How do you get RA-Aus board members to respond?

[sain]

I've been having trouble getting a response to an email from the President, Secretary, Finance Manager and the NSW board members, and I'm wondering how other people manage to get a response from their board members.

 

Can anybody give some suggestions on methods that have worked for them?

 

The method I tried was an extremely polite email to the President and Secretary (given the president's hissy fit over other emails, i thought being polite might work), and after days of no response I resent the email to the finance manager (my questions were about financial reporting) and the remaining two board members, asking for a response, or for them to encourage the president and/or secretary to respond. Its now been a week since my first email with no response at all.

 

Is it best just to post my questions here, and then whip everybody up into a frenzied mob that the board can no longer ignore?

 

 

[turboplanner]

If you have any accounting experience Sain, get the Annual Reports from 2009 - that will get you focused!

 

 

[Ausmo]

I've been having trouble getting a response to an email from the President, Secretary, Finance Manager and the NSW board members, and I'm wondering how other people manage to get a response from their board members.Can anybody give some suggestions on methods that have worked for them?

 

The method I tried was an extremely polite email to the President and Secretary (given the president's hissy fit over other emails, i thought being polite might work), and after days of no response I resent the email to the finance manager (my questions were about financial reporting) and the remaining two board members, asking for a response, or for them to encourage the president and/or secretary to respond. Its now been a week since my first email with no response at all.

 

Is it best just to post my questions here, and then whip everybody up into a frenzied mob that the board can no longer ignore?

I got a response within 24 hours from the President to a polite email offering advice. Mind you that was a couple of weeks ago, I imagine his email traffic has stepped up a notch or two since then......

 

A frenzied mob sounds like a dangerous concept unlikley to result in sensible change.

 

Erik

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Erik

 

I hope to see you in Canberra on the 9th of Feb, hopefully you'll provide some balance to the rest of us mobsters!

 

Andy

 

 

[Ausmo]

ErikI hope to see you in Canberra on the 9th of Feb, hopefully you'll provide some balance to the rest of us mobsters!

 

Andy

Don't get me wrong, I support the meeting plan. My dictionary calls a 'mob' a disorderly crowd of people or (more worryingly) a loose affiliation of gansters in charge of criminal activities or an association of criminals! 'Frenzied' carries the connotation of a mob hell-bent on a lynching. I doubt that will produce the desired result. We need to be positive and proactive, advocating reform that will resolve serious issues.

 

Erik

 

 

[Riley]

My score thus far over the past four weeks :

 

- 3 emails to WA Board member listing my expectations and firm requirements for his and the Board's immediate actions..... 3 responses acknowledging my dis-satisfaction and wishes and advising that it was not in his plans to action them. Not what I wanted to hear but 3 marks for communication.

 

- 1 email subsequently to the President copying one of my abv/noted emails and a fresh request that he retract his resignation retraction and go away quietly ... 1 response advising me that it was not his intent to carry out my requirement. Again, not what I wanted to hear but again a tick mark for communication on this one item

 

- 2 emails to the Treasurer with not impolite but decidedly crusty requests for confirmation that the entire period for which I have paid annual rego for my aircraft that I'm unable to fly compliments of RAA (at $0.507/day) will be re-imbursed or credited towards next year's rego.... No acknowledgement that my request was received or logged. No reply with either an acceptance or refusal to my requirement... No reply advising that this area will be dealt with at a later date. Methinks ER's current score card won't get him in front of the selectors next time. Brings to mind that infamous quote of some years back "Can't bat - Can't bowl" Can't to do much of anything it seems. Roll on February!

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Be careful Riley, if you ask too many hard questions, they just cut you off and refuse to communicate.

 

 

[sain]

Just to be clear, I'm in favour of a moderate, reason based approach. Having the membership storm the RA-Aus offices in Canberra wielding pitch forks and burning torches would be entertaining, but just a tad counterproductive. Scheduling the next RA-Aus General meeting (after the feb one obviously) for Halloween could be really good fun though.

 

You guys are clearly doing better me on getting responses, I'm just after some pointers.

 

Maybe I'll start by asking the rest of the board the same questions.

 

 

[cazza]

Just to be clear, I'm in favour of a moderate, reason based approach. Having the membership storm the RA-Aus offices in Canberra wielding pitch forks and burning torches would be entertaining, but just a tad counterproductive.

