turboplanner

Well go back to having a break and relax - you're being vindicated day by day.

Well the circumstances of what happened could be slightly different, however:

• RAA contains several lawyers who could quickly make a decision on this.
   
   
  
• If Runciman puts the Association in a position of spending members money, then members should insist that he recompenses them.
   
   
  

If someone has breached procedure in calling this board meeting then they should also recompense the members for the expense.

These people are putting your money up, and need to be brought to account.

Runciman also should think this through;leaving now in my opinion will do him less damage than a General Meeting where, unless registrations miraculously free up member outrage will be at a higher level today.

Do you seriously think the board should be helping itself to members money to legally fight out a spat between its members?

You know the irony here is that about 2 years ago Verbal blows were exchanged between myself and people like Captain and Turboplanner where the things I was posting were almost word for word what you are saying.To me at the time It was unthinkable that things were as bad as they were stating and I thought they and some of the other contributers were delusional. However over time they and others have drip fed details that time and time again have checked out. I still from time to time have problems with the emotivness that is brought to bear in these debates and would prefer that they are mereley statements of fact that people can check for themselves but to be honest forums without emotion is probably as likely as me winning lotto.

 

I believe it is unarguably the case that the current circumstances are as bad as we have ever seen in RAAUS in the short time Ive been a member (approx 8 years) and under our democratic processes the only people who the membership can hold to account are the board. They can be held to account for their own failings, or their lack of oversight of the employees.

 

Furthermore the things that are wrong at present will take a concerted effort to put right, but before we do that we need to remove the reasons they went wrong in the first place.

 

I'd point you back to those connversations so you can see that I was indeed arguing as you are now, but all of the governing body hiostory was removed about a year ago (+/- 6 months) and the history that could show this is a recuring theme isnt on this site any longer

 

Im sure Captain and Turboplanneer will "Like" this email and can therefore attest to its accuracy that I was indeed their biggest opponent back then and yet I find myself firmly on the otherside of the fence now as a result of checks and tests of claims made where I can.

 

Andy

I meekly posted a "like" because it's true, and there were some other prominent members who put spokes in the wheel with fantasy posts about not having a dog (the board) and barking yourself.

At that time I pointed out the often fatal results when this happens in an Association, including I think the lovely lady, the club sweetheart who quietly refurnished her house with an eight dollars for me, two dollars for you approach to their fundraising.

The price of freedom really is eternal vigilance.

Brett the reason I'm posting this is that Ed Herring extensively used this forum along with a couple of others, got himself elected and that's pretty much the last we heard of him.

He runs a big risk of being seen as, rightly or wrongly, being seen as part of the problem.

Andy,I have been absent from the forums for a while trying to get our club back on track. We have the same dysfunctional issues and a small minority trying to wreck things. One of the things I am proposing is a "Standards of Conduct and Ethics" document to get rid of the bullying, harassment and other unsavoury tactics of those who were originally deposed at the last AGM. While this is not as important as the complete management operational overhaul at Ra-Aus it seems that this stuff is very much alive & well in RA-Aus. I have changed the club name but there will be other things that need change as well and it does not cover employees as I took all that stuff out. I have attached a copy here FYI.

 

By the way do you still want me to send you the form given you already have the numbers.

 

Kevin

Pete, best not to guess at it - It's all laid out in the Constitution and Rules, both of which are on the RAA website.

There has been a mass of disinformation posted in the last couple of months and I'm not sure that hasn't been deliberate (not referring to your post)

Anyone / business taking on CASA with Lawyers is either stark raving mad or equipped with balls so large the testosterone has masked good judgement ...I will always remember what my barrister told me years ago in a court action I took against a major Telco :

 

"... remember David, if you want justice you wont get it from the Courts ... justice is only available to those who can afford it ..."

"Well" said Turbo, "I've just been out spining"

"I've been trying to find airfields below me" said Brine

"I" said Ahlot ".....................

I think the CASA lawyers are better resourced than ours would be. In the GA and Airline world, CASA can immediately suspend an AOC and provide reasons later. Such drastic action is usually only taken when serious "Safety Concerns" are found and usually only when there are fare paying pasengers involved.Using the same powers to suspend RA-Aus ability to renew registrations without written notice and explanation is a nonsence. I don't understand why the President and the entire Board are not camped on CASA's and the Ministers doorstep demanding a "Please Explain".

