Admin Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Hi All I thought I would start a thread so everyone can help each other for the upcoming RAAus General Meeting being held in Canberra on the 9th February 2013 by listing if they can provide transport and/or accept proxies. I will start and say that I will be driving up from Melbourne beginning in the early hours of Sat 9th Feb leaving at 2am, the day of the meeting, and returning late that night after the meeting. I can accept proxies and provide transport for 3 others in a Ford Fairmont sedan. Please send me a private message if you would like to come along or wish to allocate a proxy 2
cazza Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Ian, proxies have to be at the office on Friday before the meeting. carol
cazza Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 proxys need to be with the Secretary 24 hours before the meeting....so....do I send my proxy nomination to the Secretary...and hope he allocates it to the person I nominate?...or do I send my proxy to the person I nominate and they (copy) and send the original to the Secretary...I can see many disenfranchised voters ahead! CFIcare, you can do it any of those ways, however, I would suggest, that if you send it straight to the Secretary, contact your proxy holder and let them know you have done that. Given the uncertainty around, I would suggest you send your completed proxy to your proxy holder. They should know to get it into the office 24 hours prior to the meeting and keep a record of those they are looking after. Cazza 2
Spriteah Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 It's my intention to fax a copy of all proxies to the office on the Thursday. Regards, Jim.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 The guide to proxys:- If you cant make it to the February the 9th meeting but want your chance to influence the outcome you can prepare a proxy and provide it to someone you trust that will be at the meeting. I would suggest if you go down this path you should prepare a short guide as to how you want your proxy votes cast in the event that certain circumstances/motions are presented to be voted on, on the day. Understand that your guidance is just guidance and cant generally be absolute because the reality today is that we know very little about why things are as they are and the purpose of this meeting is to first understand why things are as they are. Only then can we propose changes and vote on them. So, the proxy form. Is at the rear of the constitution as Appendix A, or page 22 of the PDF file that can be found on the RAAus website here. Print it off and fill it in. The specific instructions:- Your name is hopefully self explainitory. Your member number can be found on your membership or pilot certificate card. Unless Methusla was your dad its likely a 6 digit number. Appoint:- Enter the full name of the RAAus member that you want to vote on your behalf and include their membership number and their address. Nobody has any motions on notice at present other than infomally??? Gavin and Myles and as such you practically only have a single choice available to you which is to strike out the last option on the page below the (or). Sign it and send it by Aust Post, or fax or scan it and send by email to your proxy holder direct. Make it clear to them that you are sending it direct and it is there responsibility to lodge a copy with the secretary on the Thursday Evening before the Saturday meeting. If people send me proxys I will fax a copy of every proxy through to Sue in Canberra on Thursday night and will cary the original with me to the meeting on Saturday. So as to be fair, if Gavin and Myles motion which has been discussed in other threads is a formal motion and you want your proxy holder to respond only to that motion strike out the "vote as seen fit...." line and write your instructions for that motion on the seond line. Ok so Its filled out now what:- the group Im part of (member details below) are all prepared to act as proxy holders at the meeting and we have set up a generic email address for those that can scan (or take a photo of ) the completed form and send that to [email protected]. Alternately I can accept FAX's on my private home number of 02 66536297 for all the folk identified below (I'll scan and redistribute by email if you cant) , however please remember that most normal humans go to bed at around 11pm and dont like faxes at 2am in the morning especially as I have to answer normally first and then wander over to the fax machine and press go......If for whatever reason it doesnt work try again immediately and we'll let the fax machine pick up the line as soon as you retry. Lastly you can use good old Aussie Post (but dont leave it too