 

Sain, no one wants to storm the offices doing stupid and counterproductive things. We ALL want this organisation to survive and provide the services they have in the past. We are working within the organisation and its processes to have a say, but those of us who have been on the board in years past were concerned then about the lack of proper professional proceses employed to look after the fastest growing aviation organisation in the country. This lack of steward ship which many of us have tried in the past to improve and were blocked by the same people who are now crying "we are only volunteers"" is not sustainable. To get them to do something differently and be more transparent and accountable is difficult if not impossible. It is becoming clearer, surely to the membership, that the Board that is responsible for the organisation is unable or unwilling to reform itself. What a shame. But we will do our best to have a positive result.

 

Cazza

 

 

[drifterdriver]

I don't know Carol. If we get to wear pointy white hats and sheets then the pitch forks and burning torches might be more fun.

 

:0)

 

Nick

 

 

[dodo]

I did offer (the last time this was raised) to take a home-made torch (I don't know where I could get a pitchfork) and surround the office on my own.

 

I thought it would probably raise morale in the office - a home made mob of one peasant would have trouble being taken seriously.

 

dodo

 

 

[Gentreau]

Couldn't you protest the french farmers way ?

 

Dump a load of manure on the steps of the building ???

 

.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You could, but the result would be the Australian way, a conviction for littering and maybe harassment, and a bill for transporting it away.

 

 

[Captain]

I did offer (the last time this was raised) to take a home-made torch (I don't know where I could get a pitchfork) and surround the office on my own.I thought it would probably raise morale in the office - a home made mob of one peasant would have trouble being taken seriously. dodo

You are a member of many talents dodo, as would you also be inside volunteering too?

 

If so, I'll come over to watch, and bring a box of matches.

 

(And thanks again for your recent volunteering efforts in the office)

 

 

[Guernsey]

Couldn't you protest the french farmers way ?Dump a load of manure on the steps of the building ???

.

I could arrange that with my flying cow then just fly off into the sunset.

 

Alan.

 

 

[gavinthobaven]

My score thus far over the past four weeks :- 3 emails to WA Board member listing my expectations and firm requirements for his and the Board's immediate actions..... 3 responses acknowledging my dis-satisfaction and wishes and advising that it was not in his plans to action them. Not what I wanted to hear but 3 marks for communication.

- 1 email subsequently to the President copying one of my abv/noted emails and a fresh request that he retract his resignation retraction and go away quietly ... 1 response advising me that it was not his intent to carry out my requirement. Again, not what I wanted to hear but again a tick mark for communication on this one item

 

- 2 emails to the Treasurer with not impolite but decidedly crusty requests for confirmation that the entire period for which I have paid annual rego for my aircraft that I'm unable to fly compliments of RAA (at $0.507/day) will be re-imbursed or credited towards next year's rego.... No acknowledgement that my request was received or logged. No reply with either an acceptance or refusal to my requirement... No reply advising that this area will be dealt with at a later date. Methinks ER's current score card won't get him in front of the selectors next time. Brings to mind that infamous quote of some years back "Can't bat - Can't bowl" Can't to do much of anything it seems. Roll on February!

Riley

 

I have responded to all emails that I have received and I have spent considerable time responding to telephone contacts from members. I will continue to do this while on the board.

 

My votes on RA-Aus matters are always based only on what I consider is the best possible outcome for members. I am not ever inclined to vote in line with any dictate from others except the counsel of my members from WA when it is appropriate. My vote is also not always on the winning side, as is the case in a democratic process.

 

I do notice things on this forum but I must note that when I attempted to open a line of communication with the forum I was personally attacked for my efforts. The last straw was when a person claiming to be a lawyer demonstrated that they either had absolutely no idea of how legislation works, or intentionally disregarded the way legislation works, just so they could try to belittle my comments. I said in an earlier post that I would contribute while the communications demonstrated a level of decorum. While many members of the forum showed commendable restraint in their quest for knowledge, a select few behaved like petulant children and as a result of their actions I decided that there was no way to reason with the unreasonable.

 

I will continue to respond to member emails but I will not regularly contribute to this site as any attempt to inform members is quickly sabotaged by those running an agenda of their own. I cant blame other board members for abandoning the thankless process of communication on this forum due to actions of the few.

 

Regards

 

 

[turboplanner]

As I recall Gavin, you were not "attacked" just corrected by some people.

 

 

[shu77]

I could arrange that with my flying cow then just fly off into the sunset. Alan.

Has your cow been reregistered?

 

 

[gavinthobaven]

Dear forum

 

In line with complete openness I will make the following comment.

 

I have been informed that there is some conspiracy theory being promoted by one or more members of this forum relating to membership of the freemasons. I am proud to openly state that I am a freemason, albeit I am not overly active in the organisation due to other commitments including the time I put into RA-Aus. The freemasons is a very historic and benevolent organisation. It is also very importantly an activity that I share with my father, the only activity that I have had to myself with my father making it very special to me. It also has very strict rules in relation to the freemason's public actions. Freemasons are forbidden to use their membership to gain any advantage.

