Is RAA Imploding - in real time - as in- NOW?

[bilby54]

For a start the Ops Manual makes no mention of a SMS or how one should operate or who should do it.It is a document in drastic need of revision!

DWF

Not quite sure I agree there.

 

All of the schools (read CFI) have been issued a draft SMS and there is no reference to it in the current ops manual. Givent that there about 200 CFI's and ??? 10,000 members it is unfair of CASA and RAA to require the minority to change for the benefit of the majority. Most CFI's are great at teaching people to fly but have very little idea of how to write an SMS.

 

As CFI's we are bound to follow the ops manual and relevant Acts pertaining to civil aviation but nowhere does it talk about SMS's. As was also mentioned, if CASA wants additional requirements, then why do I as a CFI have to wear hours of unpaid labour, research and writing to fullfil it and then cop a barrage of abuse and lack of business when my rates go through the roof for NO benefit to members.

 

If we could operate as per the operations manual and the relevant CAO's then everyone would fly safe but that does not happen now so why does anyone think that things will change with having an SMS on board? Until we ALL get together and change the culture towards safety in flying then none of this will benefit anyone

 

 

[paulh]

Aha - I was wrong; as of this afternoon we do not have a 1-man 'the Executive' - we have a NO-man 'the Executive'. Paul Middleton has resigned as the Secretary, but not from the Board.Still, I have been told that all will be well - so no worries, eh? Nullus anxietas; we have no President, Treasurer, Secretary, or Public Officer.

Did the president resign as per his ultimatum?

 

 

[Tiger]

Give the board members a chance to sort out the new Executive.

 

We only had the resignation of the President on Thursday and the secretary Friday, today, so let them get on with the task in hand to sort out our new Executive.

 

As Jim Tatlock said, CASA has been advised, now we need nominations from board members for the positions and then final ratification of those nominations by the board.

 

Lets see what late next week brings us.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Only from the Presidency but not from the Board.

 

Nothing on RA-Aus yet. Perhaps they might all change their minds over the weekend?

 

 

[Tiger]

I would assume the President resigned as per his ultimatem as he was not getting his own, undemocratic, style of management past sufficient board members

 

 

[Tiger]

AlfaRomeo,

 

Don't wish that on us. We had one who was reincarniated, we want no more. Yes Ed is still on the board. I thought that he would have quit the board and followed the path of those who went before him over the past few weeks.

 

 

[Oscar]

Mark Clayton, GM, has been appointed Public Officer.

Apologies, that is indeed correct (assuming it was a valid appointment! - the way things have gone in the past few weeks, perhaps nothing should be taken for granted! - but for the sake of the organisation, let us all hope it is kosher).

 

 

[Downunder]

Myles resignation was immediately posted on the RAA site so he could move into a paid position but the latest resignations are not worthy of a mention............hmm..............

 

 

[Keith Page]

Myles resignation was immediately posted on the RAA site so he could move into a paid position but the latest resignations are not worthy of a mention............hmm..............

Downunder one just wonders...the mind just boggles...

 

I just wonder how many big/little agendas are hidden about this place and I suspect Myles was a big threat to all these tricks. I think they are concealed like fox traps.

 

I suspect Alfa will have something to say about this.

 

Regards,

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Oscar]

OK, now can anyone tell us how RAA now escapes - while remaining compliant with its Constitution - from the apparent Catch-22 situation of: (bolding has been added by me)

 

a) the Executive shall be responsible for all matters relating to the affairs of the Association whenever the

 

Board is not meeting and, subject to any decisions of the Board, shall make all the

 

decisions necessary in relation to the Association's business and shall act in the case of

 

emergency.

 

plus:

 

b) No business shall be transacted by the Board unless a quorum is present and if within half

 

an hour after the time appointed for the meeting a quorum is not present, the meeting

 

stands adjourned to a place and time to be determined.

 

when:

 

c) Any seven (7) Members of the Board including at least two members of the Executive

 

shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the business of the meeting of the Board.

 

It seems, prima facie, that without 'the Executive' - or at least two members thereof - the RAA cannot conduct business between Board meetings, nor can it hold a Board meeting!

 

 

[David Isaac]

Clearly that is an example of what is termed in 'Interpretive law' as an 'absurd' outcome and cannot be be applied to prevent a Board meeting to elect a new executive.

 

So there us no Catch 22 and the Board will simply meet and elect a new executive.

 

 

[Downunder]

The RAA resignations have now been recognised on the RAA website news section.