late, lets say in the post no later than Friday the 1st of Feb) to the home address of the people listed below (or me if not listed and I'll scan and email and bring the original to the meeting). A number of people have said they feel uncomfortable in giving an unconditional proxy, and I can understand that but at the same time understand that your options in that case are to go to the meeting yourself (Yes please!! the more that attend the greater the power of the democracy in action!) or not participate at all and hope that what you want occurs even though you arent taking any action to make that happen. If people are wanting to go to the meeting and dont have accomodation Im aware of a number of people who will have hotel rooms where there are spare beds, I suggest that you ask here and see if anyone offers for shared costs...... So the members of the group Im part of that are going to Canberra and who are prepared to act as a proxy if you need it:- Me, Andrew Saywell, 18Bluewater Place Sapphire Beach NSW 2450, member# 015361 (mob 0414 962 648) Captain, Geoff Kidd, (get details from Geoff by PM) (NSW) David Isaac, 22 Railway Crescent, Lisarow NSW 2250, member #025205 (mob 0412 221 469) Don Ramsay, 49/1 King Street, Newcastle NSW 2300, member # 026026 Trevor Bange phone: 0429 378 370 (SQLD) Chas Priebbenow phone: 0407 133 621 (SQLD) Cazza, Carol Richards (get details from Carol by PM) (NSW) Michael Monk (can be contacted at the [email protected] email address) (ACT) Each of the above will guarentee to vote your proxy as close to your instructions as possible, or as they see fit in the abscence of specific guidance. I havent asked the others but it that means I need to vote 2 against and 4 for as an example then so be it thats what will happen. People, time is now closing rapidly on the 9th of Feb you really have little more than a week to act. any of us above will take a PM or a mobile or any question that you feel you need to ask us to help you determine what you do. As I said above you have 3 options:- 1) Go to the meeting 2) Give a proxy with instructions 3) Hope things go the direction you are wanting, but accept if they dont cause you didnt choose to try and play a part in deciding Regards Andy
Powerin Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I hope to go and will travel by car. If anyone needs a pickup to and from the airport in Canberra, or to accommodation, just PM me. Might save you a taxi fare at least. If anyone plans to fly into Gundaroo (Dick Smith's strip) a pickup might be possible on my way through. Feb 9th is my wife's birthday....but she said don't worry, just go....bless her. 3
coljones Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Just in case anyone needs a proxy form there is one attached When filling out your proxy I would (and have) strike out the part that says "vote in favour*/against* the following resolution(s):" because we don't know the exact resolutions to be voted and if you get it wrong it may screw your proxy and make it unusable (stale, dead etc). Keep "vote as seen fit on all matters at the meeting." instead. Then wisely choose a proxy and give them a short list of riding instructions. a good place to choosing a proxy would be Andy's list in post #6 above. I will be attending but have given a proxy as a safety issue. I will take proxies if anyone wants (PM me) but consider the effect if Andy stands up with 300 proxies - amazing. Col RA-Aus Proxy form - 2012.pdf RA-Aus Proxy form - 2012.pdf RA-Aus Proxy form - 2012.pdf 1
cherk Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 The guide to proxys:->snip Your name is hopefully self explainitory. Your member number can be found on your membership or pilot certificate card. Unless Methusla was your dad its likely a 6 digit number. ,<snip Andy, enough of the cracks about my father! #09640. ( I never liked him anyway) If you will be agreeable, I will forward my proxy to you on the morrow by FAX.
webbm Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 [snip!] but consider the effect if Andy stands up with 300 proxies - amazing That's the one thing I don't like about the new proxy system. I'll be turning up to the meeting, with no proxies. I'll be potentially standing next to people armed with many proxies, bolstering the importance of their vote and my vote won't count for much. We could also potentially have people armed with a high number of proxies coming in with hidden agendas (absolutely not thinking of any person in particular as I write this). It has me worried and I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell. It is better than the old system (which is why I voted for the changes) but I wouldn't mind seeing a maximum number of proxies one can have, at least to spread the votes. Cheers.
