far too often. At the end of the day its about keeping children safe (who can argue with that)
I won't argue with protecting children, but I will argue with your methods. The background checks and overreaching corporate intrusion have nothing to do with protecting children. I don't supposed it occurred to corporate EAA that those of us that have been flying YE for the last 20 years have been in the business of protecting them all along. A two adult rule has always been in effect in most chapters to protect the pilots and helpers from accusations as well as to protect the children involved in the program. That's just common sense, and is reinforced in the program. I agree with that part of the YPP program as absolutely essential to protect everyone.

However, the background checks are pointless and only there to as a lawyers CYA move. (The Boy Scouts do it, so we should do it. Never mind that we are doing 15 minute rides and they are doing overnight camping trips.) You don't find registered sex offenders hanging out at events like YE as that is enough for them to get a return trip to prison. To call it a close call because there was a registered SO that was a chapter member, but never attended a YE event is ludicrous. That is an example of the SO registry working as designed.


, protecting our pilot members (from lawsuits, etc),
We already protected ourselves by implementing a two adult rule 20 years ago, thank you very much. Nice to see that the EAA Corporate is catching up.


and continuing to find a way to share aviation with a younger demographic (which we desperately need).
The Corporate EAA is successfully killing the YE program. I don't suppose anyone at Corporate EAA would be willing to compare and share the number of YE flights from June - Aug of 2015 vs 2016?

The fact is, many of the smaller chapters no longer have a YE program. Many of the larger chapters are still scraping up enough pilots to fly YE. Is that really the way you want the program to operate? For years, a number of us used to do YE flight rallies at dirt strips in remote areas specifically to get to some of the ranch kids that have been working horses and driving tractors since they were 5, but have never seen a light plane up close. It pains me to see those events now dead as they were the most fun of all the YE events we did. But that's the outfall of the corporate YPP program.

-Cub Builder

[djenders]

The language of the YPP and EAA management has been quite clear. The YPP program protects the EAA as an organization. Not its members. From reading the processes, it may not be effective at protecting the kids -- at least no more so than in pre-YPP days. It certainly does not reflect best practices of other organizations with a history of implementing similar policies (e.g., BSA and CAP.)


Very thoughtful reply Chris.

RE: Cynical. Electronic messages are so devoid of emotion, nuance, and inflection that it becomes difficult to read what is written. For a newcomer, or even a current member like myself, some of the conversation here just dwells on the negative instead of the positive. I bring it up just to highlight that maybe some members don't realize how cynical the conversation sounds. YPP has been implemented, it is here to stay, and the sun still came up this morning... and will tomorrow. :)

And I really don't say any of this to name call or point fingers. I just wanted to share my observation as a daily lurker on the message board. We all have opinions, and I respect that. I truly believe the diversity we have has made EAA a stronger organization over the years.

RE: YPP as implemented.

When I consider the program, I think in terms of results and outcomes. The reason YPP exists is to achieve a specific result – ZERO incidents. Outcomes just happen to include protecting pilots, protecting the organization, and modernizing processes. All good things and well intentioned. When reading some of the posts it seems like we can't even agree on that.

The policy was written to protect all parties and have leveraged best practices from other major organizations. Yes, that includes the Boy Scouts. And council included very seasoned professionals that have helped implement with a variety of organizations much larger than EAA.

As you and a few others have mentioned, other organizations have implemented similar policies. It is a necessity. Why? Because we are trying to protect children. As a former employee, a caring member, and active member in other youth-based activities I recognize the importance of protecting children. We just can't expose kids to the nastiness of this world. As mothers, fathers, grandparents, uncles, aunts, whatever... we all want to keep kids safe.

And you guys are right in saying it is to protect the organization as well. But that isn't because EAA is looking to cover their ass only, it really starts with the kids. It is also there to reduce legal exposure. If something were to happen, there is a good chance a multi-million dollar lawsuit would so negatively impact EAA that the organization may never recover.

But this is also here to protect the YE pilots. No one wants a YE pilot to be accused of something they didn't do.

Perhaps I'm just reading too much into the posts here. Just wanted to fire back with my thoughts / opinions on YPP. Have there been some negative outcomes, absolutely! I don't want to see reduced flights and opportunities for kids. And I certainly don't want to see anyone offended by the policy. But if protecting our youth is the goal here, and the result... we should be 100% in support of making that happen.

I hope EAA can continue to develop programs that attract new audiences to aviation. Right now, the numbers are still disappointing. We may never see the golden age of aviation again, but we do need to crack the code on bringing more people into aviation – and EAA. I have plenty of thoughts on that, but I'll save that for another day.

