Natfly Question Time

[turboplanner]

The meeting with board members at Natfly would have represented about 0.4% of the members.

 

S0 around 9,570 Members are in the dark, and even the members on this site have only been given the odd piece of information, or something like "that question was answered"

 

This thread is for posts where more of the membership can be filled in on how many people attended, what happened, what the answers were, and so on.

 

 

[Gibbo]

I've found lots of small snipits of what occured at the Meeting but could someone put up a short summery of what occured, unless of course it breaks the official secrets act.. :thumb_down:

 

 

[Yenn]

The first question, as I recall it went something like: "Has the CEO ever told a current Board Member (words to the effect of) get off the Board or face legal action?

 

The President sought a response from the CEO who said something like I don't remember - take it on notice.

 

I find it hard to believe that anyone could not remember a statement like that, so that leads me to believe that the CEO did make a atatement along those lines. Hopefully the truth will come out and hopefully I will be mistaken.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Honestly i think that the whole board, good and bad, plus the exec should be all stood down and a caretaker put in place to oversee the office staff whilst a full legal investigation by the Feds is conducted.

 

Then re advertise the paying positions and have a new election.

 

I find the whole show so far pretty insulting really tired of paying good money to fund what just seems to be a bully boy club of dubious characters who have no intent of complying with the laws or the wishes and needs of the membership.

 

I'll say it one more time i do not wish to belong to the RAAus as it does not represent the aircraft i have been flying since 1976 IE the original ANO95:10 aircraft.

 

I find it undemocratic and unconstitutional that i am forced to comply under the threat of jail to support what i believe to be a corrupt management.

 

This will be my recommendation to my MP and to the CEO of CASA. Any problems or pockets not deep enough?

 

 

[turboplanner]

The pennies are starting to drop.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Typical, ignore the problem and hope it goes away? Think not. Look what apathy and poor voting numbers have produced so far. Sitting on the fence will not solve the rot that has set in. It will have to be dealt with post haste or it will continue to fester.

 

Penny dropped a long time ago. Unfortunatley it is not enough to entice the apathitic types off their fence to take some action. Maybe the threat of operating directly under CASA will move them into gear.

 

It will be intersesting to see what the Exec have to say in the next Magazine issue. No doubt they will blame all the mess on a few unhappy individuals that they will say are unjust and unfair in ridiculing the hard working exec and board members.

 

So what was exactly said at Natfly. Didn't anyone take notes? There must have been more asked and said than the little bit above or is no one ready to put in print what went on at that members meeting. i for one would like to know what the reason was behind making a board member resign under the threat of legal action.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Not a bad idea BR - until we see what they say in the Magazine.

 

It must be months since I raised the financial question, and the very abbreviated information handed out at Natfly was just current information. The all important 2009 equivalent, and the money in between, which is either still there somewhere, or has gone down the plug hole is still to come out.

 

A an uncommonly wise head on another forum correctly identified the Achiles heel of the RA Aus membership. If it goes under or comes to a halt for some reason everyone stops flying.

 

Now I don't think DOTARS would allow that to be permanent - there's the option of VH Registration for complying aircraft, and a new body could be established, but after reading about the time it took for a CPL who had obtained a new job, but lost it in the months it took CASA to update an endorsement, there would be a lot of people on the ground.

 

Now I'm not for a minute suggesting the 2011 figures are not correct or that RA Aus is in any danger this year, but when you hear the story of where we were financially in 2009 the slide is sufficient to start asking questions about 2015 or so.

 

I'm starting to think it might be better to call for an external Inquiry and an Administrator, but maybe the next Magazine will tell

 

 

[turboplanner]

Updated

 

 

[HunterJ]

Evening Gentlemen and of course Ladies if present.

 

I'm generally not one for supporting the potentially destructive functions that forums can have but I do read and watch to see what is happening and I feel compelled to make a number of comments at this time.

 

Having had significant experience in the executive management of Not For Profit organisations and consultancy in business structure and development, I am dissapointed to see a familiar pattern developing with our governing body that is not healthy for its own existance, its staff and certainly its membership at large. If what I am reading and and hearing is correct then there needs to be some serious consideration given to how the whole deal operates for the future.

 

Whether we like it or not RAAus is a 'business' and the elected directors have a duty of care to ensure that the organisation is conducted properly in all areas. This does not mean that the directors should manage the organisation from the board table. Their role is oversight and policy development and the day to day management of the 'business' is the role of a competetent CEO/General Manager (or whatever label you want to attach) who is a business manager in every sense and has no conflicts of interest percieved or otherwise. In many cases recruiting a person from outside the industry is a better option as they are clean and fresh.

 

Too many organisations feel the need to reinvent the wheel and not take advantage of successful models that are already in place. I hate comparisons with the US but EAA IS a successful model and many parts of it would certainly be adaptable and applicable to RAAus.

 

An organisation needs to have a relevant mission statement, a 'business' plan which outlines short, medium and long term goals and objectives and in our case due recognition and promotion of all facets of the industry - its an old cliche but hell its true, if you fail to plan you plan to fail!

 

Apologies if I offend anyone with my following comments but please take them as constructive and not personal attacks. I guess I will be tarred and feathered by some but lets look at the issues clinically.

 

To many individuals, the election and appointment as a director of a not for profit organisation is seen as a position of status and power - somewhat like a CFI needing to wear four bar epaulets to prove who they are or a veterinarian having the need to call themselves doctor. It is also seen as the opportunity to go to town a clean up a mess - actual or percieved. Many people have agendas, generally short term personal ones and not necessarily progressive or visionary for the organisation.