SOS Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Your mind is misleading you into thinking that the proxy holder has 150 votes against your 1. It's just a perception...it's not reality. If you look at proxies as just 150 or so other members standing beside you, then it's easier to handle. 7
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 No matter what you do with proxys from a constitutional perspective there are problems. Those that argue a proxy should only be used for a pre known motion are in effect saying that a member may only vote on known motions and if known motions represent 1/10th of those put then they can only havee 1/10th of the say. Similarly allowing a proxy to vote as he/she sees fit means that you get to vote 10/10th of the options......but the downside is your vote may get voted in a way you didnt intend!! hence the call for someone you trust, who youve seen debate issues before and whose thought process you generally agree with. But, at the end of the day a proxy vote cant possibly be as good or effective as going to the meeting yourself, but lets face it this hobby is expensive, just the flying part alone, if I lived in WA trying to get the rest of teh family to accept that I really need to spend $2to $3k to go to a meeting in the Eastern states would be a bloody hard sell! So, like it or not, its the only way we have of allowing people to have a say remotely. Longer term I would love to be able to introduce the technology that is already available to allow remote participation. When that happens people will see that even though that is a vast improvement over a proxy system it still has its failings, hard to hear all conversations, hard to get a point across by typing when things are heated and teh focus is on that in the room not the computer screen.....etc.. So, all that said, we have to live with what we have. penalising or limiting teh number of proxies someone can hold or use just gives more power to those physically present. If we get 300 people physically there then ignoring proxys, the future direction of RAAus will be set by ~3% of the population and 97% will be denied any ability to change directions so when you look at these problems you need to view them from all angles so that, like it was before the AGM, the rules are not so restrictive that nothing can ever change.... Andy
webbm Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 Thanks for the replies fellas. The problem I have is, although those 150 people may be like minded, they still will vote differently on different issues - it's human nature and a critical part of democracy in any group of people. As long as we don't get into a situation where the success or failure of resolutions is reliant on one or two people who hold a large number of proxies, then we'll be OK. To me that sounds like a micro-replica of the situation some people are alleging is happening at the executive level. Andy - you articulated the pros and cons very well and I agree with everything you said. We would not be able to hold effective general meetings if every motion was predetermined. With this new system, the meeting can be more dynamic, productive and effective. Cheers.
turboplanner Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 Relax web, they may vote differently on issues from time to time, and I've seen many change their mind between the motion and the vote, and a few move the motion and vote against it. However, when they commit to a proxy they have decided to run with whatever their chosen member decides on the day with the benefit of the active dialogue. That's their decision and they've happily made it. You don't have to be concerned about that group of people, just yourself, and democracy will prevail. Plus if their nominee goes again what they want they'll probably lynch him anyway and you STILL don't have to worry about them. 1
facthunter Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 Having a meeting enables facts to be brought out. A directed proxy takes no consideration of the extra intormation. If you give your proxy ( undirected) to someone you trust He/she can take note of the extra information and vote accordingly. They are the two situations you face. The more unpredictable the final questions put the more difficult to have a directed proxy work well.. Either way it is a second best solution to being there in person, but infinitely better than doing nothing. Nev 2
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 People Just in case anyone was wondering and concerned about 1 person having too much power.......The discussion of me having 300 proxys..... at present its much closer to 5.....so........how about it? the clock is ticking down and there isnt that much time left.....The fax hasnt woken me at night once yet....... Andy
Gentreau Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 .....The fax hasnt woken me at night once yet....... That can be fixed, and I don't even have to stay up late
David Isaac Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 I only have 3, so there is nothing to escalate about us having hundreds between us. I am hopeful hundreds will turn up in person at the meeting.
