AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 . . . While at least two Presidents are alleged to have tried to get their boards to bring the Association into compliance a majority of board members have not supported them. Some big assumptions here TP. Firstly you are assuming that only the President has a good idea as to how to comply. Perhaps the Board had a view the President didn't like? Neither the past President nor the current one have shown a preference for listening to their Board preferring a "command and control" approach. So the situation is as simple as x number of people, who were elected to represent the members appear to have thought they could ignore their statutory duties. Another big assumption. Who knows what goes on at Board Meetings or on the Board Forum other than the participants. And they aren't telling! No published Board Meeting minutes, in breach of a Board Resolution, other than the last meeting. Prima facie, there seems to have been a "lull" between approving the formal RA-Aus SMS in Feb 2012 and rolling it out to the FTFs that has only just happened in June 2013. How or why that happened, perhaps the Board could explain to us at the next General Meeting. Sadly, there is only one Board position that will be contested in the coming election. NSW/ACT has a healthy contingent of good candidates plus David Caban. It is clear that the incoming Board will be a much better proposition than the one that took office in Sep 2012. Whether it will be any more effective or stick to the Rules we will have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Not sure who said that or how it applies to me? Not a slur or innuendo is it?(definition: "Innuendo" - Italian suppository?) If it seems I make the same point over it is because it is still valid and has never been the subject of a logical, argued correction. All we get is unsubstantiated statements of a contrary position that basically adds up to "the ends justifies the means" and we had to do it and stop criticising the breach of good governance. Yes, you've got it; it's an old saying about repeating the same thing over and over again. Tempting as that may be there is no slur nor innuendo about Keith in anything I have posted here. Saying it doesn't make it so TP. It's a slur to suggest Keith was perpetrating Chinese Whispers and was not telling the truth, and innuendo [allusive, usually depreciatory remark or hint] to suggest he was a mate of Ed, and later "...your mate Ed..." 10/10 for that one. However, as it turns out we now know that it is NOT true- but don't expect to see a retraction any time soon from KP. We have not reached the point where we can decide that just yet Like to elaborate your innuendo so that I can copy it to Slater & Gordon? By all means; I was referring to your paragraph "CASA looking at the way RA-Aus is being operated could well be considering their options. The facts would not be lost on them that RA-Aus is not well run by the majority of the current and recent Boards. The Board was dragged by the members to an extraordinary General Meeting four months back to account for their governance and communication failures and yet we have just witnessed the biggest governance failure ever (President Ed acting in defiance of the Board) and communication failures like Myles resigns to pursue other opportunities" when it really was to accept a gift of the STCC position from his mate Ed. And now you tell us that RA-Aus is on the brink of being shut down but we won't learn of this from your mate Ed until after it has all happened?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 . . .My first instinct would be to call a meeting, get them all into the same room; go over the CASA documents very carefully so no one could misinterpret what is required of them; hand out the CASA information on board member obligations; explain the consequences to thousands of people of failing to comply with the deed of agreement; have a cup of tea; read the riot act; and kick their arses into submission. (My highlight)Ed and Steve Runciman must have read your book! Not the usual approach to team work but it might work in the trucking industry - not know for working on Boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 What you seem to be suggesting HITC, is that our elected representatives who don't subscribe to the principle (lack of principle?) of "the ends justifies the means" should forsake their principles and do whatever Ed wants done HIS way? No I wasn't doing that at all, I was suggesting that people put aside their position for now and work together for the good of the members and the Association, if they don't want an interruption to their flying. I made it quite clear that they could resume their bickering and stick the rest of their needles when the house was in order. Just prioritising in order of what's important right now. Nobody doubts CASA's ability to do just that. There are grave doubts that they would take the decision lightly. That they would take this action because some people have been critical of governance and communications failures defies logic. Of course CASA wouldn't do that for governance and communications failures. This has to do with the SMS not being in place. That's what MUST be done. In effect it really doesn't matter how it's done it just MUST be done. If some member from Wadnapudnit had to go and hold the whole Board's heads under water until they ticked the box it probably wouldn't be correct process but if that's what it takes then it's OK by me, and should be OK by every ordinary flying member out there. It's only a couple of Board members that have got their knickers in a twist and can't see the wood because they're too busy getting indignant to do their proper job of looking after the affairs of the Association. They can get their satisfaction later, right now there are bigger issues to attend to. This is like trying to teach at kindergarten, can't people simply put things into order of importance? When will people understand it simply MUST be done. From long experience with CASA some of us have a pretty accurate idea of the extent of their magnanimity. EDIT - Removed personal remark, I apologise to AlfaRomeo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 You would make your point better HITC if you weren't so personal. If you have a good case it's not needed. