Victorian members and others interested

[Spriteah]

Hi all. Jim Tatlock here and I am your current representative on the board until someone works out a way to remove me.

 

I have been critisized for using this site to talk to members. I find this interesting because I do not know of any other way I can talk to numerous RAA members at once other than here.

 

We do not have a forum on the RAA web site. I think they may have tried it but didn't like it.

 

So to find a better way that will not infuriate the current bosses on the RAA board I figured I will just ask all members interested in being kept up to date to send me their email to spriteah on this site and I will create an email group that I can send non-confidential info to as it comes to hand. Now my base audience is Victoria but if you are from another state and want to listen to the ramblings of the South East edge then by all means send me your address and I promise I will not tell your local rep.

 

Regards and safe flying,

 

Jim Tatlock. The 'new' black duck of the RAA board.

 

 

[pudestcon]

PM sent Jim

 

Pud from WA

 

 

[kaz3g]

I'd be very grateful for inclusion in your email group, Jim. Congratulations for trying to open the door to the rest of us.

 

thank you

 

kaz

 

 

[dodo]

Thanks Jim,

 

I appreciate your approach more than I can express. I thank you for taking seriously your responsibilities in a difficult environment,

 

dodo

 

 

[turboplanner]

Jim, the problem with your action is that it will bury information, which is the number one complaint of many hundreds of members.

 

That people have an unwarranted fixation with Ian's site is no excuse.

 

Despite disgraceful criticism of this site, and disgraceful and illegal actions against its owner, the many thousands of posts by hundreds of members and others show that serious concerns over the administration of RAA (not over the Association itself) are held by more than a vocal minority.

 

These people are not your bosses.

 

The behaviour is not unexpected, since previous board members have experienced it, and unfortunately if they had not resigned, but banded together they would have had a majoriy which would have cleaned up the situation internally.

 

I would urge you to keep communicating publicly, with due regard for your constitutional responsibilities of course, because that is how you reach the majority of members.

 

Those members, based on human nature, might well be slow to react, but as we've seen, that reaction is accelerating, and as we learn of issue after issue, that acceleration will become exponential.

 

I've seen this scenario in Associations before, and the resistance is vicious and strong right up to the point where all the inert members finally say enough is enough and move in, and then the boil bursts.

 

 

[Admin]

Jim, it disheartens me to hear that you have succumbed to the wishes of, as you put it, the RAAus bosses, so as not to infuriate a few but have rather chosen to ignore the opportunity in having great and mixed discussions with the members that can be achieved on RAAus issues here on this site, this great resource for the entire RAAus membership. The little private email chains that are created remind me of the French Underground during the 2nd World War and the information channels that were used in those days. To revert to that style of communication only serves to achieve the secrecy and controlled dissemination of information dictated by the RAAus board and thus free from any open discussion.

 

This site provides a mechanism that allows issues to be placed on the table and then discussed in an open manner amongst many RAAus members, a manner that helps and supports board members in their representation, rather then a closed 1 way back and forth email discussion. As many will testify had it not been for the openness of this site then thousands of members would not have known of the goings on at RAAus, the very same goings on that I thought your were standing up and fighting against on behalf of ALL members. Yes the, as you call them, RAAus bosses, have tried every possible way to kill this resource for all members, legal threats, membership refusal, letters of verbal assault, demands of obtaining true identities of users (fat chance of that ever happening), playing games with this site's representation at NatFly, verbal abuse against myself etc etc etc and on and on and on, BUT this site stands firm on the rights of RAAus members to be able to discuss issues relating to RAAus in an open and extremely UNBIASED manner.

 

Fifteen months ago I tried to steer the site to what the "RAAus bosses" wanted by removing all RAAus issues from the site's bellows and furthermore sending a rather lengthy letter of apology to the RAAus board however I did not even receive a reply. I offered to work the site in with their needs, I put my own name on the line against the members to stand with RAAus and still the diarrhoea from Runciman continued. I made a mistake back then by offering an olive branch, a mistake that I will never make again so Jim don't do the same, do what I have learnt and that is to stand next to the members here on Recreational Flying and represent them and use this site as a communication channel then to succumb to any form of "gagging" that may be tried on you by the detractors of this great resource, a resource that has been made great not by RAAus, not by me, not by anything other then actual RAAus members!