 

In many cases those who seek election are highly passionate and well intentioned for which they should be acknowledged but they may not have the business maturity and acument to fulfill their role which sees them at a disadvantage. Simply, the appointment as a director is an appointment to a lot of damned hard work for no return other than the satisfaction of playing a part in success and growth or the pain of ridicule in the case of membership rejection.

 

There are a number of areas in whic RAAus as an organisation has to step up to the plate and some of these are being addressed but certainly well overdue - the magazine is one but the main areas that need the most attention right now is corporate professionalism and efficiency for the sake of members and newcomers to the industry.

 

I'm happy to expand any comments that I have made and again, please do not take them as derogaotory or personal attack, they are more to motivate discussion on the bigger picture.

 

Sincerely

 

Hunter Jones

 

RAAus 019706

 

 

[Hildy]

I'll say it one more time i do not wish to belong to the RAAus as it does not represent the aircraft i have been flying since 1976 IE the original ANO95:10 aircraft.I find it undemocratic and unconstitutional that i am forced to comply under the threat of jail to support what i believe to be a corrupt management.

LSAs and the ilk should be moved out of RAA and merged with the light end of GA.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well the discussion in the GA community is about the RPL (Restricted Pilot Licence)

 

This is not the now defunct Restricted PPL which was a stepping stone to Unrestricted Private Pilot Licence.

 

It would have a driver's licence medical standard, with appropriate area restrictions but you could take up a C172, Jab, Drifter or even one of Ozzie's flying shopping bags wihout the need for a separate organization.

 

However that's a different subject and people interested in debating the future dierection of flying in Australia should set up another thread.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Hunter, I fell for the same trap, and it was pointed out to me that we don't have directors, we are in an Incorporated Association and not a Company, and the CEO isn't a CEO, and in fact should be using a different title.

 

All good thoughts though.

 

 

[HunterJ]

Hi Turbo

 

In reading the post from David which outlined in detail the events at the meeting I agree, the behaviour is dramatically less than a membership should expect from any elected representative.

 

Running an organisation such as RAAus openly and transparently and with vision takes leadership, guts and especially the ability to listen - not seeing it here!

 

Time to do some Articles of Association ah sorry Constitution gazing I think as that is one area where a'boys club' can hide!

 

Many people are not aware of the subtle differences between the two roles (CEO/GM) butany way many thanks for your response.

 

Unfortunately, the majority of not for profit interest based organisations suffer from this malady in cycles, the 'bad' guys make a mess of it and the 'good' guys fix it only for it to all happen again later on.

 

I'll go back into my corner now and keep watching with interest.

 

Cheers

 

HJ

 

 

[turboplanner]

Good assessment Hunter

 

 

[Hildy]

Hildy,I think you may have overlooked the benefit of the RAA category in that no CASA medical is required. A significant number of aircraft would be sold if the owner pilots were required to renter the GA field if not for the medical reasons alone.

Make a class 3 medical with further relaxed requirements. Don't require a DAME to do it (just a regular doctor).

 

At the moment we have self-certification which is problematic because there are a lot of people who don't realise that they're sick.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Make a class 3 medical with further relaxed requirements. Don't require a DAME to do it (just a regular doctor).At the moment we have self-certification which is problematic because there are a lot of people who don't realise that they're sick.

Their Doctors usually inform them they will have an issue meeting driver's licence conditions Hildy.

 

 

[Hildy]

how many men haven't visited the doctor in thirty years except to get a sick note for work?

 

 

[turboplanner]

how many men haven't visited the doctor in thirty years except to get a sick note for work?

In the overall wash, car fatalities are already very low compared to many other forms of death.

 

So that's a low starting base

 

Car fatalities resulting from a medical incapacitation are a minute percentage of overall car fatalities

 

So when you look at the risk assessment like that, the car driver licence system, which takes into account such things as eyesight, epylepsy etc. presents a very low risk to other people. I would suggest a lot lower than the risk posed to people catching trains and walking around the City at night.

 

 

[facthunter]

Motor vehicle accidents kill about 1300 annually, in aus.. Medical misadventure (in australia) around 10,000. In America it's around 650,000. Never investigated and covered up by compatriots. Usually wrong diagnosis wrong administration of drugs, drug incompatibility, fouled up operations etc. What's the number of sport type aviation fatalities due to illness? Hardly any, and we only carry ourselves and ONE other INFORMED person. There are plenty of deaths of pilots who do the full class one medical. You could do a full medical and drop dead in the carpark on the way home. I've personally known of that .Also a 28 year old airline pilot Heart attack unpredicted, never flew again. Diabetes if acute, and not controlled, poses a real risk. Maybe more in a driving situation. I know of one pilot who had a crook ticker and died in a plane. You wouldn't know if it was suicide or something else. Didn't affect anybody else.

 

Responsible people carrying others , do take these things seriously. The fact that you have to state that you "meet the medical standards required to operate a private vehicle" is significant. It's not the same as saying that I am driving a car and nobody has found out that I'm blind and have epilepsy etc. Wouldn't be much point in insuring your plane if all that came out in the wash.

 

If you have some medical conditions you become required to do whatever is necessary to satisfy the authorities, on an ongoing basis. I was mistakenly put in this category recently, so I know what is involved. I have cleared that up, so now I'm just like anybody else, no requirements

 

With CASA , it's not so easy. But the principle is the same. If you go in to have a check-up just to be sure, you can end up even though the test was 100% clear, having a problem proving that things are OK, and never were a problem. No test can guarantee that, so you're up the creek .

 

Regarding heart assessment . The Stress ECG (Bruce's Protocol) with ultrasound scan is regarded as one of the most valid assements. An angiogram is sometimes used but there is a definate and significant morbidity associated with the procedure.

 

Food poisoning or dehydration is probably as likely to incapacitate the average person, in an aviation situation. Nev