JUNIOR MEMBERSHIP

[Admin]

30 December 2011 JUNIOR MEMBERSHIP

 

The e-mail concerning the cancellation of the Junior Membership sent to all junior members on 23 Dec 11 is hereby rescinded. It was sent out due to a miscommunication between the board and staff of RA-Aus. However, all members are to be aware that this category of membership is under review and will be discussed and decided upon at the February Board meeting. Once a decision has been made all Junior Members will be informed of the outcome.

 

 

[winsor68]

Miscommunication at HQ... hmmm.

 

 

[winsor68]

Looking forward to an in depth review of the processes that have led to this "miscommunication"....

 

 

[Admin]

Personally I think there are two elements to this...one that it may have been a miscommunication that the email was sent out but 2, a decision was actually made that the Junior Members would get a refund and free mag subscription till they are 14 years and 6 months of age...that would seem to me that a decision of some kind was made by someone irrespective of any miscommunication of whether to send an email out or not, so who made that decision, I am told by 4 board members that they knew nothing of it...just my opinion.

 

 

[winsor68]

Standard operating procedures apply then?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well David Isaacs has explained in detail what the procedures and requirements are to move forward.

 

I'm not sure if our PL Insurers have been consulted, and they would also need to accept any policy before moving forward.

 

What happened was not the fault of the current Board of Management.

 

So if they screwed up comunications, that's all they did - not WW3.

 

David has explained that any new decision cannot take effect for some months.

 

Time for some patience.

 

 

[facthunter]

A common problem with organisations that have largish and dispersed, committees of management..

 

They discuss things ..Fine.

 

They vote and pass resolutions.. good also.

 

Then fall down on the most important part.

 

WHO is to action it , how and by when and who is responsible for seeing it finalised/documented/signed off? The minutes must record who is to do it.. Nev

 

 

[David Isaac]

There is an other thread started on Junior membership which just duplicates matters; perhaps the content of the other thread could be put at the beginning of this thread to keep some continuity on the discussion.

 

There is discussion currently before the board on Junior membership following the resolution at the September Board meeting. The following was reported in the synopsis of the September Board meeting which can be found on the RA Aus notice Board:

 

"The CEO expressed his concerns regarding aspects of having very young Junior Members. Following

 

the discussion on this matter it was resolved that the issue of new Student Pilot Certificates to

 

persons under the age of 14 years and six months be suspended while the matter was investigated.

 

No current holders of Student Pilot Certificates would be affected by this temporary suspension."

 

It seems the perceived 'concern' centers around the definition of 'very young Junior members' to use the CEO's terminology because it was the CEO that was the proposer and initiator of the discussion not any Board member. I guess a reasonable person could assume that an age below 14 years and six months specified in the Board meeting Synopsis statement above could potentially be regarded as 'very young' in the context of the implied 'concern'.

 

NO minimum age is set for training under instruction in GA and neither is there a minimum age in our Ops manual. The only minimum age with requirements kicks in at 16 for GA and 15 for RA Aus. The difference being that you do not need to be a member of anything to undertake GA instruction but you must be an RA Aus member to undertake instruction in RAA. This is complicated because there is NO junior membership class in the RA Aus Constitution with this matter being poorly administered by the previous RA Aus administration and Board.

 

Since the 'concern' surrounding this matter was raised by the CEO we would have to assume there is some safety concern based on some form of quantifiable risk assessment documentation, surely not based on some unquantifiable ‘what if’ scenario which would be hardly a balanced science and in all probability would fail reasonable scrutiny. What are our insurers saying about it … perhaps that is more pertinent and may be a valid argument if they see it as an unacceptable risk to insure, but somehow I doubt there could be an increase in risk given the instructor is the pilot in command regardless of the age of the student.

 

So if this is not a problem for GA, why would we make it a problem for RA Aus? Why would we want greater restrictions in RA Aus training than GA training? That would be contrary to our charter.

 

I suspect the current structure of the regulations assumes a reasonable person would determine an appropriate age for instruction, that being said I would doubt a reasonable person could suggest an 8 year old was a suitable age, but there would be some 12 year olds that could benefit from instruction. Remember we are talking about under the direct supervision of an instructor we are not talking about solo.

 

The board will make their decision at the February Board meeting, so if you feel strongly either way you need to contact your local State Representative and ask him to support your position.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I think that pretty much sums it up David. The key is there in an instructor in the seat, not a parent.