 

I have never been approached by any board member to vote for an item because of my membership of the freemasons and I would never countenance any such approach. Any suggestion that I have agreed to vote based on this membership is false and defamatory.

 

I have been advised that there is sufficient information in posts to identify me and that information may state that my membership of the freemasons has caused me to act inappropriately in my board activities. If true I would find this offensive.

 

People who know me will know that I am very easy going, but they will also know that I hold my integrity as a huge issue. If I find that posts on this forum, or any other, have defamed me I will not hesitate to take appropriate legal action. In West Australia defamation is listed as a criminal offence, items published within the state fall under this banner and publications, depending on their nature, may be deemed as published in the state even if they are written in another place.

 

I offer the opportunity to any forum member who has posted any unfounded allegation or suggestion against me to publicly withdraw the comment and post a clear retraction. I would accept any such retraction as closure of the matter so long as it was genuinely given. Withdrawal should be done in the open by highlighting the comments and striking them out and posting a retraction alongside. A separate post confirming the retraction should also be placed so members coming onto the forum later would know that it has been done.

 

I have been advised of details of the posting members and the post numbers of posts that may make these possibly defamatory comments. I expect that they posts not be subjected to any attempt to edit or remove them as this may constitute an offence of tampering with evidence or a conspiracy to pervert the legal process.

 

I would expect that the owner and moderator on this forum would know that they may also be joined as a party to any legal matter coming from their forum. I would hope that reasonable care is being take by the moderator to ensure that the forum retains some integrity.

 

In closing I am hoping that the information I have received is not accurate, but if it is the opportunity is there to bring closure to it immediately. I would be extremely upset if the organisation that I share with my aging father was being used to try to fuel an inappropriate attack on me and the organisations members.

 

Regards

 

 

[gavinthobaven]

As I recall Gavin, you were not "attacked" just corrected by some people.

A correction requires that the new information is correct. I will say no more on the matter.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Probably a good idea for you not to say any more.

 

 

[Admin]

Probably a good idea for you not to say any more.

Correct...Gavin, best you say no more

I also draw your attention to the site rules that you agreed to, specifically sections 7 and 8

 

I have specifically stayed away from commenting on the current RAAus state of affairs BUT I will post now by saying outburst of this nature are not acceptable on this site and threats against the site owner(s) and Moderators plus RAAus members will NEVER EVER be tolerated!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

[ahlocks]

...Withdrawal should be done in the open by highlighting the comments and striking them out and posting a retraction alongside...../.....I expect that they posts not be subjected to any attempt to edit or remove them as this may constitute an offence of tampering with evidence or a conspiracy to pervert the legal process.

You expect people to alter their posts and then go on to threaten that to do so may be an offence? Make your mind up....

There has been minimal moderation of this forum for quite some time to enable people to express their opinion on matters without fear of their words being altered or unduly removed. If you don't like what you are seeing, you are welcome to post a rebuttal and express your opinion. If you want to rattle your sabre, well, you can do that too. Just don't whinge if you get told to stuff off.

 

I have been advised of details of the posting members

Like hell you have.

 

 

[kaz3g]

Gavinthobavin said: "I do notice things on this forum but I must note that when I attempted to open a line of communication with the forum I was personally attacked for my efforts. The last straw was when a person claiming to be a lawyer demonstrated that they either had absolutely no idea of how legislation works, or intentionally disregarded the way legislation works, just so they could try to belittle my comments."

 

Dear Gavin

 

I have noted this comment and your closely following threat to mount defamation actions in relation to comments some contributors made to this list that you believe impugn your reputation.

 

Like you in your situation, I haven't been specifically named as the person referred to in the above quote, but I guess there aren't many here who might claim to be a lawyer.

 

The post I made, that you apparently took umbrage with, followed two posts by you in particular:

 

1. in the first you collectively referred to us as "cowards" and used other such unpleasant terms to express your opinion of us;
    
    
   
2. in the second, you made statements regarding purported requirements under the Commonwealth Corporations Law that you assert have to be complied with as a necessary precursor to the resignation of a committee member.
    
    
   

 

 

I responded to the first in a way that I hoped might take a little of the sting out of your words recognising that you are a relatively new member of the committee and, apparently, are well regarded by your State's membership.

