Runciman resigns...AGAIN

[Spriteah]

Tiger and others. I have not yet re-nominated as I was seeing where the insurance ended up. It is looking better. Also if another candidate put their hand up that "I" think will do a better job than me then I would stand aside.

 

Bandit, I respectfully disagree. Although you are there 'to represent an area' that is not your primary duties. You are governing and guiding a large business. This has been lacking (and still is however we are on a better track at the minute) in the past. If I had my way we we reduce the area elected positions and create specific positions to select better candidate with skill sets.

 

To give you an idea at present we have almost no civil litigation knowledge on the board and are currently being sued.

 

Our financials were terrible however a board member (Michael Aaps) fixed them with outside accountants. We have very little financial knowledge on the board.

 

Our paper work is a mess as many know. We need to develop a advanced computerised system and have a dangerous amount of knowledge on the board.

 

These are the types of challenges a board member is expceted to deal with. Not worrying whats happening in North Queensland or Victoria. I am happy to talk on the phone with any persons interested in running for a position.

 

Most importantly bring an open mind and do not fall into a group and vote that way always. That is what destroys boards and allows organisations to get into all sorts of trouble.

 

Regards,

 

Jim Tatlock

 

Victoria Representative (really a national representative vote in by Victorians).

 

 

[facthunter]

Thanks Jim for an insider's view, which is current and relevant. I should have made time to come to Lethbridge or somewhere and talk with you. Your time seems to have been certainly not wasted and you have kept communicating with us all the way even though that would not have been popular with some on the board. Nev

 

 

[Bandit12]

Jim, you can respectfully disagree with any time :-)

 

I don't want to downplay how important it is to bring appropriate experience in management. Rather that attitude is just as important, a willingness to learn equally important, and possibly most important to have people who are prepared to admit when they have no clue about a specific issue but have the foresight to seek the correct advise and not bumble around hoping for the best.

 

There probably aren't many people who already have the skills, knowledge and experience to do the job well. But I hope that there are a few out there who have enough of the above to get started and the right attitude to get them the rest of the way.

 

 

[terryc]

Thanks for your input Jim, I would like to make a point regarding the skill set your promoting as being required on the board. I am a dimwit but if I received a legal letter about some serious matter I would look for an appropriate legal professional to assist me. I notice your comment about getting outside accountants to help get out of a mess, why was it left so long, why wasn't the first sign of problems addressed in that way. All of these matters should be presented to the board by the GM to keep them informed and request direction. It's my opinion that the board needs to get it's nose out of the business of running raa and back to over sight. Then they can spend their energy in the area's that a board should. If the board's choice of the new GM was a good one and I got no reason to doubt it our troubles will soon be on track to being resolved. To add to that if you have what you suggest and you fill the board with legal people, accounting people, IT people and all's well and come next election their all tired or sick of giving their professional skills for free and we end up back where we were then what have we achieved. Like the business side of raa needs a GM who puts processes and procedures in place so the board does also for it's area of operation.

 

 

[Admin]

I think you would have to have been on the RAAus board at some stage to understand why these skills are needed...just in discussion of policy making you wouldn't want to be running to professional people on every sentence that is said not to mention the long delays in decision making waiting for some little bit of information so correct decisions can be made by correct discussions on policy matters. This why ALL successful boards are filled with people that have different skills in many difference areas that effect a business in whole and not all board members have the same skills...once you have been on the RAAus board you will quickly realise just after a few discussions that attitude is only a small component of what is really needed to manage RAAus "TODAY" at a board level

 

 

[Bandit12]

But then you could argue that attitude is a large factor in how so many big mistakes have been made to date.

 

I'll look into my crystal ball and predict that RA-Aus will not be overwhelmed by candidates with the requisite knowledge, skills and experience of running a national body in the near future. And that isn't hard to predict, because there hasn't been an overwhelming number of them for a while either. And if things are as bad as people like to predict, that could be a big disincentive for anyone with the knowledge to get involved, particularly if they feel that their personal assets may be at risk.

 

 

[Spriteah]

Terryc. I never said I want to "fill" the board with those type of people. I want to fill some positions with them. A board needs balance of general flyer's, instructors, importers and business representation in my opinion. Not full of one type of person. As to a legal letter, give it to a Solictor and say sought it out and you might find if you do not guide the Solictor with clear sensible directions the next thing you know is you are $100'000 less in the bank and no better off. But the Solictor is way better off than before he met you. And now you have spent $100K with him it's hard to change solicitors and start again!!!!!

 

That is what can happen.

 

And yes I feel the board got itself into having to run day to day because of poor board decsions, employment choices and not governing. So tell me, does the average flyer have the skills because he has mates and is a good bloke? He speaks his mind and stands strong? They are two good qualities but only useful if that person has life knowledge and some of the previous skills I have previously mentioned. Can work as a team very important which is a tricky one for some pilotie people because many are of a certain ego.

 

Jim Tatlock.

