RAA Aus resignations

[pudestcon]

And have you seen those ears!

Yep, first hand!!

Pud

 

 

[robinsm]

So after all the tooing and froing we still dont have the first hand facts. Oh well , never let the facts get in the way of a good second and third hand supposition. Instead of dropping hints, will someone please publish the first hand facts so we can put this issue to bed.

 

 

[turboplanner]

So after all the tooing and froing we still dont have the first hand facts. Oh well , never let the facts get in the way of a good second and third hand supposition. Instead of dropping hints, will someone please publish the first hand facts so we can put this issue to bed.

To get first hand facts YOU have to contact a board member, otherwise they are second hand facts. This message seems to be taking a while to get through.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yep, first hand!!Pud

I can just imagine you two rag and bone men together, parts all over the floor, tongues out the side of your mouths, gaffer tape and WD40 all over the place!

 

 

[robinsm]

Got it in one!

 

 

[M61A1]

To get first hand facts YOU have to contact a board member, otherwise they are second hand facts. This message seems to be taking a while to get through.

The picture I'm getting here is, anyone can phone a board member, then they have to tell you all about the "issues", but the "issues" are so private that they can't be posted on a forum. The "issues" can be spoken about on a forum, but not in a way that divulges any facts. ????????? Why even talk about it at all?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

ok that's seems about it in a nutshell.

 

 

[David Isaac]

........In fact if Im right David has perpetuated the issue. David you wrote that Legal proceedings were commenced, when Ian wrote Threatened/Commenced and I believe on what I know that the truth (and I only got told first hand) is just threatened. Is there a difference??? well I may be pedantic but in my opinion they are vastly different and from a risk to the organisation perspective.....

Indeed they are Andy and I have corrected my typo so to reflect what actually happened,

 

 

[Tomo]

To get first hand facts YOU have to contact a board member, otherwise they are second hand facts. This message seems to be taking a while to get through.

Why can't someone that has 'talked' to a board member post what they were told?!

 

This secrecy biz is starting to make me wonder!

 

 

[ave8rr]

193 posts on this subject and all that has been stated is that a number of 24 Registered aircraft were grounded for what ever reason.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Why can't someone that has 'talked' to a board member post what they were told?! This secrecy biz is starting to make me wonder!

I'd suggest there are two reasons:-

1. As has already been said, miscommunication occurs as information is passed from person to person.

 

2. Getting too specific may make the poster a target of legal proceedings. Particularly if they convey something that is not strictly accurate, or is perhaps open to misinterpretation.

 

That said, some of the topics have been aired in a generic form.

 

Apparently, your wonderment has not yet reached the level to motivate you to seek first hand information, as yet!

 

 

[storchy neil]

I'd suggest there are two reasons:-1. As has already been said, miscommunication occurs as information is passed from person to person.

2. Getting too specific may make the poster a target of legal proceedings. Particularly if they convey something that is not strictly accurate, or is perhaps open to misinterpretation.

 

That said, some of the topics have been aired in a generic form.

 

Apparently, your wonderment has not yet reached the level to motivate you to seek first hand information, as yet!

agree david misinterpreation of information can do a lot of damage to the cause

 

as i found out that what was said to others by me is not what is coming back the to me as what was said in the first instance neil

 

 

[Tomo]

I'd suggest there are two reasons:-1. As has already been said, miscommunication occurs as information is passed from person to person.

2. Getting too specific may make the poster a target of legal proceedings. Particularly if they convey something that is not strictly accurate, or is perhaps open to misinterpretation.

 

That said, some of the topics have been aired in a generic form.

 

Apparently, your wonderment has not yet reached the level to motivate you to seek first hand information, as yet!

Yes I guess that's true about the misinterpreting thing...

 

 

[rankamateur]

Very diplotatic Andy, I am that uninformed reader and I don't know what to think!

 

 

[turboplanner]

It's killing you all isn't it!

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Very diplotatic Andy, I am that uninformed reader and I don't know what to think!

Then if that drives you ring a board member to try and understand if "all is well in RAA Land" then fantastic, Ive achieved my aim. Im of the view (personal view only) that things arent currently fantastic, but unlike Ian I dont believe that we are "basket case" (my words not his) and we can address through evolution not revolution. However thats my view and you need to form your own view on that by the means I've already identified. As Ian said:-

 

1) There are a number of legal issues in play, perhaps more than there should be if management was "Benchmark". And that statement pertains to a whole period of time because as we all know a missmanagement event now, will, if its going to, appears as a legal event quite some time later. So a rough measure of "Is there too much legal activity" can not be attributed in total to the current exec, and all board members (unless they were around before, and during the management event that triggered the legal issue, and even then depending onwhat their historical individual fortitude/involvment was to address the underlying issue, if indeed it could have been addressed in advance). If you want more info, and you should because this is a summary designed to "DO NO DAMAGE TO OUR ORGANISATION" then ring your board member and discuss the legal issues with them. I believe that all those years ago Hippocrates had it spot on "Above all else do no harm"!

