Relocating the office...where to?

[dazza 38]

I think that the only people who this effects and so should have a input is the staff. If they are happy to stay where they are, let them stay. If they vote and the majority want to move, then the board and management can come up with a couple of alternatives. Simple, thread done and dusted.

 

 

[rankamateur]

As the core business moves ever more towards collecting the money, it wouldn't matter if the office was in Nigeria!

 

 

[coljones]

As the core business moves ever more towards collecting the money, it wouldn't matter if the office was in Nigeria!

It would probably help. Nobody believes RAA but everyone falls over themselves to get into the deal when an email comes in from Nigeria

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I think that the only people who this effects and so should have a input is the staff. If they are happy to stay where they are, let them stay. If they vote and the majority want to move, then the board and management can come up with a couple of alternatives. Simple, thread done and dusted.

Wish my employer gave me a say in where I work! Lets get real here, the staff work for the association, the association works for the members. As with every other employer in Australia, if you want the job you'll move to where we want you.

 

Sorry if that sounds harsh, I'm sure our current staff do a fantasic job, however I don't see why we'd be asking them if it's okay by them if we move our operations.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Wish my employer gave me a say in where I work! Lets get real here, the staff work for the association, the association works for the members. As with every other employer in Australia, if you want the job you'll move to where we want you.Sorry if that sounds harsh, I'm sure our current staff do a fantasic job, however I don't see why we'd be asking them if it's okay by them if we move our operations.

But is there a real or urgent need for the RAA base to move at all ?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Good opportunity to downsize the office

 

 

[gandalph]

But is there a real or urgent need for the RAA base to move at all ?

No

 

 

[dodo]

But is wouldn't be bad to have a friendly RA "home" airfield with a clubhouse and a friendly outlook to visitors.

 

Somewhere like Holbrook would be good - with it's ultralight museum and ultralight culture. And it's a nice airfield and a nice town.

 

We could leave the awkward bits like administration, Ops and Technical where they are (or move those to Townsville)

 

dodo

 

 

[rhysmcc]

But is there a real or urgent need for the RAA base to move at all ?

No, unless it's an opportunity to save money (which it isn't)

 

 

[rankamateur]

We could leave the awkward bits like administration, Ops and Technical where they are (or move those to Townsville)

Or Nigeria....

 

 

[coljones]

Moving? This is becoming a solution looking for a problem and isn't the solution to any problem we already have. This whole discussion puts me in mind of certain politicians who have all the answers but are completely clueless about the questions.

 

 

[Keith Page]

we already have locals, they live and work in Canberra!!!!

What Melbourne and Brisbane local??

 

Regards

 

KP

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Ideologically, I would like to see RA-Aus housed outside Canberra and at an airport. It is important to be at an airport because everyday when the staff come to work they are immediately reminded why RA-Aus exists. That does not happen in an office in Fyshwick.

 

It does not need to be at an airport so members can fly in. If everything is working well, we as members should never need to set foot in the place. It's a bit like a bank, any time I have to go to the bank in person something is not right with their system.

 

Access to the RAA HQ by RPT is really only an issue for Board Members and managerial staff. Hopefully we will get the number of Board Members down from an insane 13 to a practical 5 or 7 max. and even then, Board Members don't really need to go to HQ as they could hold their Board meetings in the Qantas Club at any of Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne.

 

However, at the moment it is very convenient for the HQ to be where it is. We have a very effective President in MIck Monck and an achiever CEO in Michael Linke. Both are Canberra residents. The endlessly experienced and well connected Michael Apps is just down the road at Cooma an hour's drive to Fyshwick. This is working well at the moment and we should not be looking to disturb that setup for the next 3 years or so. We also have a good and improving staff in Canberra and a move out of Canberra would force many of those to look for alternative employment.

 

The move out of Canberra should happen but not for a while yet. It would be smart to do it in concert with, say, SAAA and possibly other SASAOs. But RA-Aus is not ready for amalgamations and won't be until it has its own systems sorted.