Hi Turbo,I asked the President today if he had received the formal CASA Audit report yet. He said no.

 

CASA can sometimes take some time, as I understand it, they run a lot of stuff through their legal people first.

 

There are a lot of people putting in a great effort to fix things, and I am fully aware our distributors and manufactures are hurting big time, and I really feel for them.

 

All I know at this stage is our paperwork and procedures were not up to scratch. Were CASA nit picking? I really don't know, but I can understand they would have, by this stage, demanded zero tolerance of any errors.

 

Cheers,

 

John McK

The Board is yet to see the CASA report on the last CASA audit, so I can't make official comment. I do know some unofficial reasons from a private chat with CASA. We are currently waiting for the Ex to release the report to the full Board.John McK

If board members are not yet aware of the reasons the people they represent are being grounded, I would have expected some vigorous action at board level - people are losing in some cases substantial amounts of money, and they would be leaving themselves open knowing there were major issues, but not doing anything to fix them.

Robinsm

I also was referring to the board members in reference to the time frame.

As much as several times, maybe 5, 6 or 7 I have pointed out that "CEO" was a description given to Lee Ungermann and has no part in an Incorporated Association, this comes up in conversation as if we were talking about the head of a large organization. The position was a sham.

Also in an Incorporated Association the Members do the work, they do not go off flying and leave the running of their organization with no one at the wheel.

The position strongly and repeatedly was pushed by some 18 months ago that members should leave the board in charge and let them do the work, is now clearly exposed for the garbage it was then.

That is not to say you don't appoint representatives to ensure the housework is done, or employees to do the processing, it's just that you don't employ the additional levels of management found in a Company.

I see even after I've explained the additional cost factor of a Company structure someone was advocating that yesterday, and the only objection to that would be the cost to members.......probably from about 12,980 of them, so you have to take all sides into consideration.

Or even if he wasn't the person flying the aircraft.

As to what role people might play in the future? well if the approach we are seeking happens then the decision as what employees (casual or full time) we employ and what they do, will be up to the operational arm of the organisation not the board itself.....

If past transparency is argued to be inadequate, then ambushing members at a public meeting is just as bad.

If you argue for transparency, you have to be transparent yourself.

If you argue incompetence, you have to have a clear alternative.

At the present time the members in general have not seen CASA documents referring to the central issue of Audit failures; if you don't know what the problem is then how could you possibly put forward a fix.

Would it be possible to put a time limit on the length of representation, and the number of times you can be elected to the board.

There are better alternatives to fix that situation than a fixed term, because if you go down that path, then in a different scenario when the Association is being managed and represented by an exceptionally good person, you knock him/her out by the time limit. I know some Associations which have been brilliantly run by the same President for 30 years.

CFI, maybe try another version of last night's effort this morning.

What a load of BS CFI, anyone can see straight through that spin. There is a current audit issue that must be fixed. Who have you been talking to?

There's nothing to stop you sitting around yarning about building and flying planes now OME, but if you're thinking of a Chapter as a power base which puts resolutions to a State base which debates those resolutions and if the voting is right puts those resolutions to the National body - in other words vertical integration, that's pretty much like the Liberal Party machine, and it can take locals a number of years of campaigning to get something up. Sounds good, but you (locals) don't have the horsepower in the state debate, whereas now you can call up your board member, and he puts it on the table at the national level......twice a year admittedly, but that could be improved on.

You are actually yarning about building and flying planes on this site by the way, and to a much wider audience,

Are you saying Rec Flying is rooted OME?

Perhaps RAAus should take into consideration the tyranny of distance and establish a structure that has "Chapters" as the grass roots format.Initially, a Chapter could be established at airfield locations where members fly, eg in NSW we could have a Chapter based on The Oaks, Warner Vale, Bathurst etc. Country members who fly off their own strips, could be part of the Chapter at the nearest public airfield. Then we could have Sections which consist of the Chapters from the same Region, eg, The Carbonne Section consisting of Bathurst, Cowra and Orange Chapters. After that, we have the State Group which would consist of all the Sections. Then the State Group comes together as the National Body.