 

 

[rankamateur]

OK, now can anyone tell us how RAA now escapes - while remaining compliant with its Constitution - from the apparent Catch-22 situation of: (bolding has been added by me)a) the Executive shall be responsible for all matters relating to the affairs of the Association whenever the

 

Board is not meeting and, subject to any decisions of the Board, shall make all the

 

decisions necessary in relation to the Association's business and shall act in the case of

 

emergency.

 

plus:

 

b) No business shall be transacted by the Board unless a quorum is present and if within half

 

an hour after the time appointed for the meeting a quorum is not present, the meeting

 

stands adjourned to a place and time to be determined.

 

when:

 

c) Any seven (7) Members of the Board including at least two members of the Executive

 

shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the business of the meeting of the Board.

 

It seems, prima facie, that without 'the Executive' - or at least two members thereof - the RAA cannot conduct business between Board meetings, nor can it hold a Board meeting!

Looks like time for a bit more justifiable action outside the constitution, oh well that shouldn't cause too much grief, we have already well and truely crossed that line.

 

 

[Oscar]

When looking at the Constitution, I found it interesting that a great deal of time and effort went into the drafting of things like the handling of Disciplinary matters, yet very little - and all of that as far as I can see extremely formulaic in nature - went into actual 'governance' matters. I imagine it was presumed that 'good governance' would, in the main, result from good will and competent sensible management by those with that responsibility.

 

That's not an unreasonable expectation - but as we now see, when things suddenly slip outside the bounds of 'reasonable' expectation, there is no defined mechanism for handling the situation. As you say, about the only path forward is for things to be done that are technically not handled within the Constitution, and assume that whatever results will be acceptable in the short term and 'ratified' - however that is to come about - in the slightly longer. By any objective measure, that places the current management situation of RAA in 'emergency' mode i.e. in a situation where action NOT consistent with its Constitution has to be adopted.

 

We HAVE to accept this - but we should, I believe, be working our collective butts off to get things back under duly constituted control both as quickly as possible and in a manner that is a demonstrable advancement on the management and governance circumstances that has led us down this path. Despite the fact that RAA-class aviation is something way outside the mainstream of things that are part of daily life for society generally, all we need is for some tragic accident to happen plus parts of the media shouting things such as 'Ultralight aircraft management in crisis, out of control' or similar and we WILL become the focus of attention, with potentially serious implications: such attention is almost never helpful..

 

 

[turboplanner]

we WILL become the focus of attention

You are right now

 

 

[Keith Page]

When the CASA staff arrive at the office monday morning and full of red cordial, I wondering what they will dream up or leave RAAus alone.

 

ED did the only thing to fix the situation as all other means were not giving the desired result.

 

CASA can only suffer the head ache for so long.

 

We will see.

 

Regards,

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Powerin]

When looking at the Constitution, I found it interesting that a great deal of time and effort went into the drafting of things like the handling of Disciplinary matters, yet very little - and all of that as far as I can see extremely formulaic in nature - went into actual 'governance' matters. I imagine it was presumed that 'good governance' would, in the main, result from good will and competent sensible management by those with that responsibility.That's not an unreasonable expectation - but as we now see, when things suddenly slip outside the bounds of 'reasonable' expectation, there is no defined mechanism for handling the situation. As you say, about the only path forward is for things to be done that are technically not handled within the Constitution, and assume that whatever results will be acceptable in the short term and 'ratified' - however that is to come about - in the slightly longer. By any objective measure, that places the current management situation of RAA in 'emergency' mode i.e. in a situation where action NOT consistent with its Constitution has to be adopted.

 

We HAVE to accept this - but we should, I believe, be working our collective butts off to get things back under duly constituted control both as quickly as possible and in a manner that is a demonstrable advancement on the management and governance circumstances that has led us down this path. Despite the fact that RAA-class aviation is something way outside the mainstream of things that are part of daily life for society generally, all we need is for some tragic accident to happen plus parts of the media shouting things such as 'Ultralight aircraft management in crisis, out of control' or similar and we WILL become the focus of attention, with potentially serious implications: such attention is almost never helpful..

I haven't read ACT legislation, but in other states the constitution of an incorporated association must contain certain rules...such as the disciplinary rules. You will find these rules are probably directly copied from the ACT Model Rules for associations...and therefore very little time and effort went into them.

As I've mentioned before an association only has a legal obligation to its own members to follow its own constitution. In many cases associations can successfully run on good will and competent management and the constitution is only used as a fall back position in case of major dispute. We, the members, can allow a little or a lot of latitude as to how closely the constitution is followed. As you say, we really have to accept some variance to the constitution just to get things back on track. But as the constitution forms the common ground on which all members stand so it makes sense to have it as compreshensive and foolproof as possible.