 

This is a matter for a strategic plan. It should not be forgotten but there are a few much more pressing matters to get sorted before we worry too much about the long term base for RA-Aus.

 

 

[gandalph]

Ideologically, I would like to see RA-Aus housed outside Canberra and at an airport. It is important to be at an airport because everyday when the staff come to work they are immediately reminded why RA-Aus exists. That does not happen in an office in Fyshwick

It sounds good Don but applying that reasoning to other businesses would mean that BHP's head office should be on a mine site?, or the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport should be headquartered on Mount Panorama or somewhere similar? Where would you put the Department of Transport though? At an airport and a train station and a shipping port and a ferry terminal and a busy intersection ( well maybe in the very middle of a busy intersection would be ok ) .

 

It sounds good as rallying cry to get the masses on their feet but it really doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

 

 

[flyvulcan]

I might have missed this detail and I don't have access to the annual financial report but could some one please indicate whether we own or lease the current office facility and if we own it, what is its current value?

 

It could be that we are sitting on a $1m asset that is appreciating nicely, or we could be sitting on a $1m asset that is not appreciating at any great rate. Is there anything about the current office that motivates the members to visit? Indeed, is there anything about the (physical) current office that positively motivates the members in any way or make them feel proud about their organisations headquarters?

 

Is the current office/HQ simply a space where business is conducted and nothing more?

 

Are there any benefits to the office being located in its current place (accessibility to CASA, convenience to visit, cheap council rates, etc)?

 

What if instead of having a $1m (or whatever it's worth) non-descript, office complex in an industrial suburb of Canberra that no one visits except on business, the organisation had a new custom built headquarters facility that incorporated office space for our admin staff, a meeting/training room, a club house facility for resident and transient members, and attached hangar suitable for aircraft stowage and to host the annual AGM, all looking out over an airfield that could host the annual AusFly event and all this for significantly less cost than the Fyshwick office...

 

Okay, many of you say that the location of the office is not a problem/issue. That may be the case but at the same time, it cannot hurt to investigate whether there is a better option than the one we now have. We might just be able to have a cheaper facility that free's up some of the organisations assets, and at the same time have a much better and functional facility that offers not just improved office space, but other tangible benefits for the members.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Ideologically, I would like to see RA-Aus housed outside Canberra and at an airport. It is important to be at an airport because everyday when the staff come to work they are immediately reminded why RA-Aus exists. That does not happen in an office in Fyshwick.It does not need to be at an airport so members can fly in. If everything is working well, we as members should never need to set foot in the place. It's a bit like a bank, any time I have to go to the bank in person something is not right with their system.

 

Access to the RAA HQ by RPT is really only an issue for Board Members and managerial staff. Hopefully we will get the number of Board Members down from an insane 13 to a practical 5 or 7 max. and even then, Board Members don't really need to go to HQ as they could hold their Board meetings in the Qantas Club at any of Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne.

 

However, at the moment it is very convenient for the HQ to be where it is. We have a very effective President in MIck Monck and an achiever CEO in Michael Linke. Both are Canberra residents. The endlessly experienced and well connected Michael Apps is just down the road at Cooma an hour's drive to Fyshwick. This is working well at the moment and we should not be looking to disturb that setup for the next 3 years or so. We also have a good and improving staff in Canberra and a move out of Canberra would force many of those to look for alternative employment.

 

The move out of Canberra should happen but not for a while yet. It would be smart to do it in concert with, say, SAAA and possibly other SASAOs. But RA-Aus is not ready for amalgamations and won't be until it has its own systems sorted.

 

This is a matter for a strategic plan. It should not be forgotten but there are a few much more pressing matters to get sorted before we worry too much about the long term base for RA-Aus.