 

In the second, I tried very hard to point out the obvious errors in your assessment of the legal situation without heaping ridicule on you for making them. I provided you with references to legislation, model rules, and the manual provided by the Registrar-General to help people without legal training know, understand and discharge their obligations under ACT law. I quietly pointed you to the fact that RAAus is incorporated under the Australian Capital Territory's legislation, not Commonwealth legislation, in the process. I particularly drew your attention to that clause in the manual making clear that there is no requirement for a registered office and that this, in itself, should be sufficient to apprise you of your erroneous view that notice of a resignation must be delivered to the registered office. This should have been so, even if you couldn't see the lack of a link between the Commonwealth and ACT Acts in that instance.

 

If I am wrong in my view, please point me to the authorities upon which you rely.

 

Surprising as it may seem to you, I am a lawyer. As I said in my previous post to you, I have largely practiced in the criminal law and my last position was as A/Principal of a well known criminal law firm supervising 10 emplyed lawyers and supervising a large number of volunteer lawyers engaged in delivering a night service 5 days per week. My legal background commenced when I worked in law enforcement, first as an investigator (I completed VicPol's Detective Training School course in 1995 under DI David Sprague -- he who led the team looking into the Eyre/Tynan murders) and then as a prosecutor working in the Magistrates' Court. I subsequently completed an Hons Degree in law (my thesis won me the Supreme Court Exhibition Prize) and a Grad Diploma in legal practice. My practice today is as Managing Lawyer of a small but very busy generalist firm, however, and I have to read, understand and apply a wide range of legislation in the course of my professional duties. I am assisted in this regard by my time spent as a Legislation Officer in the Victorian Public Service and as a Research Fellow at my university's law school.

 

I haven't seen anything posted here which I would have thought defamatory of you, but I lead a very busy life and I don't get to read everything. If you have taken particular offence, I for one am sorry that is so. I appreciate that committee members are doing their duties as volunteers and should be given all reasonable encouragement for doing so.

 

Unfortunately, your comments about the destruction of evidence appear somewhat vacuous to me as there are no proceedings on foot and, in civil matters, it is incumbent on the parties to a claim to mitigate matters betewen them, including by removing offensive material from a publication viewable by others. Threats of defamation have been thrown around previously in the heat of the moment and it is my experience that, whenever this occurs, everyone is diminished as a consequence.

 

Gavin, I am offended by the aspersions YOU have cast on my professional ability and ethics. in the quote above. I'm not that thin-skinned or stupid as to start throwing around threats of civil litigation, but I am offended and I think you owe ME an apology in the circumstances.

 

But none of this is addressing the crux of the issue. What has occurred with RAAus, especially in recent times, is quite deplorable in my view and major steps need to be taken to prevent such things happening again. The very future of the organisation and the reputations of all those who fly or own aircraft under its banner have been seriously damaged. We don't even know how damaged because so little is communicated from the committee back to the members of the association who fund its activities.

 

My real concern is therefore that you and the rest of the committee still appear to be oblivious of the constraints under which you act or the consequences for failing to observe them. You owe it to yourselves, as well as the members, to be properly informed and surely that must be apparent right now? I implore you, as a matter of urgency, to convince your fellows to engage a suitable professional to provide you all with training in the legislated responsibilities imposed by the Act and the Constitution so that you do not fall foul of the Regulator-General or other authorities. I also urge early involvement of all committee members in training in governance, policy formulation and audit processes so that all know what is expected of them and are better equipped to lead the Association to bigger and better things in the future.

 

Kaz

 

Karen W Gurney

 

LLB(Hons), BAppSc, Deakin; GradDipLP, CoL; DippAppChem, SIT; ADASC, CertAppSc, CIT; DipPSM, RMIT, DTS; CMedn, DSCV

 

 

[dodo]

Gaivn,

 

I posted a comment suggesting your opinion of which legislation governed RA-Aus was rubbish (rough summary). I didn't see that as an attack on you, but it was less than polite about your opinion. If you saw that as an attack on you, I am sorry.

 

I think the posts on this site are often very blunt, and often inconsiderate, so as a forum, that makes it about normal on the internet. I don't think everyone will agree with you (or me) on every matter, so we do need a fairly thick skin. I would suggest that you contribute your views, as this is a useful communication medium, and I think ignoring it has it's downside (people will still discuss issues, but without the perspective you can offer).

 

Yes, some people disagree with you, but that doesn't make the forum a conspiracy to shout you down - readers will form their views based on content- that is,they will consider what is said, not how loudly it is said. But they will still read the posts on this forum, as it remains one of the better sources of information as to what is happening with RA (that shouldn't be so, but I won't repeat my views on communication again)

 

As for a freemason conspiracy theory, frankly, I thought that was hilarious (as in ridiculous). I think legal action is probably a bit over the top, but that's not my decision...

 

best wishes,

 

dodo