 

 

[Admin]

But then you could argue that attitude is a large factor in how so many big mistakes have been made to date.

That is why I said "that attitude is only a small component"...I didn't say it had no bearing but also another element in the mix is the different matrix of attitude against personality so the wrong personality would even lesser the attitude component much more...another thing to consider but probably not within one's general knowledge is such concepts as Belbin's model:

http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/belbin.htm

 

(if my memory serves me I think Andersons Consulting also had a similar model many years ago)

 

 

[terryc]

Terryc. I never said I want to "fill" the board with those type of people. I want to fill some positions with them. A board needs balance of general flyer's, instructors, importers and business representation in my opinion. Not full of one type of person. As to a legal letter, give it to a Solictor and say sought it out and you might find if you do not guide the Solictor with clear sensible directions the next thing you know is you are $100'000 less in the bank and no better off. But the Solictor is way better off than before he met you. And now you have spent $100K with him it's hard to change solicitors and start again!!!!!That is what can happen.

 

And yes I feel the board got itself into having to run day to day because of poor board decsions, employment choices and not governing. So tell me, does the average flyer have the skills because he has mates and is a good bloke? He speaks his mind and stands strong? They are two good qualities but only useful if that person has life knowledge and some of the previous skills I have previously mentioned. Can work as a team very important which is a tricky one for some pilotie people because many are of a certain ego.

 

Jim Tatlock.

Thanks for that response Jim, I won't comment on the first part because that can go round and round in circles but to say I never said hand it over I said professional advice. without it you can't take the next logical informed step. Your second point, it seems we are in complete agreement. After all raa has been through I think things are heading the right direction. If we get good reps at our next elections things will continue to improve.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Read Col Jones' pre-election brief - there was someone with National, high level experience and the skills we need. Failed to win a seat. Unfortunately the hoi polloi of RAAus don't realise we need these skills and, my observation is, that they vote more along the lines of "hours / years flown" in my "type" of aircraft. Even the local footy club doesn't vote in the highest scorer as Treasurer. The campaign needs to focus on why we need these skills now.

 

We don't necessarily need an aviation lawyer, but we do need people who are sufficiently aware of the issues to contribute to the discussion before a decision. We need people with a good grasp of ethics (when to put it out to tender, no under the counter deals, being fair to all members, transparent decision making, sufficient information to members etc).

 

I have been on many committees, usually asked to come in to salvage the Titanic, and it is my observation that many catastrophic scenes could have been avoided with a little knowledge.

 

First job - educate the RAA members as to why they need these skills.

 

Sue

 

 

[turboplanner]

The longest journey starts with the first step.

 

And what is the first step? Just to get a full compliment of people to nominate as board members.

 

If you do this you will have three or four ACTUAL people to make a choice from, rather than trying to dream up imaginary volunteers.

 

If just this was achieved, and if the elected people were fully informed of all the major issues BEFORE they took up their positions, then is is likely that care would be taken in electing and Executive, or even rules for Executive operation would be voted in, and the issues would be at least discussed and addressed with fresh eyes, and voted on before any agendas got established.

 

With just this, RAA would be a different world.

 

 

[terryc]

The longest journey starts with the first step.And what is the first step? Just to get a full compliment of people to nominate as board members.

 

If you do this you will have three or four ACTUAL people to make a choice from, rather than trying to dream up imaginary volunteers.

 

If just this was achieved, and if the elected people were fully informed of all the major issues BEFORE they took up their positions, then is is likely that care would be taken in electing and Executive, or even rules for Executive operation would be voted in, and the issues would be at least discussed and addressed with fresh eyes, and voted on before any agendas got established.

 

With just this, RAA would be a different world.

TB what you have said is a brilliant summary of this entire thread. We are all saying the same thing but from our own viewpoint. Sue just suggested educating the members I previously said educate the board members and the biggest point of all is communicate constantly with the membership if you want participation. The answer is communicate communicate communicate.

 

 

[kgwilson]

In cross country flying the 3 rules to get you where you want to go are Aviate, Navigate and Communicate in that order. It seems that our organisation has been using a similar model.

 

What is really needed is for that to be completely reversed. Communicate well with the membership, then the process of Navigating the organisation through the mire will become much clearer. Only then if we have done every thing right will the powers that be allow us to Aviate.

 

 

[Bandit12]

KG, if ever there was a good principle to follow, you just described it.

 

 

[facthunter]

Analogies only go so far. You could have a lawyer on the board but there might be a situation where you need a "specialist" LAWYER say TAX law Or AIR law.or CRIMINAL law. When the heat is on you need the best and you are not going to get say three lawyers on the board who could run a case on specific legal matters. You may always have to pay for extra advice. CASA should have on tap legal access and unless there was a conflict of interest between CASA and us, why couldn't CASA's resources be available (at cost or even free) to us. After all they have delegated responsibility to us the carry out functions that fall under their jurisdiction and they could do IF we weren't there doing it.

