RAAus Fails CASA Audit Again

[turboplanner]

I can just about guarantee that at least one Advisor will be tracking the fortunes of CASA's recent trials and now RAA.

 

About the last thing the Minister would want to do is step into RAA's internal problems (and they are internal) right now and possibly cop a grenade in the goolies.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Having blamed one tech manager and shown him the door because he wasn't to be trusted, did they then hire a more trustworthy Tech Manager only to show him the door a few months later? What a fabulous management system! I wonder if Harvard knows about it?

 

Incidentally, who wants to be No. 3? Could you imagine anyone who knows anything of what happened to the last two lining up to be No. 3?

 

 

[Captain]

Having blamed one tech manager and shown him the door because he wasn't to be trusted, did they then hire a more trustworthy Tech Manager only to show him the door a few months later? What a fabulous management system! I wonder if Harvard knows about it?Incidentally, who wants to be No. 3? Could you imagine anyone who knows anything of what happened to the last two lining up to be No. 3?

You are right AlphaR.

 

Given the history and life-span of past Tech Managers, the only way RAA will attract a great Tech Manager is if they can 1st attract an effective General Manager who can guarantee to set up effective systems and management that will allow the Tech Manager to do an effective job and protect that Tech Manager from past failings .......... and from the Executive.

 

What RAA needs is a very effective & strong Manager at the top, but reading the advert, they will again go for someone with a detailed knowledge of the legislation and that limits the class of Manager that they will get.

 

If it were up to me I would choose someone with strong private industry management experience, who is a great communicator, who can establish a strong & immediate effective working relationship with Lee Ungermann and CASA, & whose 1st priority is to get the Office and systems, and relationships and internal audits etc running effectively and who can learn the Legislation on the job (if it was me as GM I would form a GM's Legislation Sub-Committee to advise me, comprising 2 or 3 trusted knowledgeable members until I knew it well enough) and concentrate my efforts on giving the Tech Manager, the Ops Manager and all other staff a sound working base and environment in which to do their jobs.

 

The GM's job that is advertised is most likely to attract another Steve Tizzard type.

 

 

[Guest airsick]

The GM's job that is advertised is most likely to attract another Steve Tizzard Runciman.

Fixed for accuracy.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You mean Runciman was the secret "CEO"?

 

 

[Teckair]

Having blamed one tech manager and shown him the door because he wasn't to be trusted, did they then hire a more trustworthy Tech Manager only to show him the door a few months later? What a fabulous management system! I wonder if Harvard knows about it? 23Incidentally, who wants to be No. 3? Could you imagine anyone who knows anything of what happened to the last two lining up to be No. 3?

No 23 more likely.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Aircraft Registration Update 14/12/12

 

December 14, 2012 | opsassist

 

The aircraft registration issue is being resolved, albeit slowly. The backlog of aircraft which have no identified issues on file has been dealt with thanks to a huge effort from the staff and the volunteer members who have been assisting for the past two weeks.

 

This leaves approximately 60 files that require as a minimum, a photo of the MTOW placard through to a Type Certificate from a foreign country. Where issues can be handled by phone and email we have both staff and volunteers contacting the members and advising them as to what is required so that the registration can proceed.

 

Paul Middleton

 

Secretary RA-Aus

 

 

[icebob]

Well done all those office staff and volunteers it is a pity Paul, "the system" let everyone down and caused so much heart ache. I am sure some owners have worn thier nails down to the armpits by now.

 

Paul can I ask what now? A proceedure change or what?

 

Bob.

 

 

[facthunter]

I posted and it didn't happen. ( finger trouble) I think it's great that some volunteers are there. Must be like the early days. I hope a list is complied and some acknowledgement is given. Nev

 

 

[Captain]

Aircraft Registration Update 14/12/12December 14, 2012 | opsassist

 

The aircraft registration issue is being resolved, albeit slowly. The backlog of aircraft which have no identified issues on file has been dealt with thanks to a huge effort from the staff and the volunteer members who have been assisting for the past two weeks.

 

This leaves approximately 60 files that require as a minimum, a photo of the MTOW placard through to a Type Certificate from a foreign country. Where issues can be handled by phone and email we have both staff and volunteers contacting the members and advising them as to what is required so that the registration can proceed.

 

Paul Middleton

 

Secretary RA-Aus

Now that's a better update. It allows us to get a feel for what is the current & ongoing situation.