 

I hope you will reconsider and do service to the members by continuing to keep the members that you represent, that is not just Vic members but ALL RAAus members, completely and unequivocally informed on all matters pertaining to RAAus affairs that are not subject to confidentiality right here on Recreational Flying and open to completely unbiased discussion.

 

 

[metalman]

call me a dummy , how do I do a PM

 

met

 

 

[Admin]

call me a dummy , how do I do a PMmet

On the right of the main menu bar you will see the word Inbox...click on that

 

 

[skeptic36]

On the right of the main menu bar you will see the word Inbox...click on that

its easier to click on the username below the avatar, then start a conversation, then you don't have to remember how to spell it

 

 

[metalman]

Although on the plus side anything can be discussed via email , no point of view is "off limits" and can be discussed. It would be nice to have a public forum for this but at this time I don't believe we do, this is the FIRST time a board member has ever made any effort to get one on one with the members , I say thanks Jim

 

Met

 

 

[facthunter]

It will be JIM's decision as to the method(s) of communication he utilises. He has already established some considerable credibility, here. Many don't stay with this forum as Jim, John mcK Cazza, and drifter driver do. It may be a bit too "public" for some who could be afraid of victimisation. It's not for us to judge their motives or strengths and the attempt to "not allow" Ian's membership would not be lost on some of them. Jim may find out many things.. It is his right to do so and we have secret ballots for the same reason. This organisation leaks like a seive, if you are in the know. Well it used to and I will assume it still does till I am assured otherwise. Nev

 

 

[Spriteah]

Fellow flyers. I have had a conversation with Ian about the request to have emails and I understand the views and concerns that some members have that I am giving up and complying with the RAA board pressure.

 

I wish to clarify this is not the case and I have no intention of ceasing communications through this board. I look forward to continued discussions and reading different members points of view.

 

Regards,

 

Jim Tatlock.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Sorry if there was any whiff from us of you "giving up" Jim. I didn't see it that way, just that it would be better for the members to be geeting open and transparent information. Whatever you want to do, you'll have very strong support.

 

As for the people putting pressure on

 

you to hide things, they can be absolutely sure that they have hardened the resolve of members to uncover every little leaf

 

 

[ports]

Whatever you want to do, you'll have very strong support.

Ditto.

 

 

[kaz3g]

Jim, the problem with your action is that it will bury information, which is the number one complaint of many hundreds of members.That people have an unwarranted fixation with Ian's site is no excuse.

Despite disgraceful criticism of this site, and disgraceful and illegal actions against its owner, the many thousands of posts by hundreds of members and others show that serious concerns over the administration of RAA (not over the Association itself) are held by more than a vocal minority.

 

These people are not your bosses.

 

The behaviour is not unexpected, since previous board members have experienced it, and unfortunately if they had not resigned, but banded together they would have had a majoriy which would have cleaned up the situation internally.

 

I would urge you to keep communicating publicly, with due regard for your constitutional responsibilities of course, because that is how you reach the majority of members.

 

Those members, based on human nature, might well be slow to react, but as we've seen, that reaction is accelerating, and as we learn of issue after issue, that acceleration will become exponential.

 

I've seen this scenario in Associations before, and the resistance is vicious and strong right up to the point where all the inert members finally say enough is enough and move in, and then the boil bursts.

I don't think there is any intention to bow to pressures... what it does is give Jim an indication of the size and commitment of his support base in Victoria as the sytem we have at present is regionally-based.

 

Personally, I think this sytem of electing representatives creates an unnecessary conflict between the fiduciary duties of a committee member to act in the interests of the whole membership, and the duty of a regionally elected representative to act in the best interests of those who elect him. Those interests should obviously be aligned on almost all occasions, but there may be times when they aren't or, at least, aren't perceived to be.

 

Might be another issue to be considered for constitutional change down the track?

 

kaz

 

kaz

 

 

[facthunter]

You might find that a representative body operating nationally is required to have a state based board. If not "required" at least advised, at a level reflecting the numbers. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

An Incorporated Association can set the Constitution whichever way it wants, but a geographical spread has a better chance of producing widespread feedback. At the present time there is one sort of problem with a clique, but if you take away the need for a geographic spread, quite often a clique is formed from people in one town or one area, which is just as bad.

 

 

[Captain]

Jim,

 

Congrats again for your approach to communicating with the Membership.

