Positions available at RAAus

[Guest Maj Millard]

Point taken drifterdriver,...... Except for the line : "Filled by someone we can look up to, and respect" !!....I don't even know how Eugene came to be back in the power-structure anyway ??...wasn't he relieved of his position as treasurer previously because of suspected inpropriety in that role ??..........................please explain ??............................................Maj...

 

 

[Camel]

Maj, what you say is true but the fact Runciman continued to support ST is a serious problem and was left too long and the fact Adam Finn was sacked is all too weird. ST was and still is a problem and unresolved except he resigned and leaves a mess.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I just got home today & read the RAA mag letters to the editor plus the responses.To be quite honest, I am a bit perplexed with the responses given by SR in regards to Don Ramsay's letters. Letters to the editor segment in the mag should be there for members to write in with what ever they want to say. Also, I have no problem with SR responding to Dons letters in this segment. But I felt it was more political grand standing in the last letter from SR. "Another reply to Don Ramsay".

 

 

[Admin]

Exactly 101% what I thought...extremely distasteful against a member from the then President and also having the ability to add what ever he wanted to just prior to print to have the last say without giving the member the right to reply to the whole membership.

 

By the same token I find it extremely unacceptable for the Secretary to include comments in the notification to members of the calling of a EGM...professionally, the Secretary should have been wearing the hat of the Secretary performing his duties under the requirements of the constitution NOT as an opportunist.

 

I believe that I am seeing an extreme lack of professionalism on an almost daily basis from the Executive of RAAus which is causing the irreparable damage to OUR Association by these individuals...time to clean things up, have a clear out, turn things around and make all this an unfortunate instance that we can look back on in our history

 

 

[turboplanner]

Time for you to knock on the door of the caravan again CFI

 

 

[Spriteah]

Maj, What do I think we need and I presume you mean the CEO/GM not the president as that has no impact on the recruitment agency. Do they need to be in our sport? Not necessarily but a good knowledge of aviation would obviously make their entry to the RAA easier. If we had an applicant that had no knowledge of Recreational flying then that would not be suitable. Qualities that we do need is staff management and the ability to oversee and monitor. Able to communicate with authorities/regulators and deal with a board in a positive manner.

 

Able to monitor and assist with planning budgets. Lots of other qualities but I feel I've answered what you were asking. I have requested to be part of the employment of new applicants but that is yet to be seen.

 

Jim Tatlock.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Thanks for that Jim, so is it the board as a collective that makes the final vote or decision, yea or no on a canidate ?..is that how it works .....And if not the board, who then ?........................................Maj...

 

 

[Spriteah]

Maj I can honestly say at this time I do not know the answer to that question however I don't think we can have 13 people trying to make a decision. I would guess maybe three board and the recruitment agency would be appropriate.

 

Jim.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

I would expect that a majority vote by the whole board would be the way to go, otherwise what the hell are they there for in the first place ..to simply view the preceedings ?..........I do appreciate your honesty though Jim, and I also understand that you are new to the whole process .........................................Cheers .....Maj...

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

....I don't even know how Eugene came to be back in the power-structure anyway ??...wasn't he relieved of his position as treasurer previously because of suspected inpropriety in that role ??..........................please explain ??............................................Maj...

The previous Treasurer that received a vote of no confidence from the Board was the recently returned to the Board, Dave Caban. I don't think there was any impropriety involved, just an inability to do the job or perhaps that was unwillingness?

Eugene was dropped as President by a Board who thought he was ineffectual and he was desperate to get back into the Exec. even if it was in a job that he had no skills for or interest in doing. What it seems he really wants is to be President again so,he can wear his Greek Cruise Ship Captains uniform with all the gold braid.

 

By now, Eugene should have also been given a vote of no confidence for his failures as Treasurer. Seems the Board are not really bothered by their breaches of the Constitution and the Act if you go by Runciman's letter to the Editor.

 

 

[drifterdriver]

I have lost track. Which letter to the editor. The first or the second?

 

 

[kaz3g]

Maj I can honestly say at this time I do not know the answer to that question however I don't think we can have 13 people trying to make a decision. I would guess maybe three board and the recruitment agency would be appropriate.Jim.

Hi Jim

 

I agree it is not practical to have more than 3 committee members present on an interview panel for the GM. Even then, with the F2F nominee also present, that is a big panel indeed. The panel should provide its recommendation to the Committee, together with a copy of the panel chair's summary of the assessment of each applicant, and the committee should ratify the appointment.

 

Selection of the panel will be the key issue because there will be a lot of angry members if the current Executive hogs the show. The anger will no doubt be even greater should the ex President be a member of the panel. It would severely damage the credibility of the appointee; a situation that would be disastrous both for the new incumbent and for the Association.