pudestcon Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 I only have 3, so there is nothing to escalate about us having hundreds between us. I am hopeful hundreds will turn up in person at the meeting. I sent mine last night to [email protected] with your name as my proxy David. Pud 1
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 I sent mine last night to [email protected] with your name as my proxy David.Pud Correct! I can see it there....with a few friends.........but less than we need to achieve change....... Andy
Gentreau Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 May I suggest that anyone sending a proxy by email, sends it with a read receipt requested. That would be your proof that RAA have recieved it.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 May I suggest that anyone sending a proxy by email, sends it with a read receipt requested.That would be your proof that RAA have recieved it. Just for clarity the email addres I provided is for RAAus proxys, but its not an RAAus mailbox, just one our ISP provides for group related emails...... RAAus themselves will get a copy on the thursday evening just before the Saturday meeting....... Andy
coljones Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 ... snip...As long as we don't get into a situation where the success or failure of resolutions is reliant on one or two people who hold a large number of proxies, then we'll be OK. To me that sounds like a micro-replica of the situation some people are alleging is happening at the executive level. ...snip.. proxies are not ideal but as has been pointed out there may be reasons of distance or finances or timing that prevent people attending in person. If you constrain the numbers of proxies held by any one person then you constrain the ability of people becoming involved in the business of the association - they become disenfranchised. When you give a proxy you need to trust the person carrying your proxy. If they are already up to their quota of proxies who do you choose? Someone else who might also be quota limited? Give it to the chair? give it to the "enemy"? When you are standing next to a person with 300 votes you really should be thinking that democracy might be a bit problematic but at least some of your mates are there in spirit making sure that the members do get a say in the way the organisation runs. If your position gets overruled you can take faith in the fact that the people who gave proxies didn't have to suffer economic, locale or time discrimination just so you can win. 2
Gentreau Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 Just for clarity the email addres I provided is for RAAus proxys, but its not an RAAus mailbox, just one our ISP provides for group related emails...... RAAus themselves will get a copy on the thursday evening just before the Saturday meeting.......Andy Sorry, I should have been clearer. I was referring to anyone who sent their proxy direct to RAA by email with a copy to their proxy....
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 ..........We would not be able to hold effective general meetings if every motion was predetermined. With this new system, the meeting can be more dynamic, productive and effective. Cheers. And yet that is exactly what your board is trying to do. Have a read of the following exchange between myself and the board (bottom up):- Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "Gavin Thobaven" < [email protected] > Date: 25 January 2013 12:12:16 AM AEDT To: "'Andy Saywell'" < [email protected] >, "'Adam'" < [email protected] >, "'Eugene Reid'" < [email protected] >, "'Paul Middleton'" < [email protected] >, "'Paul Middleton'" < [email protected] >, < [email protected] >, "'Michael Apps'" < [email protected] >, "'Ed Herring'" < [email protected] >, "'John McKeown'" < [email protected] >, "'Rod Birrell'" < [email protected] >, "'Myles B'" < [email protected] >, "'Dave Caban'" < [email protected] >, "'Dave Caban'" < [email protected] >, "'Cliff McCann'" < [email protected] >, "'Michael Smith'" < [email protected] >, "'Jim Tatlock'" < [email protected] >, < [email protected] >, < [email protected] > Subject: RE: Cease and desist Well aren’t you scary????? I have had real tough men try to intimidate me before and you fall well short of them I can tell you. I will continue to do the will of my members as they requested. It’s their motion and they have the right to have it heard. Your threats won’t change that. There is still more than 14 days to the meeting, the secretary has the motion and has assured me it will be on notice. Let’s face it it’s the only one out to the members so far and since you admit knowing about it, I would say it would be hard to say it hasn’t been announced before the meeting. As it has done the rounds of the forum as well it would be impossible to claim it isn’t announced. Maybe a smarter tactic might have been to not show your hand and claim you didn’t know about it. Shame that really isn’t it? Sometimes it doesn’t pay to shoot your mouth off does it? The pile of proxies I hold seem to say that a big stack of members agree in their right to be represented. I hope you are bringing plenty of support. Bring it on. Gavin From: Andy Saywell [mailto: [email protected] ] Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013 7:33 PM To: 'Gavin Thobaven'; 'Adam'; 'Eugene Reid'; 'Paul Middleton'; 'Paul Middleton'; [email