 

You have my email address, and may I please be included in any email list that you create for the purposes of communication.

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[Admin]

Fellow flyers. I have had a conversation with Ian about the request to have emails and I understand the views and concerns that some members have that I am giving up and complying with the RAA board pressure.I wish to clarify this is not the case and I have no intention of ceasing communications through this board. I look forward to continued discussions and reading different members points of view.

 

Regards,

 

Jim Tatlock.

Good to hear Jim, I was worried that you had succumb to the pressures that you have mentioned had been inflicted upon you for posting on here...keep the info coming so members are able to openly discuss...don't forget that this forum, the Governing Bodies Forum, is closed to viewing by the public so only registered site members, bound by the site rules, can see posts and openly discuss any issue getting many different member opinions.

 

 

[Powerin]

An Incorporated Association can set the Constitution whichever way it wants, but a geographical spread has a better chance of producing widespread feedback.

I'm not quite sure which post this was in reply to, and I'm sure you know this, but for general information - Incorporated Associations must include certain standard model rules in their constitutions. If they are not included, and a dispute arises, a court will rule as if the rules were there anyway (in NSW anyway...and the ACT act looks similar)

 

Sorry Jim, for the off topic post.

 

 

[damkia]

Sorry if there was any whiff from us of you "giving up" Jim. I didn't see it that way, just that it would be better for the members to be geeting open and transparent information. Whatever you want to do, you'll have very strong support.As for the people putting pressure on

 

you to hide things, they can be absolutely sure that they have hardened the resolve of members to uncover every little leaf

That being said, then there is no need for a private email list, if it is reasonably found that THIS FORUM itself is the most effective way to communicate with all the Victorian and other interested members.

 

What exactly is the purpose of the private email list? If you are bound by legal obligations in your position as a Board Member under the courts/RAA not to disclose anything publicly on this forum, then you equally cannot legally divulge any of that information privately via email.

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/board-member-costs-advice-sought.54439/page-2#post-264749

 

Keep it open and transparent - no secret societies.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The private email list hides his communication from those who are seeking to bully him into submission, bully him into keeping things hidden from the members.

 

As tough as anyone might be, when you are on the receiving end of constant vitriol and threats (whether they can be carried out or not) it's quite understandable that you might decide it's too stressful to keep running the gauntlet.

 

So I understand Jim's thoughts and I don't think any pressure should be brought to bear on him just because we all want things to improve.

 

I wonder if the workplace bullying laws apply here? That would sort things out pretty quickly.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I'm not quite sure which post this was in reply to, and I'm sure you know this, but for general information - Incorporated Associations must include certain standard model rules in their constitutions. If they are not included, and a dispute arises, a court will rule as if the rules were there anyway (in NSW anyway...and the ACT act looks similar)Sorry Jim, for the off topic post.

#15, para 2

 

 

[kaz3g]

The private email list hides his communication from those who are seeking to bully him into submission, bully him into keeping things hidden from the members.As tough as anyone might be, when you are on the receiving end of constant vitriol and threats (whether they can be carried out or not) it's quite understandable that you might decide it's too stressful to keep running the gauntlet.

So I understand Jim's thoughts and I don't think any pressure should be brought to bear on him just because we all want things to improve.

 

I wonder if the workplace bullying laws apply here? That would sort things out pretty quickly.

There has already been a discussion with Jim about this and, as an ex-VicPol member, Jim knows that bullying is also a criminal offence in Victoria which is where it would be regarded as occurring if a finding to that effect were made.

 

kaz

 

 

[damkia]

The private email list hides his communication from those who are seeking to bully him into submission, bully him into keeping things hidden from the members.As tough as anyone might be, when you are on the receiving end of constant vitriol and threats (whether they can be carried out or not) it's quite understandable that you might decide it's too stressful to keep running the gauntlet.

So I understand Jim's thoughts and I don't think any pressure should be brought to bear on him just because we all want things to improve.

 

I wonder if the workplace bullying laws apply here? That would sort things out pretty quickly.

Workplace bullying laws would apply. Another shield would be the Whistleblowers' legislation. (Delegated Public Service status via CASA)

 

I would assume there would be some Companies Act indiscretions if there is withholding of information based on whether someone "likes you" to the point of having a separate email list for the dispersal of information, more so if it is a private list not affiliated with the organisation itself. This applies to the board/executive and the board/member interactions.