RAAus Executive Resignations

[Captain]

Since we have had - as far as I know - NO explanation of the reasons for Middleton's resignation, this has the absolute stench of political manoeuvring.

No matter what you make of the Secretary's resignation and subsequent re-appointment in this last round of elections for the Executive, it is clear from this and other events over recent months (and possibly years) that while the Secretary speaks at length as the "Member's Friend" when face-to-face and in meetings, from my observation he could certainly radically improve his communication with the membership (and also possibly with the Board) at all levels and on all matters when between AGM's and EGM's.

 

Let's hope that this Executive and the upcoming elections in September are the dawn of a new day for RAA & the performance of our Executive and Board.

 

The members deserve no more secrecy unless it involves essential "In-Camera" issues, and no more deferring the hard decisions until the last minute (or a little later).

 

 

[David Isaac]

Yes and he was the same guy that allegedly said "... let Australia go, we must save the mother country ..."

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Your idea of some getting there then "bailing out" would seem to be a little over the top, especially in one case last year when the President sent a personal email to all board members telling them they had no insurance protection for board members and said he would understand if they resigned.

Hello Tiger, yes the claim at the time by the board members that bailed was "due to lack of insurance cover" yet a senior RAAus person told me that this was in fact not the case & the board was always covered. So our information / understanding conflicts; I don't know what the email you mentioned said.

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Hello Tiger, yes the claim at the time by the board members that bailed was "due to lack of insurance cover" yet a senior RAAus person told me that this was in fact not the case & the board was always covered. So our information / understanding conflicts; I don't know what the email you mentioned said.

Gnarly,

 

At 1600 on 30 Apr 2012 the insurance cover for the Board, paltry as it was expired. No ifs, buts or maybes. It was known for 12 months that it would expire at èxactly that time but the CEO of the day returned the information required by the Broker just 4 days before the insurance was due to expire.

 

Then, for the couple of months, a series of week-by-week extensions were granted that had some mighty big "ifs" attached. And in at least one week there was no cover for the Board Members at all.

 

Subsequently, when the insurance was finally placed, the insurance cover was backdated to 1600 on 30 April 2012. The idiots who effed all this up then had the unmitigated gall to cynically claim that their had never been a period when the cover was not in place. Only in retrospect was that even remotely true. On a week-by-week basis in real time Board members were risking a great deal of their personal (family) assets. This did not worry most who were oblivious to the risk just as they were oblivious to the parlous state of RA-Aus affairs. Time has certainly proved who was right to be worried.

 

Also, I would suggest that not one member of the current Board could tell you concisely exactly what risks they take on as a member of the RA-Aus Board. Runciman was asked by several Board Members to obtain legal advice so Board Members could know where they stood but it, to this day, has never been sought or received. I would strongly advise incoming Board Members that this advice is to hand before they put their bums on a Board seat.

 

With all the legal actions pouring in, a number of present and past Board Members may get to test the cover the hard way.

 

Tiger is quoting from an email sent by then President Runciman to all Board Members. Unless you were on the Board at the time you would not have seen it.