 

If the fridge broke down would we be better having someone on the board who could fix it?. I know it is not the same but it is not so different. We contract out our magazine. We don't make our own furniture

 

It is possible we could employ a permanent staffer who had accountancy skills but that would not be a full time thing so he would perform other duties.

 

How the office staff are employed to do some duties for the board members has been difficult to arrange. Obviously the GM should be responsible for that and every other day to day matter that comes up that doesn't require board oversight.

 

I mentioned the 'policy manual" in previous posts..Over time this should be developed to provide guidance to individuals and be CURRENT at any given time. IF someone does something that is contrary to the known current policy it should be explained WHY? and the policy reviewed at that point and the action justified at board level, . I have personally seen this work and gives all members the right to propose policies for the organisations guidance. The policies have to be accepted bu the board or if of a major nature by a referendum/ballot of members The policy manual becomes a living document reviewed when require Such as a "sunset clause" or annual review by the board or a delegated committee and finally OK'd by the board..

 

What I have written on this here is just a bit of thought music and conceptual in nature. The RAAus has had a policy document in the past but seems to have NOT been an active document, and ignored mostly.. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

Sounded a bit Heavy Metal to me, but yes I see where you're going.

 

 

[Spriteah]

Fact Hunter. A lawer on the board is not there to do law work for RAA. They are there to explain principles to the whole board to assist with decsion making. An accountant would not do our books, but can conduct audits to confirm they are being done correctly. No one is trying to replace outside services with board members. just improve the way the board functions.

 

Jim.

 

 

[kaz3g]

But then you could argue that attitude is a large factor in how so many big mistakes have been made to date.I'll look into my crystal ball and predict that RA-Aus will not be overwhelmed by candidates with the requisite knowledge, skills and experience of running a national body in the near future. And that isn't hard to predict, because there hasn't been an overwhelming number of them for a while either. And if things are as bad as people like to predict, that could be a big disincentive for anyone with the knowledge to get involved, particularly if they feel that their personal assets may be at risk.

My crystal ball tells me something different. I see several great candidates standing for positions to compliment the good ones already there. I see opportunities for RAA's future growth and success. And I see a better mix of skills between all those mentioned in earlier posts as the path for achieving them.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Spriteah]

Kaz I hope your Crystal ball is accurate.

 

jim

 

 

[kaz3g]

Kaz I hope your Crystal ball is accurate.jim

Me too, Jim. I think this is our collective last chance to make a go of it and I hope the wider membership comes to understand that things have been seriously mismanaged at RAAus for quite some time...financial accountability, risk management, staff morale, operational and administrative standards have all been shown to be sadly lacking.

 

The old guard and their supporters on the Board need to move on or be moved on. It would be nice if this could be done decently and without rancour but I fear this wont happen. It certainly won't happen if people vote blindly based on old allegiances or ignorance.

 

If it doesn't happen, the organisation will continue to be mismanaged from the top and will cease to exist, at least in the current form where the sports body has the administrative role under contract from CASA.

 

I am very glad that Steve resigned because I think his style of management demonstrated a serious lack of interpersonal skills and he was therefore part of the problem. I don't doubt he is a very capable officer and serves his military masters well and I feel for him as a person because I accept he did his best for us as he saw it. He just wasn't the right guy.

 

I think Paul Middleton has equally done his best as he sees it. His hands on and interventionist style was undoubtedly well received and successful in the early days when it was a small show. It was HIS baby, as he told me not long ago. It's time that we all calmly told him that it is now OUR organisation and we want to see it blossom into maturity. Paul needs to sit back and watch proudly from the sidelines because the fate of those who stay too long can be an unpleasant one. His more fervent supporters should do likewise.

 

At least, that's how I see it...

 

Kaz

 

 

[Guest airsick]

This is VERY critical information to the future of the Association; how can you confirm this?Are board members leaking information to their mates while keeping the membership in the dark?

I wouldn't say leaked to mates, I don't think I have any on the board. But you are right, it was leaked from the board...

 

 

[robinsm]

I am still trying to find out why we are being sued over the sting crash at all. Surely any court action would involve the aircraft manufacturer/importer and not the body that issued the pilots certificate or aircraft approval. If the aircraft was run under RAA Aus rules, and the court case gets up then is it correct that we are all in the can because the rules and regulations mean nothing??

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I think the idea is that you sue anyone remotely involved, with the idea that the non core people will settle early which will further fund the legal case. At least that's how it seems to be in the US. The RAA wouldn't be involved if they weren't some how legally responsible.

 

 

[facthunter]

Debateable. This bloody matter has been around for years and has always ben hush hush. Ok that might be alright for a little while but if it has the serious consequences it appears to surely at some time it must be examined, and the membership told the ramifications. Nev

 

 

[Teckair]

This is off topic and needs its own thread. I think allowing L1s to work on certified aircraft will come back to haunt RAAus if it survives. Maybe that Sting did not have the placards in place about flying at your own risk?