Rocky Mountain Response to the GTF Report (Short Version)

Rocky Mountain Response to the GTF Report (Short Version)

At the recent ASEA sponsored and facilitated Governance Task Force session on June 2 and 3, 2013 recommendations were proposed.  The PSIA-RM –AASI Board of Directors would like to relay our response to these recommendations.  The core principles we stand on are:

  • The PSIA-RM-AASI Board continues to hold that we are not signing the existing Affiliation Agreement.  We desire an organization that has the Divisions as its members and is there to serve its membership needs.
  • We believe the model of governance recommended is a structure from the top down inserting control by 1) redefining ASEA as an individual membership organization, 2) taking ownership of the marks, logos, and intellectual properties, and 3) clouding the process by focusing on accreditation.
  • WE ARE COMMITTED TO A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION and remain WILLING TO CONSIDER different models of governance.  PSIA-RM-AASI will continue to run its business of providing education and certification programs and fulfill our responsibilities to our mission and our members.

The PSIA-AASI governance reform report leads you to believe that those in attendance were in agreement, when in actuality, there was not a vote or process to confirm any type of agreement.  Our recommendation of a Minority Report was disregarded.  The report also lists “Defining the purpose of PSIA-AASI vis-à-vis the Divisions” as a key issue for this group.  The only model entertained was one that reinforces ASEA’s position over the Divisions and recommended the concept of “dual membership”.  We feel at this point we must remember that to become an ASEA member you must first be a member of the Division.  Thus we feel a more ideal model would be one in which the membership of ASEA would be the Divisions.

While addressing the National Board of Directors structure and recommendations, options for proportional representation and voting were discussed, but were negated by the proposed super majority.  With the “Divisions as Members Model” the RM Board could nominate, vet and approve any representation of their members to the national organization and maintains its right to terminate their representation.  In the changes recommended for PSIA-AASI Board of Directors Duty of Loyalty policy statement we find the inclusion of the phrase “for the benefit of its membership”, a ploy to claim the Divisions’ membership their own.

The Divisions are in the business of education and certification.  We feel that discussion of accreditation further shows intent by ASEA to control the Divisions and their business.   Further issues of accreditation cloud the horizon of ASEA’s role to the divisions.  We recommend that the divisions maintain their collaborative efforts to develop shared standards in this regard.

In summary we find many points in the stated recommendations that need refinement and raise questions that contradict our core principles.  Let’s look at a concept that we, as a collective group of snowsports professionals, can agree upon.  “Envision an organization where:  1) We agree to use the collective developed educational materials that fall under ATS.  2) We agree to uphold these collectively created ethical guidelines.  3) We have a members’ buyers’ club and marketing group.  Compliance with 1 and 2 gets you the use of the logos and marks because that is the core of their value:  an educational philosophy and behavior that demonstrates we are professionals in service to guests and the industry as a whole.”   We feel this can be achieved—

If you would like to read the complete PSIA-RM-AASI response to the PSIA-AASI Governance Task Force see RM response to GTF report in the scoop at

We welcome your thoughts, input, and questions regarding these issues.


-PSIA-Rocky Mountain-AASI Board of Directors

Scroll to Top