 

That's "communication" with the membership, and there should be more of it on all issues & activities, big or small.

 

Good on those that have put in to this effort, particularly the volunteers.

 

But is this re-registrations only or is it new registrations too? Does anyone know?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well that's what Fly Tornado said Captain, it's not on the RAA website latest news.

 

Rather eccentric and roundabout way to communicate with the members.

 

 

[Black]

You have been misinformed again by your board members..... Ask the staff for their figures on the back log....

 

 

[turboplanner]

Misinformed by FT

 

 

[Mick]

Well that's what Fly Tornado said Captain, it's not on the RAA website latest news.

Try -

 

http://www.raa.asn.au/2012/12/aircraft-registration-update-141212/

 

.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yes, sorry FT, I should have scrolled down the page. I was expecting it in "Latest News"

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

People

 

Today I sent the following text by email to all the RAAus board members. I would like to understand if there are members of RAAus who should have but havent yet recieved renewal paperwork from RAAus.......... My greatest fear is that if the claims made to me are true someone among us isnt going to pick up on the fact that their aircraft is now unregistered go flying...Murphys law will apply..."In case of emergency apply lawyers liberally" will apply.....

 

Andy

 

Yesterday Middo posted to the News on the RAAus Website some news that was at face value a step in the right direction which was that the backlog of renewal registrations had reduced to 60 and those 60 all had problems requiring member action..

 

However I was contacted after that news was posted and told that the reason the backlog was reduced was that RAAus is no longer sending out renewals and therefore if there was no renewal paperwork sent in by the member there could be no backlog associated with it.

 

1) I would like to understand if it is true that RAAus has stopped sending out aircraft renewals.

 

2) If 1) is true, I would like to understand if the number of members who will not have renewal paperwork where traditionally they would have, is approximately 300 as at Friday the 14th of December

 

3) If 1) is true, I would like to understand if any member as a result of that decision now has an aircraft where the registration has expired where RAAus has not sent out a registration renewal yet traditionally would have already done so.

 

4) If 1) is true I would like to understand if RAAus has legal advice as to whether such moves to stop sending renewal paperwork without advising members of that fact could be claimed to be negligent and whether the insurance policies we have in place will cover such an action of negligence.

 

5) If 1) is true has RAAus discussed this with CASA given that the obligation to register aircraft as I understand it is one of the pillars of the annual Deed of agreement.

 

6) If 1) is true could you please explain to me the thought process and approvals process that was applied to enact this decision,

 

Can I please have answers to the questions above by return email please.

 

Regards

 

Andy Saywell

 

Member 015361

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Turbs

 

You asked about insurance and in reviewing an old "Deed of agreement" between CASA and RAAus which is renewed every year I noted that there are obligations in the deed regarding insurance. Specifically:-

 

1) Public Liability insurance of $10m for each and every occurence

 

2) Professional indemnity insurance cover, with a limit of at least $5million with a bodily injury and property damage sub limit of $500,000 excluding opemtional flight training.

 

3) Workers Comp insurance as required by law

 

So that is some info in a sea of silence......

 

I also not that the historic annual deed of agreement has many obligations of actions that must be undertaken in the year. For the one I have those obligations to me appear to be still unfulfilled in the main.......

 

I also note the following clause which may well be very interesting when considered and applied to lititgation that is underway........

 

X) Indemnity

 

X.1) Subiect to this Deed, the Organisation will at all times indemnify and hold harmless CASA, its officers, employees and agents (in this clause refered to as those indemnified) from and against any loss (including legal costs and expenses on a solicitor/own client basis) or liability, reasonably incurred or suffered by any of those indemnified arising from any claim, suit, demand, action or proceeding by any person againsL any of those indemnified where such loss or liability was caused by a wilful, unlawful or negligent act or omission of the Organisation, its employees, agents or subcontractors in connection with this Deed.

 

X.2) The Organisation's liability to indemnify CASA under clause X.1 will be reduced proportionally to the extent that any act or omission of CASA or its employees or agents contributed to the loss or liability.

 

This clause X survives the expiration or earlier termination ofthis Deed.

 

<Sigh!>

 

Andy

 

 

[turboplanner]

If 1) above was in force at the time of any Public Liability lawsuit, the coverage to me looks comfortably in line with any potential surge in claims arising from crashes.

 

That means that RAA would only have to focus on culture action to anticipate and correct any potential negligence to keep these incidents to a minimum compatible with other activties in other sports and industries.