Cheers!
Dennis

[rwanttaja]

Very well stated, Dennis, and please don't think any of us are taking things personally or attacking you. As you mention, electronic communications are devoid of nuance, and people may not realize how that affects their communications. At a chapter meeting, we can say to someone, "Boy, are you an idiot," laugh, and slap them on the back and no one has a problem with it. On the internet, without the non-verbal gestures, the target of such a comment might justifiably take umbrage.

I do want to take a slight issue over this comment:


But this is also here to protect the YE pilots. No one wants a YE pilot to be accused of something they didn't do.

The policies do tend to change occasionally, but I do not believe the YPP protects the pilots. If a YE pilot is accused of molestation as part of an event, EAA does not provide them with an attorney. EAA will only get involved if they're listed as a co-defendant...and if it's criminal charges, that ain't going to happen.

EAA will have zero interest in proving the pilot's innocence, *except* to minimize its own liability. If a child's parents sue for $5M, and the lawyer says, "We'll settle for $100K and an apology," the EAA will quickly write a check. The pilot will be stuck with the blame.

Ron Wanttaja

[Mike M]

I think there is a pretty cynical view of EAA shared here, far too often

some of that cynicism was nurtured by a statement o so many months ago that the volunteers being checked wouldn't have to pay for the background check process, EAA would pay for it. somebody in Wisconsin forgot who EAA is.

[ssmdive]

I think there is a pretty cynical view of EAA shared here, far too often.

Could be because we feel that the EAA has stopped listening to the members. And as someone already pointed out... "Members will not have to pay for the background checks"..... Uh, where did they plant the magic money tree?

I have LONG known that the EAA was more about Airventure and not the members... It just gets shown over and over. I avoided being a member till I started doing acro and wanted to compete.


At the end of the day its about keeping children safe (who can argue with that), protecting our pilot members (from lawsuits, etc), and continuing to find a way to share aviation with a younger demographic (which we desperately need). e

Nothing in the background check protects the pilots. It is 100% to protect the EAA.

If I didn't have to be an EAA member to be an IAC member, I'd drop my EAA membership in a second. The EAA does not care about the members, only the airshow and its own survival.

I was looking to fly YE.... And then this BS came out. Funny, I am an LEO but not trusted to fly a kid for 10-15 mins from the EAA. And the chance that I give this organization my personal information, after the OPM lost my information.... Well, it just is not going to happen.

So count me as a guy that will never fly a YE.

[dougbush]

Funny, I am an LEO but not trusted to fly a kid for 10-15 mins from the EAA.
You just insulted all your fellow EAAers who don't happen to be LEOs.

[martymayes]

Funny, I am an LEO but not trusted to fly a kid for 10-15 mins from the EAA.

I find it interesting that you feel entitled to a free pass because you are an LEO. How long do you suppose it will take Google to find court cases of LEO's guilty of inappropriate behavior with a kid? 0.49 seconds? There's bad apples in almost every barrel.

[Byron J. Covey]

. .... Funny, I am an LEO but not trusted to fly a kid for 10-15 mins from the EAA. And the chance that I give this organization my personal information, after the OPM lost my information.... Well, it just is not going to happen.

So count me as a guy that will never fly a YE.

LEO's are not immune to misbehavior.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/isolated-incidents-40-cops-30-days-racked-dozens-charges-child-rape-sexual-abuse/


BJC

[Bill Greenwood]

The study showing 40 cops guilty of child rape, murder etc, is bad but some perspective: There are about 900,000 police in U S. They kill about 1357 people per year and lose about 126 police killed per year. It is hard to find accurate figures, for instance police report only "justified killings" which is given as 410.
On the downside, police live in an atmosphere of violence in some places like south Chicago, maybe Philly, etc. And they may see violence as THE cure to most crimes and problems, even carrying over to domestic lives. And while they are supposed to be law enforcement officers, in some cases they seem to have more respect for order part of law and order, thus an affinity for being the authority figure no matter what the law actually is.
There must be a lot of decent cops, but there are some rotten ones that slip through the seams and sometimes avoid justice for serious actions which would be major crimes if done by the public. If the public shot an unarmed cop with his hands up or running away, dont think they would get away with the excuse that the citizen "thought" he was in danger.
I dont care much for many undercover narcotics cops, but lo and behold at Osh this year got to meet a man who had been just that. I didnt get time to talk much to him about it, but he seemed like a nice guy.
I know 2 guys who are cops, one is a pilot parks 2 planes over and I used to rent an apt to one. I live an small mostly peaceful town with few real violent crimes and cops are extra patient, even when dealing with the occasional armed or nutty person. I cant recall them ever shooing or killing anyone.

