De: Serge Lamarche
À : HPAC-ACVL ACVL-HPAC
Cc : board of directors HPAC-ACVL
Mrs Nance, BoD HPAC, and all,
Re: continued expulsion without justification or merit
Two different lawyers have concluded that the expulsion and termination [of Serge Lamarche] were illegal. As such and according to legal counsel, this nullifies the expulsion and termination and I am hence still an insured member of the HPAC and technically still working for the HPAC. Your continuous claims that I jeopardise sites [by continuing to fly] is most egregious, to recycle your term.
As I previously mentioned in conciliatory manners that should have been understandable by anyone, there was no breach of trust and the addition of a PG endorsement (not a rating) was done in 2015 for testing the accident form. It is most egregious to claim that such a thing could have been done for self-agrandisement. Ridiculous, even. Moreover, the endorsements are a simple skill reference of academic use and bear no consequence whatsoever in the use of flying sites. Endorsements bear no effects either on insurance as was egregiously claimed by one of the BoD. As additional evidence, once the Executive Director removed the PG thermal soaring endorsement from my record when the accident form was near completion, she judged appropriate to add a HG thermal soaring endorsement to my record. In general, not having a rating or endorsement is not a proof that a pilot does not have the skills of the rating or endorsement.
I received my private pilot licence in 1983. I did fly Cessna and Piper planes. Shortly after, I had the check on ultralight type, which allowed me to fly ultralights, and I did for a few years. In 1984, I took a hang gliding course and fly hang gliders since, now having more than 2500 hours airtime hang gliding. In 1988, I was introduced to paragliding on mont Ste-Anne. I did fly paragliders occasionally in 1994, 95, 98, 99. More so in 2000 and 2001 after following a paragliding course at Muller Wind Sport and buying paragliding equipment. After that in 2002, 05, 06, 08, 12, 13, 14, and this year with new PG gear. I have more than 50 hours airtime paragliding. I am a paraglider with no rating as is the case for numerous others, more than 80 in BC alone.
I have supported the HPAC since its inception and bear the member number 122. I have volunteered many hundreds of hours for the HPAC before being formally hired with contract for translation, but was working as more than translator since and before then.
I have worked under good and bad HPAC directors and the current set is a source of shame. Your accusations of slandering are most slanderous themselves. I merely report first hand facts. Here is an example: on july 2, I was finishing to fold my paraglider in Golden after a chat with another visiting paraglider. At around 10 pm, mr Busby, president of the HPAC, after waiting for the other visiting paraglider to leave the area, started to utter death threats from the seat of his huge truck, terminating with an insult: "... you'll be dead, you little prick.". I did not hear the beginning as it was unexpected and not loud enough, and I wanted to record it so I went for the camera, but as soon as mr Busby saw the camera, he hit the gas and scrammed. I ran after him with the camera asking him to come back, to no avail. Mr Busby can surely put it in writing for us now, so that we all know exactly what was his proposal for the resolution of the dispute he spearheaded. I can only surmise it was quite innocent...
How can the BoD demand of the instructors to follow a code of conduct after their illegal behaviors? A code of conduct appears to be necessary for the BoD as well.
I wish the BoD had not been so abusive from the start with an expulsion, something that seems appropriate in cases of impending death, imminent danger and such. I promised that I would apologise if the BoD had rescind their outrageous expulsion. After all, the endorsement test I added was about as offensive and dangerous as a little boy putting a small toy in the cookie jar, without taking a cookie, mind you... so possibly worthy of some apology. I almost did apologise but was advised by legal counsel to simply promise the apology, since the actions of the BoD were illegal and counterproductive. Some people can't, either morally or by profession, condone illegal activities. Now that the BoD insisted in their erroneous and most egregious actions, a third party may be required to resolve the issues created, which would likely include having them removed. Consequently, to limit all the BoD useless aggravations, so far causing much grief, expenses, loss of income and damage to reputation, the BoD is invited to redeem themselves a notch by rescinding completely their illegal decisions, voluntarily remove the current president from the BoD since he proved his fondness of intimidation (not something supported by the whole BoD I hope), and all other BoD members apologise to me and to the members of the HPAC on the HPAC website and on facebook in both languages. Following this, a complete rework of the disciplinary measures to make them abide to Canadian laws and values would be required as I mentioned in a previous email. Currently, the rules drafted, since we don't even know the new voted rules the HPAC BoD endowed themselves (which are even worse, evidently), are perfect for a totalitarian regime like the Stalin dictatorship. Or would they also fit perfectly the mafia?
The executive director may convey BoD apologies for writing all these egregious things for the BoD.
HPAC member 122.
The full dossier of the dispute is available upon request to firstname.lastname@example.org
Le dossier complet de la dispute est disponible sur demande à email@example.com