 

2) Related to 1) is the issue of RAA registration decisions and documentary evidence for approving individual aircraft types, or whole of type, to be registered on our register. That issue has spread across a time period that isnt again related entirely to the curent exec and board members. It resulted in unfavourable outcomes in the CASA Audit (in that specific area of the audit only) which then resulted in the current exec/board perhaps applying, in perfect hindsite, some management actions that are being questioned. Independent of that questioning work proceeds in resolving the underlying mistakes and while not finished substantial progress has been made. My personal assumption is that CASA must be satisfied because while they have issued a corrective action on RAA its hasnt been upissued to apply a timeframe or more draconian limitations. We know from other well publisized CASA action that if they were extremely concerned there would be timeframes or limitations like applied to Tiger which I sumarise to be "Take as long to fix this as you need, but by the way dont take to the sky again until its done"

 

3) there was speculation around insurance...and thats enough said on that issue.In this forum

 

4) and then, for me the most problematic, is that the board and exec and operations team still appear to be disfunctional. Is it that I apply a expected degree of co-operation and willingness to accept compromise when its required, and stick to right when compromise is a suboptimal outcome which is greater than an organisation like ours can reasonably be expected to produce in a non proffesional board and exec (and I dont mean they are acting in an unethical non professional way, they may b,e but I dont know enough to claim that) as opposed to paid professionals with an appropriate set of education on which to hang out the "professional" shingle. We have had many board members over the last few years that have not for one reason or another, not made it through a single term before resigning. That to me, above all else is indicative that things are not optimal.

 

So thats it from me on this issue, I wont be replying or saying another thing in public, I hope there is enough above for you to challenge my perceptions, and those that are perhaps more strongly put than I have and ring and test for yourself.

 

I will however contribute to a discussion that talks about ways we the members can assist in making things better than they are, and that discussion is constructive and unlikely to find it self center of a defimation action becuase people in a virtual world feel free to act far beyond what they would in the real world.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

P.S Another point that probably needs to be made as a result of 1) above. What is your personal liability as a member of the organisation. That answer (from me) has three parts and while I will put them there I AM NOT QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU ARE CONCERNED DO YOUR OWN INVESTIGATION /DUE DILLIGENCE.

 

RAA is an incorporated association. What does that mean? It means it has been given the ability to exist as a seperate legal entity and that is different from a bunch of people gathering together, where the group of itslef has no legal status and individually teh members are responsible for what the group does. This meand the incorporated association can legally contract with other parties (a Landlord, CASA, an employee etc) without every single member providing unique assent to do so.

 

The other major benefit is that someone wanting to commence legal action against the group will be suing the entity RAA and not the membership base. That means that in the even that the legal action were successful (and this is said only to illustrate a point not because I have a clue as to what the outcomes to 1) above will be) then damages are assessed againt the entity not the membership base. As a result, lets say that damages/costs awarded represnted $10 and the entity only own $3 of physical assets and money in the bank then the membership will not be asked to contribute the remaining $7 as a function of law, rather the membership executive may determine that we will all put in 10c each because it makes more sense to continue the entity than wind it up, but in the event that it made more sense to do the reverse , then so be it. The membership liability is the annual subscriptions only, and if they are in advance, then not even that.

 

So thats the individual member position. Now board members. These people are directing the association and for them liability in the context of a normal member is the same as above, however liability as a director is different and theer are circumstances that could occur where they have a degree of personal liability. That means that worst case, their entire family is at risk of loosing everything if things go badly for the entity. If we do nothing then you can see its hardly a fun position for someone who is not being paid to manage the entity and is the reason why many board members will comment "Im not being pasid for this". Its a subtle reminder that their personal risk has gone up, yet the remuneration that in a democracy usually accompanies risk has not increased. To address that aspect the entity normally pays for a special type of insurance which protects the board members against that risk. It doesnt protect them against an action occuring or all the legal stuff that goes with it, but at the end of the day with a worst case outcome should protect them financially (obviously, up to the limit of the policy).

 

And as for employees of the entity, they are entitled to state and federal legislated protections the same as every other employee within the state that the entity operates within. There is generally nothing that teh entity can do, or indeed should do, to remove those rights.

 

Someone who is a profeesional lawyer can correct me if Ive oversimplified, or, heaven forbid, completely missrepresented the facts.As identified above I have a single uni course and some life experience on which I base this answer and as such you probably paid what it was worth when you read it....

 

 

[Admin]

I think to may best serve you is to bring to your attention to 8. Indemnity and Legal exemption of the site rules that users have agreed to when registering:

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/site-rules-policies-etc-must-read.5325/

 

Also please take note of 10. Copyright Notice of the Site Rules as well

 

 

[David Isaac]

Are you trying to scare everybody off from Posting anything Ian?????

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Here's how I see it, pure and simple.................Imagine were all on a ship, (1800s style). Steve Runciman is the captain, the board members are all his Leutenants, (ships officers)... Then there are the ships crew, lead by the deck boss Steve Tizzard. One or two of the Leutenants don't like the workers boss, and thinks he should go. They decide to hop off at the next port, even though the captain no doubt needs them on his crew.