 

Regarding the current Sting accident claim where members have been advised that the $500,000 cover has virtually been used up, this is a typical Public Liability issue from my experience, and I wonder whether someone has claimed on the wrong policy.

 

If the Public Liability cover as required in the deed of arrangement was in force at the time of the crash, and if someone has claimed against the wrong policy, and if this can be corrected, then the financial threat to RAA on this and other potential claims falls away.

 

Which would be very good news and something board members should immediately start burning the midnight oil on.

 

 

[turboplanner]

PeopleToday I sent the following text by email to all the RAAus board members. I would like to understand if there are members of RAAus who should have but havent yet recieved renewal paperwork from RAAus.......... My greatest fear is that if the claims made to me are true someone among us isnt going to pick up on the fact that their aircraft is now unregistered go flying...Murphys law will apply..."In case of emergency apply lawyers liberally" will apply.....

 

Andy

 

Yesterday Middo posted to the News on the RAAus Website some news that was at face value a step in the right direction which was that the backlog of renewal registrations had reduced to 60 and those 60 all had problems requiring member action..

 

However I was contacted after that news was posted and told that the reason the backlog was reduced was that RAAus is no longer sending out renewals and therefore if there was no renewal paperwork sent in by the member there could be no backlog associated with it.

 

1) I would like to understand if it is true that RAAus has stopped sending out aircraft renewals.

 

2) If 1) is true, I would like to understand if the number of members who will not have renewal paperwork where traditionally they would have, is approximately 300 as at Friday the 14th of December

 

3) If 1) is true, I would like to understand if any member as a result of that decision now has an aircraft where the registration has expired where RAAus has not sent out a registration renewal yet traditionally would have already done so.

 

4) If 1) is true I would like to understand if RAAus has legal advice as to whether such moves to stop sending renewal paperwork without advising members of that fact could be claimed to be negligent and whether the insurance policies we have in place will cover such an action of negligence.

 

5) If 1) is true has RAAus discussed this with CASA given that the obligation to register aircraft as I understand it is one of the pillars of the annual Deed of agreement.

 

6) If 1) is true could you please explain to me the thought process and approvals process that was applied to enact this decision,

 

Can I please have answers to the questions above by return email please.

 

Regards

 

Andy Saywell

 

Member 015361

 

 

Of course you can catch up on renewals if you don't send notices out; human nature is for us to rely on a reminder.

 

If this is true then members could inadvertently fly unregistered, and could face financial risk if there was an accident - for example if an insurance claim was rejected.

 

So you should ensure your mates are checking their renewal dates just in case

 

 

[Black]

Stop asking your board for info and ask the staff in the office. Who do you think is working on fixing the problem. Out of 13 board members only two have offered and come into the office to help.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The temptation indeed is to ask the skilled professionals, however members should not do this because it would destroy the RAA structure apart from grossly overloading hard working people.

 

We can blame board members for a lot of things, but they shouldn't be expected to find hundreds of dollars for a symbolic appearance to do something which may well be beyond them.

 

Their job is to make sure these things are given the right assessment in the first place, the budget, the right people and the right number of people.

 

I say assessment because LSA aircraft fit into that category. Where was the analysis to reject them or accept them and if accepted cost them and employ additional people if necessary, passing those costs on to the LSA owners, as SAAA appears to do.

 

 

[facthunter]

It is fair and reasonable that the complex and harder to administer types should pay their proportion of costs. This happens already where a single seat is cheaper than a dual seat. The user pays principle should apply. I can't see why anyone would object to this. Nev

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

The temptation indeed is to ask the skilled professionals, however members should not do this because it would destroy the RAA structure apart from grossly overloading hard working people.

You can ask but should never quote them as the source. They do not deserve to be brought into this mess. However, if they sit back do anything the Board asks of them, like "tell the punters we have had a computer glitch" when they know that registrations have been withheld by CASA then they become complicit in the downfall of RA-Aus. BTW I have heard from more than one person that that actually happened.

 

We can blame board members for a lot of things, but they shouldn't be expected to find hundreds of dollars for a symbolic appearance to do something which may well be beyond them.

Quite agree but then the President & Middo shouldn't be saying the "Board" are working flat out when in fact it is just two out of 13!

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I am glad that only 2 of the 13 are there. 3 would require a committee

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Still no renewal and no email or contact from raa.