 

We need to move forward from here and leave the bad things that have happened behind so they only serve as a distant reminder of how things can unravel when governance is forgotten and committee executives try to be operational managers.

 

At least, that's my take on it.

 

Kaz

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Tech Manager ($85-90k + super) & General Manager ($100-110k + super) positions have been advertised on Seek - http://www.seek.com.au/JobSearch?DateRange=31&SearchFrom=quick&Keywords=recreational+aviation&state=3100&locationtext=Canberra

 

Closing date 18 Jan 2013 - a bit short, but at least it is better coverage than an advert in Sport Pilot.

 

According to the job descriptions, RAA employs 10-13 staff. I am guessing - GM, 2 x Tech, 2 x Ops, Office Manager, ASIC admin (was advertised in Dec), 2 or 3 Admin. Here's hoping we get some good applicants.

 

I feel for the Admin staff, probably on an ordinary wage and having to shoulder the brunt of angry members and pressure to push through mountains of work, letters, emails, files etc. and cope with staff shortages, consultants, volunteers off the street. If it was me, I would be looking for a less chaotic job. Hats off to the office staff - always courteous & helpful whenever we have had reason to ring.

 

Sue

 

Still Grounded

 

 

[Guest Error404]

Members need to be aware of how recruiting agencies work. They merely provide resumes to the employer via a short list or if there are only a few applicants then maybe all of the applications. Even if they are a highly experienced aviation recruitment firm it won't matter because the chosen employees / members a Raa office will do the interviews anyway.

 

Face to Face will then take their 10% of the salary once off or whatever has been negotiated. The only benefit is that if a 6 month probation period has been agreed upon, F2F will be obligEd to find another candidate at no cost to Raa. This could save a lot Of cash. If it raa were clever they would have negotiated a 6-9 month probation period.

 

The usual benefit of using a recruiting firm of drawing from a large pool of potential candidates from a certain field idles not appear to be relevant here.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Tech Manager ($85-90k + super) & General Manager ($100-110k + super) positions have been advertised on Seek - http://www.seek.com.au/JobSearch?DateRange=31&SearchFrom=quick&Keywords=recreational aviation&state=3100&locationtext=CanberraClosing date 18 Jan 2013 - a bit short, but at least it is better coverage than an advert in Sport Pilot.

 

According to the job descriptions, RAA employs 10-13 staff. I am guessing - GM, 2 x Tech, 2 x Ops, Office Manager, ASIC admin (was advertised in Dec), 2 or 3 Admin. Here's hoping we get some good applicants.

 

I feel for the Admin staff, probably on an ordinary wage and having to shoulder the brunt of angry members and pressure to push through mountains of work, letters, emails, files etc. and cope with staff shortages, consultants, volunteers off the street. If it was me, I would be looking for a less chaotic job. Hats off to the office staff - always courteous & helpful whenever we have had reason to ring.

 

Sue

 

Still Grounded

Just thinking out loud.Maybe a current long term staff member would be suited to the GM role. They would all ready know the ins & outs of running the adminstration side of the RAA.What do you guys think?. I guess they would have to want to do it for a start.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Just thinking out loud.Maybe a current long term staff member would be suited to the GM role. They would all ready know the ins & outs of running the adminstration side of the RAA.What do you guys think?. I guess they would have to want to do it for a start.

Do we have any long term staff? Julie (who I believe had been office manager for some years) left last year. Tech men have lasted months, Ops - maybe one of them? They seem to have lasted longer - probably because they are on the road doing School inspections. Admin staff - not sure if any of the Admin Assistants have been there long, or willing to rise to the challenge - ATM you are still working with a fractured Board - needs someone with strong ethics and will. I would rather see someone with solid management experience, accounting, legislation etc rather than hours in ultralights. Tech - needs a knowledge of at least Australian Aviation legislation, then it is just a matter of boning up on the Tech Manual (which needs a re-write - wasn't ST doing that?). ST's looking for a job.....

 

Sue

 

Still Grounded

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Just thinking out loud.Maybe a current long term staff member would be suited to the GM role. They would all ready know the ins & outs of running the adminstration side of the RAA.What do you guys think?. I guess they would have to want to do it for a start.

And a counterposition to consider.....

 

Current staff have "enjoyed" a period of work under less than effective leaders. If we were to take current staff how do we ensure we dont get a repeat because all they know is what they have seen.......

 

Im not wedded to either position, my view is that whoever gets the role be they current staff or an outsider, they shpould be selected because they are the best person for the job.

 

Its also my view that haveing a short selection timeline means that the number of candidates available to choose from will be less than is we had a normal campaign. We must select a good candidate rather than teh best of a small bunch (there are some assumptions in that statement!!) Most people workinng at this level will (assuming they are already at a CEO/GM level) require to provide probably 3 months notice to their current employer so if we get a hard hitting candidate we may not see them until April/May or even June......