Maybe the logical first step would be to find a suitable home for hosting an annual member get to gather and fly-in to create public interest in our association, with the long term aim to relocate the HQ when the time is right.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

It sounds good Don but applying that reasoning to other businesses would mean that BHP's head office should be on a mine site?, or the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport should be headquartered on Mount Panorama or somewhere similar? Where would you put the Department of Transport though? At an airport and a train station and a shipping port and a ferry terminal and a busy intersection ( well maybe in the very middle of a busy intersection would be ok ) .It sounds good as rallying cry to get the masses on their feet but it really doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Don't hold back Gandalph tell me what you really feel about my brilliant post.

Seriously, there is a bit of a difference between where a multi national conglomerate sites it's head office and a one trick pony like RA-Aus has theirs.

 

I worked for a sizeable subsidiary of Rio Tinto and we moved the head office of the subsidiary from The 10th Floor of 1 York Street Sydney CBD to their biggest mine site in the Hunter Valley. The focus shifted remarkably I can assure you. A lot of BS was left behind in Sydney and a lot costs as well.

 

And CAMS would certainly benefit from being based at, say, Eastern Creek.

 

I'll presume you were not asking to be taken seriously about the other silly examples.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

I might have missed this detail and I don't have access to the annual financial report but could some one please indicate whether we own or lease the current office facility and if we own it, what is its current value?

In the books at 30 June 2014 as $872,582. This is a market related value.

 

It could be that we are sitting on a $1m asset that is appreciating nicely, or we could be sitting on a $1m asset that is not appreciating at any great rate.

Purchased for around $o.5 million and revalued to about $1 million and devalued back to about where it is now. Value probably increasing again in line with commercial property in the area.

 

Is there anything about the current office that motivates the members to visit? Indeed, is there anything about the (physical) current office that positively motivates the members in any way or make them feel proud about their organisations headquarters?

IMHO = no, nothing.

 

Is the current office/HQ simply a space where business is conducted and nothing more?

Yes.

 

Are there any benefits to the office being located in its current place (accessibility to CASA, convenience to visit, cheap council rates, etc)?

Canberra is a very expensive place relative to somewhere like Narromine/Dubbo.

 

CASA SASAO is based in Brisbane.

 

Only advantage is the current good staff are Canberra/Queanbeyan residents and President Mick Monck is also. This has allowed us to get the right CEO into the job and smooth his induction with Mick Monck close on hand. It has also been handy for the two Michaels to collaborate on issues like the CASA's Jabiru effup.

 

What if instead of having a $1m (or whatever it's worth) non-descript, office complex in an industrial suburb of Canberra that no one visits except on business, the organisation had a new custom built headquarters facility that incorporated office space for our admin staff, a meeting/training room, a club house facility for resident and transient members, and attached hangar suitable for aircraft stowage and to host the annual AGM, all looking out over an airfield that could host the annual AusFly event and all this for significantly less cost than the Fyshwick office...

For sure it would - just not yet.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hello Don

 

I will go along with you regarding having the head office where the action is, that is at an airfield where everyone is reminded why RAAus is in existence.

 

I did like your briefing regarding Rio Tinto moving one of their divisions to a big mine. That move left all the BS and egos in the city and the warriors were exposed for what they were. Face facts some of them if they could work as well as their egos they would be valuable assets, thank heavens RAAus is not in that boat.

 

The other valid point RAAus is nothing the size of BHP or Rio Tinto so why try and emulate their management style.

 

Put simply have an airfield we all can fly into if we want, have room for expansion training/conference rooms, at a larger town so there room for the annual fly in..

 

Another good idea have a little dormitory for those who get stuck with weather etc. etc..

 

Has not got to be big now -- have room so RAAus can expand --- expand the way for RAAus not an establish museum or the like.

 

Has to be a friendly area so we all want to be there.. e.g. Bees to a honey pot.

 

Regards

 

KP.

 

 

[flyvulcan]

Thanks Don,

 

The few questions that I posed and which you answered both clearly and succinctly are the tip of the iceberg as part of the process to determine whether it is in the interests of the organisation to retain its current HQ facility or to consider alternatives. From your answers to those few questions alone, there appears to be the start of a case to explore the possibility of relocating the HQ.

 

For sure it would - just not yet.

