President Resigns ** Then Thinks about it **

[John G]

JG,my post was not a criticism of you, or of others who provide information.

 

It was just a personal and bitter observation of how RA-Aus members can stay informed.

 

thanks for the information,

 

dodo

 

EDIT - PS I assume you meant corroborated, rather than collaborated. I enjoyed the difference.

Damn, I hate being wrong!!! Dodo you win!!!!!'

 

"collaborate" to work with another person or group in order to achieve something

 

"corroborate" to give or represent evidence of the truth of something

 

Hopefully you will find some grounds of forgiveness given that I have had a glass of wine and rr's start to look like ll's after the second glass.

 

JG

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi All,

 

I believe one serious issue facing RAA is lack of transparency, and lack of member information. So let me stop any rumours right now, and give some clarification.

 

Kiwi's post above was an email sent to him as Vice President of a local club in my area. It was for club information only, and perhaps should not have been posted on this forum.

 

The President and some Board members have been extremely critical about this information becoming public. My belief is the Resignation of our President, and a subsequent withdrawal is extremely important and must be communicated to the membership. You the membership, must make up your own mind on this.

 

I have not released the Resignation email itself to anyone.

 

I am seeking advice on the contents of the resignation email..

 

The Facts. -

 

On 25/11/12 at 18.30 I sent an email to the Board telling them of my efforts to try to get the GM postponed to February, not just as a cost saving benefit, but also as the delay would let tempers cool as I believe decisions made in haste or anger, are often poor decisions. At the end of the email I made the statement the President no longer had my support (over other internal issues), but he could cement the support of the others. I also said that with perhaps a slight attitude change, SR would get more member participation in some of the discussions. Steve Runciman took real offence at this email, and it appears to me it was this email that caused his resignation.

 

Now let me state here publicly, Steve Runciman is an extremely hard worker for the Association, and is one person who really does what he believes is in the best interests of the Association. He is not on the Board for ulterior motives. But in my personal opinion he often acts before thinking, and he won't accept any different view and will attack the messenger and not the issue. Now please be aware this is entirely my opinion. Steve Runciman has the total support of the majority of the Board. I am the odd one out here.

 

My views differ from some of the others, in that I believe as the elected representative for South Queensland (one of three) my duty is first and foremost to represent the majority view of those in my area, and keep them informed of what is happening inside the Association, even if it means I am isolated and alone. This is not to say my view on this is right and others wrong. It is just different. It is up to the membership to vote in as their Rep one who will represent the majority view in their particular area. The members can choose someone who will toe the "party line" (term used loosely) or be their own person and act independently. It is your choice.

 

On 26/11/12 at 2.55 pm Steve Runciman wrote a resignation email (Resigning as President and as Nth Qld Rep) to the Secretary, with a copy to the Board. " ..... To that end, please accept this e-mail as official notification of my resignation as President and as the North Queensland board member for RA-Aus"

 

In it he was extremely critical of me (perhaps bordering on defamation) I did not immediately inform the members of the resignation as SR had stated he was going to post his Resignation later that afternoon on the RAA web site. It is just common courtesy to allow the President to inform the general membership first. I decided to wait until next day before informing the members in my local area.

 

27/11/12 at 5.43 am Steve Runciman sent an email to the secretary with a copy to the Board, asking the Secretary for permission to withdraw the Resignation. I have heard some claim SR was just game playing, but my personal view is he likely acted in anger and haste, and regretted pressing the send button after the fact. I do not know this as fact, it is only an opinion. SR is the only person who would know.

 

During the day SR received a number of emails of total support from other Board members.

 

As for the legality of the withdrawal? - I do not know.

 

A precedent has been set with a former Presidential resignation, and advice at the time was all dependent on the wording of the resignation letter. From memory, if the resignation was "offered" it could be rejected or accepted by the Board, but if stated as fact, e.g. I resign, then it could not be withdrawn. This a legal area and one I am staying well away from. At the time of writing this, there has been no notification from the Secretary to the Board as to whether he accepted or rejected the resignation, or allowed a retraction. Here again this is a legal area and I do not know if the Secretary has the power or it is a full Board matter. My personal view is the Board needs a written legal opinion on this matter, particularly in view of the Precedent being set some years ago.

 

Added later - Another issue that needs clarification is, if you resign from your region, can the Board accept a retraction, or is this a matter for the region itself? - I don't know.