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 He's responding FH, have a look at the personal insults to the President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 They are not good wherever they appear but criticising behaviour is fair. Behaviour could be or appear (to be) stupid or whatever . Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 You would make your point better HITC if you weren't so personal. If you have a good case it's not needed. Nev Quite so, point taken. Just getting a bit tired trying to make the blind see the obvious, I wonder how many different ways you have to say the same thing. The information is all there but some people would rather derail the Association on a Principle than preserve the privilege to fly and sort out their personal issues in good time. There'll be a change of tune if the SMS is delayed and CASA decide to let us have some time on the ground to catch up to where we ought to have been years ago ... the urgency to get regos renewed would soon fade away until the rest is done too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Yeah I know.. We are all a bit frustrated to see the organisation where it is. Cheers Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Yes, you've got it; it's an old saying about repeating the same thing over and over again. Thanks. A technique I learned from my wife - it works on me. It's a slur to suggest Keith was perpetrating Chinese Whispers and was not telling the truth, No, Alan, Chinese whispers happen accidentally due to the "photocopier effect" it is not intentional on anyone's part classic example "bring 4/6 we're going to a dance". It was questioning the validity of 4th hand info but not as a reflection on the communication process not the communicator. and innuendo [allusive, usually depreciatory remark or hint] to suggest was was a mate of Ed, and later "...your mate Ed..." True allusive and true judgmental but, that is the public perception that is created when two people get together and one suggests the creation of a job and that he'd be ideal for and the second person approves the job without reference to anyone else and gives it to the person who thought it up and asked for it. And just to rub the salt in the resignation is announced coyly as "to pursue other opportunities" and the next day the "other opportunities" is revealed as a very controversial appointment of jobs for the boys (damn! there I go quoting myself again). Can't help but be a bit judgmental about that smelly situation. Like to elaborate your innuendo so that I can copy it to Slater & Gordon? Firstly, my apologies for the "Slater & Gordon" crack. Turned out to be not as funny as I thought it would be. Not funny at all actually and not something to joke about here anyhow - ever. However, the paragraph you quote I thought was pretty straight forward no alluding going on there - straight statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 HITC, firstly you removed the remark before I read it so no offence possible. Second, I will try to lift the tone (a lot). Frustration is there on both sides of this discussion but I shouldn't let it get to me either. Let's get back to the facts: - there is an RA-Aus SMS and it has been on the books since Feb 2012. - the template for the SMS has been rolled out to the FTFs and they have a date to have it completed by. - OH&S (WH&S) law Australia wide requires every place where work is undertaken to operate a safe system of work. talk to any CFI and you will (hopefully) find that they have what they consider to be a safe system of work. - Most airports are owned by Local Government. Sure as eggs they will have an SMS and require that all aspects of their empire abide by it. It is certainly the case at the three airports I frequent. - For many CFIs the job of re-documenting their SMS in the format dictated by RA-Aus is not an onerous task just annoying. They will get the benefit of a more formal SMS and having had the incentive to re-visit and review their own SMS. All of the above does not say RA-Aus has done nothing and that CASA would have good cause to shut us down. I will never agree that breaching standards of Good Governance is OK. I say yet again, abandoning good governance and keeping secrets is what got RA-Aus into this mess in the first place. It is not the way to get us out of it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 It is likely that 99.5% of the members are largely unaware of the RAAus issues, or try not to think about them. I have been a member of AUF/RAAus since the early nineties, but I don't know any of the posters on this site. I just enjoy flying. There are obviously wheels within wheels, personality clashes and a lot of history between individuals. I have been following this Governing Bodies tab because the issues may impact on me and on my flying friends, but I find it impossible to sort fact from fiction. Because i don't know the posters i can't judge their credibility, but an opinion of each is forming in my mind. The members who don't follow this site must be blissfully in the dark, because we get no meaningful news on these matters directly from RAAus. A suspicion is growing that many posts are just BS and I should just trust the board and react only to official notices. But what if I'm wrong, and the Board and management are truly dysfunctional? It would be great to get some official reassurance (or mea culpa) from the organisation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 If you had what you think would be great (last line) none of this would have to be written and the expensive meeting called a while back would not have had to happen. I thought the board had the ability to do things OK and that was about 5 years ago, but it has not gotten any better, so watch this space pmcc. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Let's get back to the facts:- there is an RA-Aus SMS and it has been on the books since Feb 2012. This is the second time you have said this. If there is an SMS please urgently copy it/post it/email it to CASA. What I would expect it to consist of is a Policy and a Manual of at least 50 pages. What you earlier said about February 2012 was that there was a board decision to set one up, and that is not the same thing. As we know, there is not an RAA SMS in existence. The non-existence also seems to lie at the root of CASA's immediate concern. We know that the SMS was required to be in place in March 2010, and I would not be at all surprised if a search of the RAA Board Minutes turned up a reference to setting up an SMS even earlier than 2010. We also know that RAA had been given a fresh needle in 2101 that board members from that time were to be managing the SMS, and it seems based on the February 2012 decision that they were not even aware they had this responsibility; from what you are saying is seems as if it was something new to them. The bottom line is, regardless of all the extraneous discussions about constitutions, governance, company structures, good behaviour, bad behaviour, this is all going to play out very quickly, since RAA is currently not in compliance with the CASA Deed of Agreement (which they would be if they had an SMS). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 "oxygen thieving pencil pushing public servants" Dear Daz, our current problems have much less to do with public servants than it has to do with democracy. RAA is screwed because of the people WE voted for not because of CASA. If anything CASA probably should have pulled our entitlements to fly ages ago because WE can't maintain an aircraft register or ensure that we have a safety system that actually ensures safety. Your comment was offensive in the extreme and fails to recognise that most public servants do a great job, maintaining what we have with dedication and put up with some pretty awful crap from craven, self seeking politicians and members of the public, generally unable to find their way out of a paperbag. It is people outside the public service who build models that allow other people outside the public service to scam the system. It is people inside the public service, under resourced, underpaid and mis-understood who spend much time trying to keep the system working and stop the smarties from totally screwing the system up. That the current board cannot read financial statements and the board keeps electing treasurers who can't count is a sad indictment. If members of the board are not prepared to stand for exec positions then perhaps they should resign but to sit there like the front row at a pantomime should not be an option. Can I do a better job - yes of course but this year because there is an airshow in Tannheim "TannKosh" I am off to Denmark and Germany to spend some of the kids inheritance. In NSW I would support Michael Monck - he seems to have a grasp of both the bean-counting, corporate governance, business systems and member ownership aspects of RAA - attributes seemingly lacking in the current board. CFIs - well? - I think we have enough of those at the moment - after all Ed and Eugene will be joined by at least 2 other CFIs being elected unopposed. Col 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terryc Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Quite so, point taken.Just getting a bit tired trying to make the blind see the obvious, I wonder how many different ways you have to say the same thing. The information is all there but some people would rather derail the Association on a Principle than preserve the privilege to fly and sort out their personal issues in good time. There'll be a change of tune if the SMS is delayed and CASA decide to let us have some time on the ground to catch up to where we ought to have been years ago ... the urgency to get regos renewed would soon fade away until the rest is done too. While you continue with this idea you have we [those that care about proper governance] have no chance of getting the board to change it's MO. If we end up being grounded and as a result we can have a board that respects proper process then it will be all worthwhile. I hope that doesn't happen of course. There can never be any excuse for what has been going on with Raa, over the last 12 months. You are entitled to your opinion but please stop trying to bully people into submission. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 This is the second time you have said this.If there is an SMS please urgently copy it/post it/email it to CASA. What I would expect it to consist of is a Policy and a Manual of at least 50 pages. What you earlier said about February 2012 was that there was a board decision to set one up, and that is not the same thing. As we know, there is not an RAA SMS in existence. The non-existence also seems to lie at the root of CASA's immediate concern. Turbo, Turbo, Turbo . . . no wonder I say things over and over! Yes, there was a full-blown, multi page SMS document signed off by the Board at the Feb 2012 Meeting. You want a copy? Join RA-Aus and ask for one. It is not a figment of my imagination. We know that the SMS was required to be in place in March 2010, and I would not be at all surprised if a search of the RAA Board Minutes turned up a reference to setting up an SMS even earlier than 2010. I would be surprised. We also know that RAA had been given a fresh needle in 2101 that board members from that time were to be managing the SMS, and it seems based on the February 2012 decision that they were not even aware they had this responsibility; from what you are saying is seems as if it was something new to them. I only joined the Board in late