Clearly, a project to determine the desirability and feasibility of relocating the HQ will be an extensive one, both in manpower and time. However, the issue could have a major impact on the overall strategic plan for the organisation as a whole.

 

In my opinion, the project to assess the feasibility of relocating the HQ could start now. It could be done with minimal impact on the resources of the Board by calling for volunteers from outside the Board to form the HQ Project Team and have the project supervised and managed by a single member of the Board.

 

RAAus has a bit of a history of not addressing things "because they are working fine now". ie "we don't need to review the registration process because it is working" and "we don't need to upgrade the computer system to monitor the member database because the system is working" or "we don't need to address the Jabiru engine issues because it's all ok".

 

As an organisation, we could probably do with more detailed strategic planning combined with a more efficient Project Management program and a Quality System that identifies deficiencies in our systems/processes/planning in order to improve as an organisation. Perhaps the lack of a publicly identifiable "home" for RAAus is having an adverse impact on our ability to recruit new members? Perhaps it's having an adverse impact on our members themselves because they have no pride in their HQ being a dingy office block in an unappealing industrial suburb...

 

Just picture the following advertisement "Experience AusFly 2017 at XXXX airfield, the leading recreational aviation facility in Australia and proud home to RAAus and SAAA". As a member, that sort of promotion makes me feel better about my organisation.

 

Why not start the process for assessing the feasibility of relocating the HQ now so that we get the ball rolling instead of waiting for something to go wrong, then reacting? Such a project does not need to interfere with the running of the organisation, nor detract from existing priorities and projects.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Much as I admire our office staff, they are our servants and should not call the shots re location of head office. The current board and CEO have the task of transforming RAAus into a sleek, efficient organisation to serve its members. If that requires downsizing and office automation, so be it.

 

Australian will never have anything to rival Oshkosh, but we can learn from the experience of our American cousins. Maybe our members who have been to Airventure can comment on the advantages of having a central national gathering place.

 

As Don points out, getting head office "closer to the coal face" may be a good idea.

 

I'd love our Association to have a home base (preferably in teamwork with SAAA , etc) but moving our annual gathering around the country may be more realistic for Australia which has only about 8% of the US population.

 

This country may be lucky to have its own continent, but the reality is that we might as well be a nation of islands like Indonesia.

 

Look at a Map of Oz at night to see what I mean.

 

Perhaps the only way to be fair to all our members is for NatFly to "go on the road" like the Ulysses Motorcyle Club AGM.

 

.

 

 

[dazza 38]

We may have to wait for a few years for the membership numbers to stabilise before moving. But I would still like the staff input as it effects them.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

We may have to wait for a few years for the membership numbers to stabilise before moving. But I would still like the staff input as it effects them.

Agreed Dazza, but even if the board make a decision this week, the staff would have a year or three to adapt. That's more time than many employees get.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Holding Natfly at the HQ would make sense. Maybe having a more "fly-in" style event moving around the country as part of our AGM, leaving the Natfly style "air-show" a locked in fixture.

 

Don what progress if any has been made in regards to the board size (that you're aware of)? I was disappointed to not see any mention at the last AGM or Board meeting.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Reality is that few if any of the staff would or could relocate away from Canberra as it would involve separating husband/wife. It is not a matter of the staff dictating the location but ordinary practical realities.

 

A move out of Canberra would require an overlap between the new office and the current office. The transition would not be a trivial issue. Been there and done that and it is a logistical nightmare.

 

Doesn't mean we shouldn't do it just that it needs a great deal of forethought and planning.

 

My vision is that a merger of RAA and SAAA to become RSA Inc. housed at an airfield with conference and training facilities perhaps even bunkhouse style cheap accommodation. However, that cannot happen until RAA has its act together in Safety Systems, Ops, Maintenance and Admin. Only then can you go to other SASAOs and propose mergers and shared admin ops, etc.

 

But there are other threats like CASA rationalising registration and licensing and rationalising RAA into an advocacy organisation to be eventually absorbed by AOPA.