RAA Safety-Training-Compliance Coordinator appointed

[nomadpete]

Good point Dazza.

 

At first sight it looks like more of the same old behavior of past exec.

 

However, bear in mind that we have all been bitching about the perceived ineptitude of the board, so in this instance I am prepared to accept that maybe Ed is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to getting RAAus into safer waters. He is privy to inside information that we don't, stuff that may not be appropriate to publicise. We have to take his decisions on trust. At least until we see the longer term results. Would you put every important decision through a board that so many of us seem to have no faith in? At this time we may be better off with a benevolent dictator than a puppet. Come September I may change my mind.

 

PeterT

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

I applaud the fact that Myles has been retained in the organisation...Well done Ed ..great decision.....Maj...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Wow..Dumbfounded. On one hand we have the first positive step ive seen in along time to improving safety and training standards in the RAA since the introduction of a second ops manager. But on the other hand, jobs for the boys mentality.

 

An incredibly brave move, but I for one would have liked at least SOME involvment of the RAA ingeneral, CFI's etc. Recruitment, etc. Even perhaps a chance to throw my hat in the ring for the Job (as an example).

 

Great idea, implemented poorly. But, as the old credo goes, even a bad plan is better than no plan.

 

 

[Admin]

Received an email from Board Member John McKeown (he does say to pass it on):

 

Hi all, this a part of a recent email sent to RAAus President Ed Herring. Please forward it on.

 

Ed, without any consultation with the Board, or a formal Board vote, has appointed Myles to a paid staff position. This is against our constitution and is illegal. Ed also does not have the power to authorise the salary expenditure. Again he has acted as a dictator, and in an illegal manner. He put in writing that the decision is completely his.

 

Myles, as a long time Board member would be fully aware his appointment is not legal.

 

"Sorry Ed, all your good worked is now trashed. You alone do NOT have the power to appoint anyone. Add to that you have grossly exceed your financial authority.

 

Myles appointment is illegal. Full stop.

 

I am currently in hospital in Turkey, but when I am able I will formally move a Censor Motion against you on the Board Forum. "

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Ah the CASA boys must be rolling with laughter, they are the one's who will really take our freedoms away,....not our own organisation............................Maj...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

No board consult or vote? Hmmmm

 

 

[facthunter]

STUPID!!!. especially with the history of bad governance we have had. Why do something contentious for heavens sake? If it can be challenged from a legal standpoint, Makes it a waste of time, shortness of which is the justification for this hasty move. Bl@@dy H#ll ..What's next? Nev

 

 

[Captain]

STUPID!!!. especially with the history of bad governance we have had. Why do something contentious for heavens sake? If it can be challenged from a legal standpoint, Makes it a waste of time, shortness of which is the justification for this hasty move. Bl@@dy H#ll ..What's next? Nev

So nothing appears to have changed re good decision making, practice and governance around the Executive & Board within RAA ………… no matter what be the merits of this new position or appointment, the requirements or desk thumping of the CASA, or the good intentions of any Executive member.

 

No Board consultation and more retrospective approvals of Executive decisions that have been made on questionable grounds and perhaps questionable legality.

 

Why the indecent haste and lack of due process?

 

 

[Aerochute Kev]

So if Myles had resigned to take on this position and the Board overturns the appointment he could have been given an option to withdraw his resignation as it was on the understanding it was for the purpose of taking on the new position.

 

As he resigned to "pursue other options" the Board cannot now give him any option to withdraw his resignation.

 

Am I reading this correctly?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Something HAS changed. The secrecy has been broken and ED has announced what he has done.

 

To some extent that has allowed democratic debate on this forum, so that's a step in the right direction.

 

Did he have to act with great urgency? I think he did, and I would have done the same, asking the board members to ratify it.

 

You all have been given the reasons for that urgency several times over the past two years, so a little thinking and assessment of the biggest threat to RAA's future is in order.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Tell me again, how many audits did CASA let the RAA fail before pulling the plug?

It was four audits, and they didn't pull the plug, they issued stronger requirements.

 

These requirements are being complied with, so this is no longer a CASA concern issue, because although there is a backlog, no non-complying aircraft are getting back in the air.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

I think the 'job' description says it all. The current issues with rego's have little to do with training compliance. Surely, any decision to create a poistion (which I would be fully suportive of) needs committee approval. Its really that simple. IMHO

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Something HAS changed. The secrecy has been broken and ED has announced what he has done.To some extent that has allowed democratic debate on this forum, so that's a step in the right direction.