 

Look Guys, politics, by its very nature is a nasty business. Many things have and will be said and done in anger and on the spur of the moment. Particularly in stressful times like we have at the moment. That is just human nature.

 

Was I really offended by statements made by SR against me in his resignation letter? - You bet I was. Will I get over it? - I already have.

 

Regards

 

John McK

 

29/11/12 - Post updated slightly for better clarification and to stop speculation and rumours.

 

 

[turboplanner]

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

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

If Legal advice was sought for the John G resignation and it covered both the John G possibility and as a means of pointing out the differences also fortuitously by contrast, the more recent SR cirumstances, then unless the law has changed between then and now (Im no expert ....... but has it .......really??????) then why would we pay to again recieve the same advice? The only way the advice can be different is if the briefing is different. Or the board has lost confidence in the legal provider an doesnt trust the advice?

 

What am I missing?

 

Andy

 

 

[turboplanner]

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.

 

 

[Gentreau]

Look Guys, politics, by its very nature is a nasty business...........

As someone looking from the outside, that just about sums up the whole problem.

 

Why is politics even involved in the licencing of pilots and the registration of aircraft ????????????

 

As far as I know, you're not running a country, a state or even a city with differing political aims, but implementing fixed regulations laid down by Australian and international law !!!

 

.

 

 

[Captain]

The President and some Board members have been extremely critical about this information becoming public.

What more is there to be said about the code of pathalogical and unreasonable secrecy at the top of the RAA, which leads to the treatment of the members as idiots and mushrooms?

 

The President resigns and then the President and some on the Board don't want the members to know. What utter nonsense and incompetence.

 

These forums, and discussion at the Meeting of Members in Temora, are evidence that we have been on about inappropriate secrecy for years and it appears that most of our elected representative just don't get it.

 

And what is worse, they pillory any Board Member who communicates.

 

This confirms my view that a cleanout is the only way to get us back to effective communication with the membership and the treatment of the membership with respect.

 

I say again that I fully accept that some items must be discussed in camera, and be kept confidential while they are live.

 

Well done John Mck, and hang in there. Where would we be without you?

 

Regards Geoff

 

PS - Some at the top may be hard working and tireless, but their efforts are obviously ineffectual as the organisation has lurched from disaster to disaster under their leadership and "hard work", and they certainly don't work hard at effective management or governance or giving reasonable briefings to the membership ........... who they think don't want to know.

 

 

[facthunter]

Gentreau...

 

As Tony Jones would say "I'll take that as comment" .

 

Misplaced loyalties, lack of consistency in applying rules, Lack of transparency. Incompetence, External threats real and perceived. Ie legal action ( serious enough to destroy us alone) This forum (not serious but a nuisance to which they over-react)

 

Where you have a group of human beings working in an organisation or even a large office there will be politics. NOT in the usual sense of labor/liberal, but in alliances that form. IF you are dealing with a big government beaurocracy there is politics too. Being involved with CASA is COMPLEX. We have 13,000 customers/owners to be responsible to. Nev

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Now let me state here publicly, Steve Runciman is an extremely hard worker for the Association, and is one person who really does what he believes is in the best interests of the Association. He is not on the Board for ulterior motives. But in my personal opinion he often acts before thinking, and he won't accept any different view and will attack the messenger and not the issue. Now please be aware this is entirely my opinion. Steve Runciman has the total support of the majority of the Board. I am the odd one out here.

John

 

I would agree with your observations and believe that it is equally true of Middo, within the 3 in the exec. However being extremely hard working is a trait we want in our elected reps....All of them! and relatively equally..... but it is not the only trait we want.

 

Knowing what to work on when there is more to do than mere board members can do is another desirable trait.

 

Working so hard that the exec or the board dont, or choose not to, communicate with the greater membership is an example. If you and the members of the board were to honestly total the amount of time you have spent on email over the last 2 weeks, and honestly assessed how much of that was repetition, and then compared the time that would have been lost if real and detailed widespread communications with the membership were undertaken, then I'll make a forecast that you all would have had hours back that could have been put towards those things that are vitally important at the moment like preventing the growth of the grounded fleet.

 

Now I cant speak for others but Steve R and I have spoken about this multiple times on the phone, but without any obvious changes in behaviour.

 

Rumour will always flourish where there is a void that should be filled with truth. The fastest and most effective way of preventing the waste of time that Im sure is rampant at present isn't to bemoan the "troublemakers and wreckers" as we have heard time and time again, but to work to fill the void.