[vaflier]

I do not think that SSMDIVE intended to infer anything negative. We do as a society place a lot of trust in our police officers and hold them to a much higher standard than the rest of us. The vast majority are more than worthy of that trust. How many of us are willing to get up and go to work every day dealing with the worst of our society, knowing there is at least a better thn average chance we will never get home to our loved ones ever again. I can only say thank you for what you do to make things better for the rest of us. You have my respect !!.

[Floatsflyer]

. Funny, I am an LEO but not trusted to fly a kid for 10-15 mins from the EAA

Please excuse my ignorance but what does a Zodiac sign have to do with your depth of character? ;>)

Seriously though, you are saying-with a straight face no less-that a cop equates with good character and exemplary behaviour. Clearly, you haven't been paying much attention to current affairs. I've got a bridge in New York that I own that I'm willing to sell to you. Call me.

[rwanttaja]

Seriously though, you are saying-with a straight face no less-that a cop equates with good character and exemplary behaviour.
No, I didn't take it that way. I think his point was is that he'd already undergone and passed levels of scrutiny far beyond what the YPP would require. Just as others have pointed out having high security clearances, which involve even more stringent assessment of the character of an individual. When they're going to approve someone when their misdeeds could cause "grave harm to the security of the United States," sexual crimes will not be ignored.

But to take the EAA's side here, working the cross-organization coordination necessary to USE these other sources of character evaluation would be impossible.

But, Floats is perfectly correct. Alistair MacLean put it best... "There are prison in America and cushy hotels in Moscow filled with people who had top-secret security clearances." EAA's YPP will likely catch the "Chester the Molester" types, but these people are usually caught before they become prosperous enough to be able to buy an airplane to fly Young Eagles. The danger is in the clever con men who pick their targets well and are able to avoid detection. These are not stupid men unable to control their impulses...in any case, their impulses are more about domination and control than mere sex. These people are far more likely to rise in society enough to be able to afford things like airplanes, but the YPP won't raise any flags because no one's caught them yet.

When I was 13 years old, I joined a youth organization. The first adult in the group I met became my mentor for a number of years. A long time later, he was convicted as a serial child sexual predator. I was never a victim, and never witnessed anything that indicated such abuse was occurring. But when I read the newspaper accounts of what had happened back in my era, I could read it and say, "That was probably XXXX" even though the paper didn't identify the witnesses. The reasons behind a lot of puzzling things from that period had become horribly clear.

And folks, the YPP wouldn't have caught this guy. He picked his victims carefully (all from broken homes), and was a master in manipulation. None of his victims talked for *about 35 years*. Sure, the YPP would pick him up NOW, but he's got another sixty years left in his sentence.

So... once again, the YPP exists only to give EAA some legal protection. It gives a false level of security. It's not going to catch the ones people *truly* have to scared of.

Ron Wanttaja

[ssmdive]

You just insulted all your fellow EAAers who don't happen to be LEOs.

Nonsense, you just read it that way.

[ssmdive]

No, I didn't take it that way. I think his point was is that he'd already undergone and passed levels of scrutiny far beyond what the YPP would require. Just as others have pointed out having high security clearances, which involve even more stringent assessment of the character of an individual. When they're going to approve someone when their misdeeds could cause "grave harm to the security of the United States," sexual crimes will not be ignored.



Ron and a few others got my comment. I had a secret clearance in the military (and had my data stolen in the OPM breach). I have 10 year background checks from the govt every 5 years.... And I have background checks from my department yearly. Yes, there are cops that are criminal, and there are average Joes that are close to saints.... I however go through more and more complete vetting than the EAA program, unlike the average Joe.

As others have pointed out, the YE BGC is mostly worthless in the real world.
And as as others have stated, this YE program does NOTHING to protect the pilot or the local chapter. It is to cover the HQ and the HQ only.

And the LEO bashing... Well, that's one reason I don't tend to tell people....Once again, I learn that lesson.

[TedK]

So, all of the Security Theater for YPP, provides nearly no real protection, eg, it would catch only the already convicted molester, yet drives away the Protectors of our Society.

Well done, EAA Lawyers!

i think our Chapter, which is home to a large number of high clearance personnel, has lost about half its YPP participants.

[dougbush]

Yes, there are cops that are criminal, and there are average Joes that are close to saints.... I however go through more and more complete vetting than the EAA program, unlike the average Joe.
There you go again. You are the special people and we are the average Joes. I have high respect for police, but I'm not proud of your disdain for the citizens you serve. I also have high regard for EAAers. Whether LEOs are more trustworthy than EAAers has not been studied, so you have insulted us.