 

The Captain, whose responsibility it is to keep the crew intact, so the ship can operate successfully, needs the workers boss in place at the moment, as there is a lot going on, not to mention breaking in a new ships engineer (tech manager), and other important thingss to keep the ship pointed in the right direction, and out of the hands of the dreaded pirates. The captain is the man at the top, and the one who has to make the tough decisions. As a very successfull military man, he has made many difficult decisions before in many past battles, which is why he is Captain.

 

Who knows what the Captain really thinks of the workers boss ?......but at the moment he has decided to keep the crew together, and to sail onward with a steady crew, hopefully to calmer waters..................................Maj...

 

 

[fly_tornado]

is that ship called the Bounty?

 

 

[David Isaac]

Here's how I see it, pure and simple.................Imagine were all on a ship, (1800s style). Steve Runciman is the captain, the board members are all his Leutenants, (ships officers)... Then there are the ships crew, lead by the deck boss Steve Tizzard. One or two of the Leutenants don't like the workers boss, and thinks he should go. They decide to hop off at the next port, even though the captain no doubt needs them on his crew.The Captain, whose responsibility it is to keep the crew intact, so the ship can operate successfully, needs the workers boss in place at the moment, as there is a lot going on, not to mention breaking in a new ships engineer (tech manager), and other important thingss to keep the ship pointed in the right direction, and out of the hands of the dreaded pirates. The captain is the man at the top, and the one who has to make the tough decisions. As a very successfull military man, he has made many difficult decisions before in many past battles, which is why he is Captain.

 

Who knows what the Captain really thinks of the workers boss ?......but at the moment he has decided to keep the crew together, and to sail onward with a steady crew, hopefully to calmer waters..................................Maj...

With great respect Rosco, it aint that pure or that simple ...

 

I think your story may well be what is happening, but I respectfully put to you that your analogy paints an incorrect perspective of the functions of the president of our Association.

 

To start with our President is NOT the Captian ... he is the chairman and a member of a three person executive, one of 13 Board members. He is not the boss and he is most certainly NOT the CEO. The President has no more power than any other board member other than where he can exercise a casting vote under constitutional powers.

 

RA Aus is NOT a military operation, we are an association of members, in essence a corporation. Military attitudes and techniques are NOT appropriate. Your analogy unfortunately uses the example of a military man 'snapping' orders and if that is the case, it is likely a potential problem. In our organisation under our constitution the President is NOT the boss and in fact has a clearly spelled out obligation to along with his executive, report to the board and carry out the Boards wishes ... NOT dictate to the Board (Lieutenants as you put it) what is going on or what is going to happen.

 

Perhaps if there are problems in the engine room, the Boss of the workers (as you put it) should be asked to explain and be held accountable (no personal vendettas intended from me, I actually like the old bugga), its too late when the rudder snaps off and you can't go astern. Its particularly bad if the rudder breaks because of poor maintenance or management techniques. But when you are the Boss which the CEO is, and your responsibility is to be accountable to the Board, the buck stops with you whether you like it or not ... you get the glory and the blame, it can be rosy one year and terrible the next. That's the way it is at the top.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Maj; While I enjoyed your analogy, it does not accord with my understanding, either of the function and structure or the suggestion that a couple of people have had a dummy spit.

 

The whole situation defies any simplification, as there seem to be quite a few distinct issues, the resolution of which is marred by another set of issues. Further, there is a time dimension to the problem as well, so the consequences of past action and inaction have a significant impact as well.

 

I don't see there being a single and simple solution, either, but I'm sure a plan can be formulated, if all the issues are known. Unfortunately, we don't, and fixing it will require the help and cooperation of people who, it seems, don't understand the problem.

 

 

[turboplanner]

More like the good ship Venus

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Yeah, well there's beautiful sunshine here, 1kn wind and a thin layer of fog burning off over the lake. I think I will be forced to go and commit aviation :-)

 

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

Maj; While I enjoyed your analogy, it does not accord with my understanding, either of the function and structure or the suggestion that a couple of people have had a dummy spit.The whole situation defies any simplification, as there seem to be quite a few distinct issues, the resolution of which is marred by another set of issues. Further, there is a time dimension to the problem as well, so the consequences of past action and inaction have a significant impact as well.

 

I don't see there being a single and simple solution, either, but I'm sure a plan can be formulated, if all the issues are known. Unfortunately, we don't, and fixing it will require the help and cooperation of people who, it seems, don't understand the problem.

It may well be David, that the problem is understood/accepted/recognised, but the cause isn't...

 

It's a magnificent day here on the liverpool plains too, so I think I'll go get Ol' Jay Tiga outa the shed and fly over Sommerton way, in the sincere hope of driving David Isaac crazy with jealousy... I don't want to be childish about this DI, but NYAH NYAH na NYAH na... Ya gotta get the Auster going Mate...