 

Im sure that the team arent IQ challenged, and yet to me this seems so self evident! Why arent the members being provided with detailed briefings on issues of importance.

 

If I look at the communications on the current grounding on the RAAus website there are a grand total of apprx 1200 words or 94 lines of text. A fair chunk of that is the repeating "RAAus regrets......" Surely one of the largest and most damaging problems that is directly impactingg members deserves a real briefing and not a bunch of platitudes. As a member I still only have a vague understanding of what this is all about. What exctly is wrong, what is being done to fix it and when will it be complete? How many Aircraft are affected? is it 10, 100, 1000 we just dont understand the size of the problem. Why not?

 

Andy

 

P.S this isnt only pointed at you its pointed at teh entire board.

 

 

[Guest john]

To All Interested RAAus Members,

 

Today an email was sent to the Secretary of RAAus requesting the follwing information ASAP:

 

1.What Board or Staff members have submitted written letters of resignation to date to the RAAus which are now the legal property of RAAus & are required to be tabled as correspondence?

 

2. What are the calendar dates these written resignations are to take place?

 

If a response is received, the contents will be posted on this site so as to allay any doubts & uncertainties.

 

 

[Admin]

David, The problem we have and I have always been aware of is that this forum only reaches maybe 100 of the 13,000 odd members we have. That is a fact.

John G, I do not wish to argue with what you are calling fact but I can recall a poll that was on this web site some time ago and it reflected if I recall correctly some 83% or more of registered users here were RA members. I propose that the RAA apathy that is so often mentioned here was evident in the past with what you may have seen but recent events seem to have changed that.

(so much for trying to take a break)

 

 

[turboplanner]

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

 

 

[turboplanner]

If, as I understand it, Steve Runciman did resign as president and board member, and has not been reinstated, in my opinion his status is that of member.

 

In that case any action taken, unless/until reinstated against any other board member, or using the powers of a board member could have serious consequences.

 

Any other board member who joins any invalid action could also have a problem.

 

Be careful guys.

 

 

[Admin]

Please note all RAAus members that if a board meeting has been called for this Friday then you are all entitled to attend as RAAus members. They may well put the meeting "In Camera" however they would need a very good reason of required complete confidentiality for doing so.

 

 

[dodo]

I would attend, but I doubt it will be publicised. Anyone know if a board meeting has been called, and if so, where and when?

 

dodo

 

 

[David Isaac]

Dodo,

 

Ring the office and ask them and you are entitled to attend as a member.

 

 

[turboplanner]

VERY GOOD POINT IAN - A CHANCE TO LET THEM KNOW WHO IS HURTING

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi Guys

 

The Board meeting this Friday has been cancelled

 

John McK

 

 

[turboplanner]

Poses more questions than it answers

 

 

[Howard Connor]

I thought Pony Club parents were bad enough, this takes the cake

 

 

[turboplanner]

Slarti, or one of the other guys which have been grounded, and well as a Pacific Ibis owner should answer this comment.

 

I'd compare it to pony club parents all right.....where the committee was shooting the ponies one by one.

 

 

[Powerin]

Let's not get caught up in whether SRs resignation is valid or not just because you want him out of there. It's not worth the legal hassle is it? Instead remember that a General Meeting can resolve to remove any board member. Constitution again:

 

17 Removal of committee members

 

The association in general meeting may by resolution, subject to the

 

Act, section 50, remove any member of the committee from the

 

office of member of the committee before the end of the member’s

 

term of office.

 

The "Act" is defined in the constitution as the "Associations Incorporation Act 1991" (Australian Capital Territory).

 

Section 50 of the Act says:

 

50 Rules of natural justice

 

If an incorporated association exercises any power that it has to

 

adjudicate a dispute between its members, or between itself and a

 

member or members, in relation to the rights given to the members

 

by the rules of the association, any decision made by the association

 

is not taken to be valid unless, in any proceedings in relation to the

 

dispute, the rules of natural justice have been complied with.

 

 

[Bandit12]

Hadn't you heard Turbz? The ponies got what was coming to them - they had been bringing the club into disrepute, and even crapping all over the place......

 

 

[Kiwi]

Hi All,Kiwi's post above was an email sent to him as Vice President of a local club in my area. It was for club information only, and perhaps should not have been posted on this forum.

Oop's

 

 

[David Isaac]

Oop's

Don't worry buddy, we all without a doubt had a right to know, the information was not confidential and concerned our governing Board that we all individually elected or at least elected by default.