PCA medical committee revoked my race license
08-19-2024, 06:46 PM
#1771
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,677
Received 1,810 Likes
on
1,205 Posts
The following 3 users liked this post by dgrobs:
08-19-2024, 07:05 PM
#1772
Why would you deprive yourself? Even those who agree with Luigi will tell you that the PCA is an amazing club with great people and a huge variety of amazing events. The only way this would affect your PCA experience is if you want to club race, and have OSA, and refuse to provide CPAP data. It is not in any way reflective of the general PCA experience and it's difficult to think of anything that is more niche and "one-off" than this issue.
Luigi was never wronged or singled out. PCA has required CPAP data for those with OSA for many years. Other racers have complied with the rule and had no issue with it (at least one posted as much in this thread). I don't think anybody else, who actually has OSA, has objected to the rule in this thread. That compliance is not surprising because it is trivially easy to provide the CPAP data and doesn't reveal any meaningful private information. It's also not surprising because those with non-trivial OSA know the impact of not using CPAP first-hand (versus the "armchair doctors" in this thread who think OSA is the equivalent of not getting enough sleep, which is objectively wrong).
Luigi was not singled out. He wanted an exception to a longstanding rule. PCA actually offered Luigi an exception to the rule, as long as he did not disclose it publicly. He refused that offer because he wanted it to be public. So Luigi would not take "yes" for an answer. In response to his refusal, PCA said they would not give him an exception publicly. In other words, his question was asked, considered carefully, and answered in a timely fashion a very long time ago. The only reason it has dragged on is because he refused to accept either "yes" or "no" as an answer.
The reasons why the PCA would not give him a public exception should be glaringly obvious. First, giving him a give him an exception publicly would likely **** off all of those did submit data. Second, any organization that willfully violates its own rules creates immense legal liability when previously it had none. I can't believe I have to spell this out -- Boeing's liability isn't because a door plug fell off the plane (sometimes unexpected things happen) -- they are being sued, and will almost certainly lose, because they did not follow their own rules that would have prevented the door plug from ever falling off. Willfully violating your own rules is a lightning rod for liability -- why would PCA ever agree to having an exception to their own rules broadly broadcast to the public (especially considering that the reach of this thread is far beyond just PCA and RL at this point)????
When you refuse to accept either a "yes" or a "no" answer from an organization, the organization is not the problem.
Luigi was never wronged or singled out. PCA has required CPAP data for those with OSA for many years. Other racers have complied with the rule and had no issue with it (at least one posted as much in this thread). I don't think anybody else, who actually has OSA, has objected to the rule in this thread. That compliance is not surprising because it is trivially easy to provide the CPAP data and doesn't reveal any meaningful private information. It's also not surprising because those with non-trivial OSA know the impact of not using CPAP first-hand (versus the "armchair doctors" in this thread who think OSA is the equivalent of not getting enough sleep, which is objectively wrong).
Luigi was not singled out. He wanted an exception to a longstanding rule. PCA actually offered Luigi an exception to the rule, as long as he did not disclose it publicly. He refused that offer because he wanted it to be public. So Luigi would not take "yes" for an answer. In response to his refusal, PCA said they would not give him an exception publicly. In other words, his question was asked, considered carefully, and answered in a timely fashion a very long time ago. The only reason it has dragged on is because he refused to accept either "yes" or "no" as an answer.
The reasons why the PCA would not give him a public exception should be glaringly obvious. First, giving him a give him an exception publicly would likely **** off all of those did submit data. Second, any organization that willfully violates its own rules creates immense legal liability when previously it had none. I can't believe I have to spell this out -- Boeing's liability isn't because a door plug fell off the plane (sometimes unexpected things happen) -- they are being sued, and will almost certainly lose, because they did not follow their own rules that would have prevented the door plug from ever falling off. Willfully violating your own rules is a lightning rod for liability -- why would PCA ever agree to having an exception to their own rules broadly broadcast to the public (especially considering that the reach of this thread is far beyond just PCA and RL at this point)????
When you refuse to accept either a "yes" or a "no" answer from an organization, the organization is not the problem.
08-19-2024, 07:12 PM
#1774
Advanced
08-19-2024, 07:17 PM
#1775
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,677
Received 1,810 Likes
on
1,205 Posts
08-19-2024, 07:20 PM
#1776
Drifting
The mission to simplify the medical process was potentially viable and winnable if it was approached correctly. It wasn't. The sooner that is understood, the sooner progress can be made. But you're right -- continue to encourage the current course, it's working really well...
The following users liked this post:
mobius911 (08-19-2024)
08-19-2024, 07:53 PM
#1778
08-19-2024, 07:55 PM
#1779
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,677
Received 1,810 Likes
on
1,205 Posts
08-19-2024, 08:43 PM
#1781
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 13,309
Received 4,492 Likes
on
2,555 Posts
If that's your goal, I think you're going about it the wrong way. Nobody at the top is going to get fired as a result of your actions. Instead, they're more likely to band together and align against you.
08-19-2024, 08:55 PM
#1782
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Manifold
If that's your goal, I think you're going about it the wrong way. Nobody at the top is going to get fired as a result of your actions. Instead, they're more likely to band together and align against you.
08-19-2024, 09:38 PM
#1784
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Patience, indeed...
The great Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis was famously quoted saying, way back in the early 20th century, that "Sunshine is said to be the best of disinfectants".
While some may debate the methods used, who can deny that Todd's situation, and National's responses to them, has shed significant light on how the Club is prone to operate at the highest levels? As dues-paying members of a car club, shouldn't we, as the "rank and file", be afforded a reasonable degree of transparency by those fellow volunteers who are tasked, and have accepted, "Senior Management" responsibilities?
The great Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis was famously quoted saying, way back in the early 20th century, that "Sunshine is said to be the best of disinfectants".
While some may debate the methods used, who can deny that Todd's situation, and National's responses to them, has shed significant light on how the Club is prone to operate at the highest levels? As dues-paying members of a car club, shouldn't we, as the "rank and file", be afforded a reasonable degree of transparency by those fellow volunteers who are tasked, and have accepted, "Senior Management" responsibilities?
The following 3 users liked this post by DKP 97 C2 Coupe:
08-19-2024, 09:43 PM
#1785
Originally Posted by dgrobs
That's "Bloviated"?
I know what effectuate is. Thanks, was looking for bloviated.
I know what effectuate is. Thanks, was looking for bloviated.