Did he really have to act with great urgency? I think he did, and I would have done the same, asking tyhe board members to ratify it.

 

You all have been given the reasons for that urgency several times over the past two years, so a little thinking and assessment of the biggest threat to RAA's future is in order.

Did he have to act with great urgency? This position was mentioned in the March board meeting minutes (albeit with a different title). That meeting was held some 9 weeks ago. If the board had acted in an appropriate manner then perhaps the recruitment process would have begun at that point in time more than 2 months ago. Instead, they sat on their hands until now and did nothing which leaves them with little option but to act with haste.

 

And all the while Ed will blame CASA or some other factor for forcing them down this path.

 

It's reminiscent of a number of events in recent times:

 

• Not acting on audit findings from 2009 and having them show up in the November 2011 audits,
   
   
  
• Ignoring audits from November 2011 and doing nothing until the right to register aircraft is revoked by CASA,
   
   
  
• Appointing a CEO without due process that left us with a steaming mess.
   
   
  

 

 

I could go on but I think we all get the picture.

 

For me it's not the appointment of Myles that is the problem. It is the deceitful way his resignation from the board was publicised that grates on me. It was the lack of due process in terms of assessing whether he was the best candidate when no proper search was undertaken. It was the way that a board member acted outside his authority to do this. It was the way that more excuses were used to hide the lack of board performance and justify the appointment on such short notice. They're the problems.

 

In general the real problem is that there is still a lack of respect for the rules of our association and a complete disregard for the membership. It's time for some real wholesale change to take place.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I agree with you Motz, but we don't have a list of any incoming multi million dollar cases, and my agreement with Ed's decision is based on ensuring the survival of RAA.

 

The figures I've done, and yes they are inaccurate indicate RAA in its present form can certainly survive and grwo, but urgetnt action is needed,

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

There should have been consultation with the Board. Cobble together a job description, call for expressions of interest for a temporary position with possibility of extension, closing in a week. A small panel to consider them, a teleconference to finalise - how hard would that be? What about existing staff and temporaries who might be able to fill the role immediately?

 

This is why we need people with a managerial background, or at least an understanding of the rules & regs that govern the organisation. There's also the possibility of getting interested people together to form a "S-T-C job recruitment" team to handle trimming to a short list. Some things could be done concurrently. It could be done quickly and transparently.

 

Had the correct process been followed and had the same appointee, I would have been satisfied. This one will forever have a dark cloud over it.

 

Sue

 

 

[Guest Escadrille]

Perhaps Ed could publish the reasons for his decision in haste..or was he pushed?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Airsick, the jury's still out right now; you could be 100% correct, but given the immediate public announcement I see this as a potential shift away from what we have been critising.

 

They've held their nerve against massive criticism on CASA Audit 4, and CASA no longer has any grounds to think non-complying aircraft are getting into the air.

 

We just have to stop the flow of stall/spins in particular.

 

 

[Captain]

Something HAS changed. The secrecy has been broken and ED has announced what he has done.To some extent that has allowed democratic debate on this forum, so that's a step in the right direction.

Did he have to act with great urgency? I think he did, and I would have done the same, asking the board members to ratify it.

 

You all have been given the reasons for that urgency several times over the past two years, so a little thinking and assessment of the biggest threat to RAA's future is in order.

Sorry Tubb, but I disagree.

 

The communication on the RAA News section is an improvement (but from a pretty low base that only lifted around the time of the Feb 9th EGM) but that little +ve is SWAMPED by the fact that some Board Members only learnt of this appointment through that News advice or around that time.

 

It is clear that the Board were not consulted, nor did they approve this appointment.

 

It is also clear that the CASA have recently been "thumping the desk" as one Board members described it, re RAA's recent safety record.

 

Regards & nice to debate with you again. Geoff

 

PS ...... I also strongly agree with Nong's post # 18, and fear that this appointment has been made just to placate the CASA's reaction to this year's accident record.

 

 

[nomadpete]

If Myles provides us with a list of his action plans and timeframes in the next couple of days, it will restore some faith in the urgency of his appointment. And may ease some of the pain caused by the unconstitutional way it was achieved.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

What will it take to get people to understand that our constitution and the associated ACT incorporated associations act are NOT optional documents that provide loose guidance only.

 

We don't yet understand why the need was so urgent....... but no matter how urgent, it was not urgent enough to go outside of the controlling legislation and to avoid fiduciary controls requirements.