protected] ; 'Michael Apps'; 'Ed Herring'; 'John McKeown'; 'Rod Birrell'; 'Myles B'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Cliff McCann'; 'Michael Smith'; 'Jim Tatlock'; [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: RE: Cease and desist Gavin It’s unconstitutional in that it attempts to change the constitution without using the mechanisms that the constitution and the ACT act specify. Fluffy words that seek to deflect from the truth change none of that. My statements as previously made stand unchanged. BTW its not a motion brought on notice (It was not published to the membership in the required timeframe) but that compared to an attempt to change the constitution not iaw the constitution and the underlying act make that merely a piece of side theatre! Im Sorry but you are simply wrong! Continue at your peril! Regards Andy From: Gavin Thobaven [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013 10:15 PM To: 'Adam'; 'Andy Saywell'; 'Eugene Reid'; 'Paul Middleton'; 'Paul Middleton'; [email protected] ; 'Michael Apps'; 'Ed Herring'; 'John McKeown'; 'Rod Birrell'; 'Myles B'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Cliff McCann'; 'Michael Smith'; 'Jim Tatlock'; [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: RE: Cease and desist I was requested by the members of my state to put forward a motion of their making. The motion seeks to have important motions brought to the attention of all members to allow them to have an equal input into the future of their association. The motion is: “ That only motions that have been presented to the full membership of Recreational Aviation Australia can be voted on at the meeting of 9th February 2013.” There is no known way that a request for equal rights and equal representation could be unconstitutional. Only those with a dishonest intent would seek to silence the majority of the membership on important issues. My members have requested the motion and I will continue to promote it in order that they have the greatest possible chance of equal representation. Since this is so far the only motion brought on notice I would envisage that it be entitled to first order of business once motions are permitted in the agenda. Gavin Thobaven WA Representative – Board Member Recreational Aviation Australia From: Adam [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013 9:03 AM To: 'Andy Saywell'; 'Eugene Reid'; 'Paul Middleton'; 'Paul Middleton'; [email protected] ; 'Gavin Thobaven'; 'Michael Apps'; 'Ed Herring'; 'John McKeown'; 'Rod Birrell'; 'Myles B'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Cliff McCann'; 'Michael Smith'; 'Jim Tatlock'; [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: RE: Cease and desist Andy Thank you your concerns are noted. Paul Middleton Sec. RA-Aus From: Andy Saywell [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013 8:51 AM To: 'Eugene Reid'; 'Paul Middleton'; 'Paul Middleton'; [email protected] ; 'Gavin Thobaven'; 'Michael Apps'; 'Ed Herring'; 'John McKeown'; 'Rod Birrell'; 'Myles B'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Dave Caban'; 'Cliff McCann'; 'Michael Smith'; 'Jim Tatlock'; [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: Cease and desist People It has come to our notice that Myles and Gavin are circulating a request for support for a motion that is at its heart unconstitutional. How our organisation meets and how our organisation changes its rules are all defined in the constitution, and the ACT legislation which defines model rules from which the constitution has evolved. If our constitution doesn’t cover a specific area, but the model rules do, then the act specifies that model rules will be taken to be included in the constitution where ours is silent.. So with those statements of fact made, why do people think they can restrict by way of a normal motion, from the floor, the way proxy’s are used from that defined in the constitution? If you want the intent of your motion to be enacted then do it by way of a motion to change the constitution with all that entails at the Natfly GM. Furthermore, notwithstanding the above, doesn’t it seem ironic that the motion itself seeks to prevent motions from the floor without entire membership input, but that motion itself you are hoping to have accepted from just those at the meeting and their unmodified proxy’s. This is circular logic and smells of desperation to the extreme. This attempt belongs on a comedy show not at a serious General Meeting of a national association. In the event that this motion somehow becomes the first piece of business on the day, and somehow is then passed I and the group I am part of will very likely commence a legal action against the board with a view to removing this unconstitutional impediment to good meeting outcomes, and will also seek reimbursement of Travel and Accommodation costs for those members that came to Canberra at their own costs. Just the T&A recovery would be a significant cost I would expect. I know in my own case I expect the costs to exceed a $1000, especially as I and many others now sit around on thumbs on the Friday because you changed the board meeting, which we are entitled to attend, to the day after the meeting with no notice! So please, run the intended motion past the RAAus Lawyer first and lets avoid another costly and inept mistake! Regards Andy Saywell Member 015361
Recommended Posts