 

Old Man Emu

There were about 30 operating locations similar to airfield in Victoria, and 105 total in Australia, with links also to the US

The umbrella over them was a State body

The umbrella over that was a Federal Body

Of the 55 Chapters in Victoria there were about 15 with their own National structure, so these had dual representation at the National level.

So you had representation as a driver, representation as a car owner/builder, and representation as a Promoter etc.

(The equivalent within RAA would be that foundation ultralights would have their own State Chapters and a National body in terms of specifications, operations, servicing etc, and the States locked into the umbrella State Body, and the umbrella State Body locked into the National Body)

This was the mid 1980's when PC's were just starting to become popular, so all contact was by meetings, phone, mail, and fax.

As you can see, hundreds of people were actively involved in their Associations compared to RAA in the present with just 13 representatives meeting twice a year, but most decisions being made by an executive three at times.

At the State level this worked very cleanly, nothing in the way of new information, problems, or opportunities escaped this network.

At the National Body Level, which consisted of the State umbrella organizations, and which met for two days once a year it didn't work as well because:

• although the Agenda consisted of issues that couldn't be resolved at State level it still was huge (you could argue we should have met monthly, but cost and volunteer time was against us and we were already meeting several times a month in other positions.)
   
   
  
• the element of territory defense applied - if you criticised Tasmania for example, that was good for an hour's argument, if you criticised the Sprint Car Racing Association, you needed smelling salts etc.
   
   
  

Oh, and the cost per member was Nil at the National level, and forty two cents at State level, and in Victoria we dealt directly with the Minister for Sport and Recreation - the Government dropped the CASA equivalent (Department of Labour and Industry as an unworkable risk pit).

The member base was about 5,000 to 8,000.

So, in a roundabout way OME, I come back to your Chapter suggestion.

For the Chapter idea to work you would first need to motivate the members, and only this week a couple of clowns were still arguing that they "only wanted to fly", and viewed their obligations under self administration as "politics", so you've got an issue there.

A bigger opportunity is electronic communication in all its forms.

For example you can reach all 13000 members with a broadcast email or SMS to tell them there's an issue in real time

You can conduct two way webinars

You can conduct meetings where people can vote

and you can do all those things without anyone having to leave their desks, so you don't have to have district and State representation, you can cut it to suit today's requirements.

Runciman particularly didn't want financial/Association information going to non members.

It probably isn't realised that this information is not private, its public record through the ACT Department of Justice and readily available to members, non members, CASA, Aircraft manufacturers here and overseas, FAA, EAA etc...............and it doesn't tell a very good story, in fact by lumping so-called office expenses/salaries etc together in one big lump it could be argued that it is misleading and possibly illegal, particularly when details become known, so trying to keep the information from non members is only going to exacerbate the situation by causing forensic examination when the data his DoJ. Not a smart thing to do when you're in charge of public monies.

One of my friends is a Walkley award journalist, and I have dealt with many journalists over many years and got a lot of front pages including front page of Melbourne's Age. Through this time I've rarely, maybe 2% been misquoted, and only about the same % did journalists take a shortcut and get the facts wrong.

So the recurring theme on this forum that journalists write sh$t is inaccurate and uninformed and lowers the standard of the forum.

Didn't ATC became concerned because he was departing his flight path?

Didn't he fail to return radio calls?

While the present situation is frustrating for owners in the extreme, just a reminder not to succumb to flying the aircraft anyway because it is someone else's fault.

If you were to have an accident, the status of the aircraft on the day is what counts, same as car registration.

So it could get a lot more painful than sitting on the ground.

Going well - is that five or 6 splits so far.

No one's going to be able to follow all this in a month's time.

If we are doing some job on behalf of CASA and the process we are following has been in practice for some time and CASA has not required a change, could you consider they have failed their duty to ensure the processes are adequate. They can't abbrogate their duty of care , as you have pointed out many times. They either do it all themselves or monitor the process they have allowed to be in place and ensure it's adequacy. That is my point. Nev