[rwanttaja]

There you go again. You are the special people and we are the average Joes. I have high respect for police, but I'm not proud of your disdain for the citizens you serve. I also have high regard for EAAers. Whether LEOs are more trustworthy than EAAers has not been studied, so you have insulted us.
"Makin' mock of uniforms that guard you in your sleep,
is cheaper than them uniforms, and they're starvation cheap...."
- Rudyard Kipling, "The Ballad of Tommy Atkins"

There are certainly problems in the US with police policy, police training, and police attitudes. But laying one's dissatisfaction at the feet of a single random police officer isn't very productive.

We GA pilots complain when we have to "take the rap" every time someone does something stupid and newsworthy in a small aircraft. Lets not do the same.

Ron Wanttaja

[Mayhemxpc]

I have read ssmdive's comments several times and I do not see the condescension that dougbush sees. Ron W. Seems to have summarized the issue that ssmdive is trying to get at. I see no purpose in attacking someone's argument because somehow a reader has taken some personal affront to something where no affront was intended.

Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us. We are pilots, that already makes us outside the norm. It would be reasonable to expect that we have non-flying backgrounds outside the norm, too.

Now, back on track. EAA HQ felt it needed to do something to protect the corporation from potential allegations. It implemented a program without apparently doing a thorough problem definition, analysis of alternatives, and effective member outreach. The result has been a significant push back from YE pilots and their chapters. Some have accepted the change, some have even embraced it. Others have left the program or continue under protest. Some chapters may be operating without any effective acknowledgement of the program at all. It is quite likely that YE flights are dropping. It is also possible that the program as implemented is not adding any additional protection and, in the EXTREMELY UNLIKELY EVENT that something undesirable does happen, EAA HQ may find that the current program does not protect them at all. So...what do we do about that?

[rwanttaja]

(Good stuff deleted)


Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us.

Does anyone else's organization use the euphemism, "Dentist's Chair"? :-)


... in the EXTREMELY UNLIKELY EVENT that something undesirable does happen, EAA HQ may find that the current program does not protect them at all. So...what do we do about that?

I think the current program protects EAA to the greatest extent possible. If sued, EAA has to show that it implements protection to at least the standard set by other major organizations like the Boy Scouts. Any plaintiff will attempt to show that EAA's program lags the currently-accepted norm, or that the implementation was botched in a way that should have been noticed and corrected.

Beyond that, there's little EAA can to to prepare. It's ludicrous to assume that any YE pilot will "try something" during a flight...with the kid's parents and dozens of people standing right there when the plane returns. The danger is that the person will try to parlay meeting the youth into continued contact OUTSIDE the bounds of Young Eagles... prohibited by the YPP, but there's no way for EAA to detect if it's happening.

That's where EAA will get bit, legally, and the existence of the YPP will be a damned thin shield. I don't think there's any way to provide further protection.

Ron Wanttaja

[ssmdive]

Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us. We are pilots, that already makes us outside the norm. It would be reasonable to expect that we have non-flying backgrounds outside the norm, too.



Points of order:
1. I do not think my BGC's make me "stand out". I just think that I go through more BGC's than an average person. I don't see that claim as controversial. I could be wrong, but no one brought data to counter my belief - only grief. How many BGCs does the average person go through in a year?

2. If you think go through a bigger, better, more difficult BGC... OK, great. If you made the claim that your BGC was better than the ones I go through... OK, I don't see that as controversial or you thinking you are 'better' than me. It could very well be a statement of fact. I could debate the details if I cared, but to make the claim I think you are being big headed for making that claim is just silly.

3. I specifically mentioned the "average". If you work for the NSA, then you would not be "average". If you happen to be the POTUS, then again, not "average". You made the claim that pilots are not "average".... OK fair claim. But the average pilot goes through approximately how many BGC's per year?

The LEO thing. I found dark humor in the fact that we tell kids if they are in trouble, to go find and tell an LEO. Yet the EAA seems to think that is not enough and some online BGC will save the day.

But some people will take ANY opportunity to get their ego hurt and slam someone... Especially certain groups. I am used to it, but honestly always surprised. With that I am done wasting my time. The EAA does not care and all I am doing here is opening myself up to abuse from someone who got upset and has an axe to grind (not you).

[Mayhemxpc]

Geez. There I was, trying to say that you were NOT trying to come off as coming from a "better than you are" mentality, only pointing out that some or many of us also go through rigorous screenings, and you decide to post this. I was not trying to slam you. I was NOT claiming that my screening is more extensive than yours (nor am I saying that yours is more extensive than mine.) My own clearance and background checks are none of your concern. Some on this forum probably have more thorough (intrusive) checks than you. Some do not. None of us, however, are, "the average joe." Your words. Now, can we stop this and focus on defining problems and trying to turn a sow's ear into suede (understanding we will never make it into silk.)