Raa Upset ??

[cficare]

his numer is 0405640689 col.

 

 

[Guest David C]

cficare said: ↑

 

“col...it ain't a rumour!

 

I was hoping someone would ring the President and get a formal statement about the current board composition.

 

Col ... I have an email from the President confirming the two resignations .

 

Dave C

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I'd love to give this peckhead outfit the flick and just go back to my original ANO95-10 rules.

 

Goerge Markey needs to be put up against the wall and shot for starting the AUF

 

 

[Guest avi8tr]

I've heard what caused all of this (which I am unable to mention details of on here) and I can't think of a way to solve it, even if I had a heap of time and millions of dollars!

 

 

[bas]

The official announcement is up: http://www.raa.asn.au/2012/05/board-resignations/

 

No details...

 

 

[cficare]

the lack of detail is concerning.

 

Things happen for a reason.

 

The 'press release' is frankly, a joke.

 

No information of what has caused the problems, no reason to feel that developments are going to move RAA forward...I'd suggest the eyes are off the ball!...while RAA is distracted with this occurence...other things are happening.

 

Not impressed by the leadership on this matter.

 

 

[Guest David C]

I agree wholeheartedly with all the above , unfortunately I have to say " it's pretty much par for the course where RA-Aus leadership is concerned " ....more is to revealed in June apparently , just don't hold your breath ..

 

Dave C

 

 

[Guest avi8tr]

I find it amusing that one person making a lot of noise about the situation and inviting others to do he same IS NOT EVEN A MEMBER of RA-Aus!!!

 

 

[Guest avi8tr]

Part of this situation is laughable.

 

The boss gets a solicitors to draft up some paperwork (cease and decist) because someone posted some bad taste material about him in a public forum, which is an aviation forum and refers to him in his capacity of his employment in the aviation industry. The recipient of that information then sends it to the board because they didn't know about it, in an attempt to have him sacked.

 

Now the recipient of the solicitors letter is trying to use the solicitors letter as a bomb shell in an effort to destroy the career of the person that arranged it and potentially belting down the organisation.

 

That person then resigns from the organisation and as such is not any longer even an ordinary member.

 

Did the original poster of the information ever consider that they shouldn't have posted that information in the first place and the reader then wouldn't have decided to call a solicitor? Maybe they could have apologised.

 

 

[Guest Michael Coates]

Honestly, it is all very laughable if it wasn't so important. If you don't want to get in trouble and attract lawyers then you shouldn't post defamatory information to start with.... the same person has done this many times before and then hides behind the fact that the forum can't be used for legal reasons etc etc. Personally, I have had enough ! this is really disruptive to the way that the RAA functions. They should have their entire attention on satisfying the CASA audit with aircraft registration problems rather than internal conflict in my opinion. If the executive are not doing the right thing that it is up to the board to give them better direction and keep them on track, perhaps something as simple as a weekly phone call would suffice.

 

 

[Guest Glenn]

Just had to delete another thread on pretty much the same topic as this one. Either post in this thread or not at all. We don't need multiple threads on the same topic

 

 

[nomadpete]

I'm new on this forum. Looking over the RAAus threads here, I am surprised to see that there has been so little activity. Especially considering the significance of events since the last AGM at Heck Field. I believe that meeting was probably the best attended AGM in RAAus history. People who attended have reported that there were many more members present than was officially reported (an unknown number of attendees were not able to sign the attendance book). Numbers around 300 were reported. Whatever the real numbers, that unprecedented amount of member involvement should send a signal that things allegedly happening have shaken many members out of their fog of apathy.Yes, there were upset members present. Although some were feeling that there was too much aggression shown at the time, I personally think they were just trying to get some answers from an uncommunicative board. Normal polite requests had failed to satisfy their questions (prior to the meeting). As for the constitutional change, it only brought the requirement for calling a GM up to the same standard required by all other corporations (100 signatures).

 

Anyway, I just thought that a forum thread titled "RAA - upset" might have attracted a few more postings reflecting the latest developments in an upset RAA.

 

A dot point summary would make it easy for people to find here where there is none of the clutter found on other web forums. Any volunteers?

 

 

[nomadpete]

I find it amusing that one person making a lot of noise about the situation and inviting others to do he same IS NOT EVEN A MEMBER of RA-Aus!!!

Which one is that?

 

 

[Guest David C]

I don't know .. Who is it ? ... Come on don't keep us in suspence , I'd like to know ..

 

Dave C

 

 

[greybeard]

errr, check the date of the thread and quoted post ;)