 

What could possibly be so urgent that the requirement to brief the board and get their agreement before acting was not possible...... For the timeline to suggest it was required would mean that if he hadn't been appointed publically yesterday then what?????

 

There are many questions and not many answers at this stage. Hopefully we can get a feel for what the urgency was that controlling documents were ignored and board knowledge and approval was either ignored or sought after the fact! The previous concept of board approval was that the exec all agreed then they needed approval only from enough other board members to get across the line...once they have those numbers the rest may not even know of the decision. That whole just advise and get >50% acceptance is a fundamental flaw with how our board/exec is managing.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Oi! What is all this moaning about?

 

Congratulation and thank you .. Ed..

 

The president has stepped up to the plate as soon as he has stepped on to the plate the bagging has started, come on boys and girls have some respect.

 

Some thing must be correct we are back flying legaly.. Just by reading what you mob type, I can work out what is correct all can not be bad and nasty.

 

If the same amount of effort is exerted goind forward than on the trumped up negatives we would be on Mars.

 

"MORE EFFORT ON KEEPING THE HOUSE UP THAN PULLING IT DOWN"

 

Interesting thing:-I have analised the moaners/complainers/negatives are way down south and it is the ones who want to dismember the QLD board numbers.

 

I see regularly we do not have a choice to choose who we want to have on the board. "WHO WANTS TO BE ON THE BOARD???"

 

I must thank Myles for has contribution to the movement - he has been there since the Ultralight Federation.

 

Just side stepping from all the "They should be doings" just imagine the toing and froing with CASA in the conception days.

 

Thanks for that Myles, just imagine the frustration.

 

Myles is not lost because there will be some behind the scenes tooing and frooing and he well respected and who else is qualified for that task.

 

We must all realise when there are intense negotiations in progress.. most of the tooing and frooing must be kept quiet just imagine if the he said she said bitts got out the missinterpretation would be beyond any ones imagineation

 

Another interesting fact has been highlighted, The moaners/complainers I can not see where they have put their hands up for board positions, yes I know it is eaier to sit back and moan and belly ache, getting off their a.s.k and doing something is the very hard work. WE SIT AND WHINGE AT THEM

 

That will our fun for a while.

 

Thank you Myles.

 

Thank you Ed.

 

Regards,

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Sorry Tubb, but I disagree.The communication on the RAA News section is an improvement (but from a pretty low base that only lifted around the time of the Feb 9th EGM) but that little +ve is SWAMPED by the fact that some Board Members only learnt of this appointment through that News advice or around that time.

 

It is clear that the Board were not consulted, nor did they approve this appointment.

 

It is also clear that the CASA have recently been "thumping the desk" as one Board members described it, re RAA's recent safety record.

 

Regards & nice to debate with you again. Geoff

Ever so happy to hear from you and how nice of you to fire a gut shot in the nicest possible way.

 

I'm going to look a right goose if Ed didn't make the decision on the grounds I've outlined, but I see that decision as critical to the survival of RAA, all the other fancy ideas about governance don't work if you don't have an association left to govern.

 

I'm not critical of any board member here, but some people on this forum have repeatedly pointed to bone at Executive members who have stood with their feet in concrete, and perhaps Ed knew if he put this decision up to the board members he would be shot down, the indecision would drag on and the secrecy would drag on.

 

xx

 

 

[flyerme]

Perhaps Ed could publish the reasons for his decision in haste..or was he pushed?

I believe CASA pressure or recomendation

 

 

[nomadpete]

There should have been consultation with the Board. Cobble together a job description, call for expressions of interest for a temporary position with possibility of extension, closing in a week. A small panel to consider them, a teleconference to finalise - how hard would that be? What about existing staff and temporaries who might be able to fill the role immediately? This is why we need people with a managerial background, or at least an understanding of the rules & regs that govern the organisation. There's also the possibility of getting interested people together to form a "S-T-C job recruitment" team to handle trimming to a short list. Some things could be done concurrently. It could be done quickly and transparently.

 

Had the correct process been followed and had the same appointee, I would have been satisfied. This one will forever have a dark cloud over it.

 

Sue

Sue,

In a normal world, all you say is absolutely right and is what we expect. But it seems that our board collectively have not operated successfully in a normal world for some years now. And I sincerely apologise to those individual board members who have tried so hard to drag the others into the normal world.

 

Peter T

 

 

[facthunter]

Don't shoot the messengers Keith and the southern reference is BS. Moaner I am not . The FACTS need addressing. We got where we are by disregarding the rules. No lesson learned yet. Nev