September 2011. It was all new to me. I can't speak for the others. The bottom line is, regardless of all the extraneous discussions about constitutions, governance, company structures, good behaviour, bad behaviour, this is all going to play out very quickly, since RAA is currently not in compliance with the CASA Deed of Agreement (which they would be if they had an SMS). What evidence do you have for saying that RA-Aus is not in compliance with the Deed of Agreement requirement for an SMS? Will it be in compliance when the CFIs return their completed templates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaRomeo Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 And, as for sending a copy to CASA, as I have said many, many times before, Jonathon Aleck and Lee Ungermann attended the Board Meeting to receive their copy and thank the Board for taking that important step. What happened after that I don't know because I wasn't there and successive Presidents have not told us - anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Escadrille Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 SO Is it true that the great Turbo is not a member of RA Aus? Now if that be true..why the aggressive position then TB? What agenda do you have? Who are you? Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 While you continue with this idea you have we [those that care about proper governance] have no chance of getting the board to change it's MO.If we end up being grounded and as a result we can have a board that respects proper process then it will be all worthwhile. I hope that doesn't happen of course. There can never be any excuse for what has been going on with Raa, over the last 12 months. You are entitled to your opinion but please stop trying to bully people into submission. Terry, I do care about proper governance, passionately. And I look forward to the day when we can take certain people to task over their lack of it. If you let them resign now you'll never have the chance to have your say about them, they'll be gone and forgotten like the previous inepts. And you'll be grounded. And you'll have to find people to pick up the pieces. And they'll take a long while to learn the ropes. And there's no guarantee they'll be better than the current lot. If you get your Rep to bite his tongue (if yours is one of the veto-mob) for a short while and do what's essential for the Association and the members, get the SMS in place, then they can go to town on Ed and Myles in September as they're invited to. Doesn't that make more sense than biting one's own nose off on a principle? Surely people understand the notion of aiming to win the war rather than every single battle. If I didn't care about the Association (which I helped to start) and the flying members' position I wouldn't be spending my time talking about this, but whatever you do you can't fix the situation in one sitting. Simply vetoing the Presidents actions, when he's doing exactly what is required, and doing what previous boards failed to do, doesn't make good sense. It's as poor governance on the part of those doing the preventing, as the performance of the previous mob was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Not sure it is HITC. A censure is no big deal. If an explanation of the circumstances etc can be provided then it is recorded and everyone moves on. No -one should expect to be beyond being accountable. To expect the board to ignore their fudiciary? Duties might be asking a little too much of them too. There are legalities here and not informing other board members of what is going on may be quite a problem. We are going over old ground but why OH why are we in this situation once again? As I said in a post earlier, things not done to process can be contested anytime within statutes of limitations, so it's a risky way to do things. Under the circumstances we are in , and all the trouble of the past why are we even voting on this. I say again, when will we learn by our mistakes? Nev 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Yes, there was a full-blown, multi page SMS document signed off by the Board at the Feb 2012 Meeting. If you are referring to the document sent to all FTF's last Tuesday, that is a proforma shell, not an SMS. some of the single lines in that shell will need to be expanded to 5o pages before it can be referred to as an SMS. A Safety Management System is a living breathing entity, a culture and would be evident to the CASA people at RA Flying schools and clubs throughout Australia and the Canberra offices. It is not possible to reconcile your claim to CASA's threat - one of you has to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 SO Is it true that the great Turbo is not a member of RA Aus? Now if that be true..why the aggressive position then TB? What agenda do you have?Who are you? Andy He just loves us all sooooh much ... don't you sweet pea ... ROFLMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 SO Is it true that the great Turbo is not a member of RA Aus? Now if that be true..why the aggressive position then TB? What agenda do you have? No secrets there Escadrille, I told everyone that some time back; RAA owes me $27.00, and if a suitable reliable aircraft comes up, or if my health decides it, I may well be paying subscriptions again. I wouldn't call my position aggressive, but I am trying, with some very diverse contacts in places not accessible to RAA members to keep you all flying, against: (a) a very bad level of fatalities leading to (b) potential legal claims which could cripple RAA © who do not need to have to admit they don not have a Safety Management System. I imagine that's also at the forefront of CASA's mind. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 He just loves us all sooooh much ... don't you sweet pea ... ROFLMAO He wants to know who I am? Should I explain there's a statue dedicated to me in nearly every Australian town? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now