 

I personally would prefer to wait for a great candidate that has long term potential than the best of the bunch and a rinse and repeat exercise in 12 months or less......

 

Jim states that he feels some aviation experience is necessary and I can see that it would be beneficial but I would not go past a fantastic GM or past CEO to select one with aviation experience. The Opps and Tech team are the specialists who embody the organisations specialist knowledge, the GM/CEO needs enough to manage them and the stakeholder relationships and its my view that if us pilots can pick that up in training to fly and hangar talk then a CEO/GM breathing this stuff every day will pick it up in no time! whereas the reverse, a knowledgable aviator will not pick up the skills of a good GM or CEO in "No time"!

 

Andy

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

For the General Manager, aviation experience isn't the top priority. After all, he has CASA auditing the tech side of things, and assistance (or whatever) from the CASA Sport Aviation officer (advertised late last year), Lee Ungerman et al. What is really lacking is Governance - compliance with the ACT Incorporated Associations ACT & Regs - both with the Board and General Manager. I suspect the previous CEO who had Not-for-Profit experience, but little aviation background, used the excuse that he lacked this to depart with honour once he saw the state of affairs - or was pushed - I don't know. Board members with experience in both fields have resigned over Governance issues - so this is our most pressing issue for our long term survival. IMO.

 

Sue

 

Still Grounded

 

 

[Admin]

I would have applied...RAAus member and Pilot, unquestionable desire to see RAAus the pinnacle of Recreational Aviation in Australia, Masters Degree in Business and Administration (MBA), Computer Sciences Degree, ex Board Member, thorough understanding of members needs, supporter of clear and precise communication, experienced in reporting directly to Boards of large Corporations and Members of Parliament etc. But what stops me is apart from an assumption that I would never even be considered by the current Committee and then not even provided with a courteous reply of no-thanks of my application, as been proven by previous correspondence with the Exec etc, but also the extreme need of reform of the Committee and the Constitution which may never eventuate...all stopping me from even considering for 1 minute stepping into a hell hole that would be destined to destroy my reputation trying to work for the Committee.

 

I wonder given everything that this Exec has done to the members and the exposure of ALL the shortcomings of the Exec and Committee, would anyone that would be truly suitable, and capable of progressing our Association in the best manner possible for the members, would even consider applying? We need someone in the 'know' of our Association but then would anyone in the 'know', worthy of what we need, even consider applying? Does this also mean that we most likely will not end up with a person we need now and then if all the restructuring is completed, we may have an issue of the GM then being out of sync in a capability matrix with the new and strongly capable restructured Committee and Constitution leaving us with another issue?

 

Just points of ponder!

 

 

[winsor68]

I wonder given everything that this Exec has done to the members and the exposure of ALL the shortcomings of the Exec and Committee, would anyone that would be truly suitable, and capable of progressing our Association in the best manner possible for the members, would even consider applying? We need someone in the 'know' of our Association but then would anyone in the 'know', worthy of what we need, even consider applying? Does this also mean that we most likely will not end up with a person we need now and then if all the restructuring is completed, we may have an issue of the GM then being out of sync in a capability matrix with the new and strongly capable restructured Committee and Constitution leaving us with another issue?

I think this is the BIG issue... Any attempt to fill the position in any permanent capacity IMO is pointless until these issues are sorted.

 

Hence why the members meeting that was requested LAST YEAR and using all sorts of feeble (IMO) excuses to delay it until now has IMO put us in a potentially un-recoverable position unless drastic action is taken.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I wonder how many applicants are going to be willing to relocate to Canberra based on the exec's lust for sacking people?

 

 

[drifterdriver]

Gotta have some aeronautical experience or will possibly be led up the garden path by those that do in my opinion.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Closing the applications on 18 Jan having been in the hands of a recruitment agency and on Seek for one week is an utter, utter mockery of process.

 

How many of the people we might like to consider would be on annual leave during January (school holidays) and unlikely to ever know the job was on offer. And why would a National Body go to a Canberra only recruitment agency? Why not go to a recruitment agency that has some clout in the aviation industry. They want the Gen Mgr to have aviation industry experience so why wouldn't they want the recruitment agency to have demonstrated success in aviation industry appointments.

 

It seems that the Board want this process to fail. More jobs-for-the-boys? Who do they have up their sleeve to slip into the job on the grounds that it needs to be filled urgently and they are being hassled by CASA to get somebody on board?

 

 

[winsor68]

We need to stop this urgently and NOW.

 

Any ideas on how to freeze the current executive from making any changes until this is sorted? Feb 9 will be too late.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

anyone researching a position at the RAA is bound to know that they could well be under extreme scrutiny if they where deemed to be incompetent. I am confident that the board won't shoot themselves in the foot with CASA waiting in the wings to start work on auditing the pilot register.