 

 

[Oscar]

Yes, I don't dispute the necessity of having fair and reasonable rules for such matters at all - but the lack of thought for basic governance issues is what does trouble me. Yet - it's extremely typical.

 

An example: some years ago, I was a consultant to one of Australia's major Universities - one of the 'Group of 8'. I was tasked with examining and developing a policy for Intellectual Property control - absolute basic stuff for a University that was one of Australia's major Research institutions, and that underpinned quite literally multi-millions of $$ worth of Research Grants each year, not to mention its potential income capacity from patentable discoveries from research. This institution had an annual turn-over of in excess of half a BILLION dollars each year.

 

When I looked at the existing arrangements, I found two paragraphs covering Intellectual Property rights - and FIVE PAGES devoted to the rules for applying for an on-campus Parking Permit. Seriously: I.P. rights governed the entire regime for delivering on-line education, let alone income potential. However, obviously those who had defined the rules for the organisation were more concerned with protecting their ability to park near their office than trying to generate reasonable income for the institution!

 

My point is simply this: the current Constitution for RAA does not provide adequate, considered mechanisms for 'good governance' to handle anything beyond management carried out to the best possible level. Once that has descended into the sort of chaos we are currently experiencing, it is an 'emergency' situation. Hence, my use of the term 'imploding' - as things stand, we have painted a target on our backs for CASA to state that we are not an effective organisation to handle the management of the exemptions under which RAA-class aviation operates. At the best we can hope for a level of tolerance from CASA to get this situation sorted - but if we do NOT demonstrate the capability of transcending the current situation, then we are, frankly, suicidal in terms of RAA's future existence.

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Please don't compare RaAus to Australian universities, they are mostly full of dolts. The only surprise is that you were surprised to find they are retarded and more interested in parking than serious issues.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

I haven't read ACT legislation, but in other states the constitution of an incorporated association must contain certain rules...such as the disciplinary rules. You will find these rules are probably directly copied from the ACT Model Rules for associations...and therefore very little time and effort went into them.

Correct Powerin.

 

Anyone who wants to understand the RA-Aus Constitution needs to read it and consider what they read in the light of the ACT Associations Incorporation Act and the accompanying Regulations and the Model Rules that live within the Regulations. All reasonably well written and not difficult to read (except for RA-Aus Constitution).

 

Then, when you have decided how our Constitution can be improved, write motions for Special Resolutions for presentation to a General Meeting (either the AGM or the Natfly GM or a specially convened GM). Then persuade more than 75% of the members who vote on the motions to support your motions. A slightly easier way is to put your suggestions to the Constitution Review Committee (CRC) who can be reached via RA-Aus Office.

 

In many cases associations can successfully run on good will and competent management and the constitution is only used as a fall back position in case of major dispute.

Exactly how it should be and is in a number of Associations I know of.

 

We, the members, can allow a little or a lot of latitude as to how closely the constitution is followed. As you say, we really have to accept some variance to the constitution just to get things back on track. But as the constitution forms the common ground on which all members stand so it makes sense to have it as compreshensive and foolproof as possible.

I don't believe there is any latitude allowable. Allowing the Board or Management to make up the Rules as they go is what got us into our current mess. My conviction is that if you don't like the Rules, follow them anyhow and propose motions for Special Resolutions as outlined above to change the Rules into being how you think they should be.

 

If the Board or Management operate outside the Rules, the things they do in that manner may not have the effect intended. They may result in invalid or unenforceable contracts or expose the rule-breaker to severe personal costs because they have exceeded their powers, i.e. acted ultra vires.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

When the CASA staff arrive at the office monday morning and full of red cordial, I wondering what they will dream up or leave RAAus alone.

So Keith, more dire predictions from somebody who clearly knows what CASA is thinking and drinking.

 

So, what happened?

 

And what will happen next?

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Alfa, Are you at some stage going to take a turn towards making some positive constructive suggestions ?.....instead of just bagging the whole thing continuously ....it's getting a bit old mate !.................Maj...

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

You don't find post 70 positive?

 

I'm afraid I'm too easily baited by KP.

 

I did try to lighten up my response with smilies - clearly I failed.

 

I will try harder to ignore him in future.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Sorry...not really......I have spoken to several people at the Raa office this week who are literally working their arxx off to keep the whole thing going . They are my type of people at the moment, and I know many members agree with me......Maj.....

 

 

[David Isaac]

Ross,

 

I don't believe there has ever been an issue with the attitude or ethic of the staff.

 

As far as I know, AR agrees with that. The only issues I had were with Board behaviour ... not the staff.