coljones Posted January 21, 2015 Posted January 21, 2015 Given that for its most important meeting in history, the RAA Secretary, in sending out the notice of meeting, provided a summary of the issues and invited proxies, and the resulting large number of proxies swamped the votes of the people who had instigated the meeting, I would have thought playing with proxies might have been a more sensitive issue.Proxies are a strategic weapon, and I've been in quite a few meetings where someone has controversially decided and issue his way by walking into the meeting with a bag full of proxies. I recommended a year or two ago, the simple alternative of writing the the ACT Department of Justice requesting the Associations Incorporation Act 1991 be amended in clause 70 (b) to allow postal or electronic voting in line with other jurisdictions. If that had been done it's probable you would have had postal/electronic voting now, and even now, I wouldn't expect there would be more than 12 months delay. Everyone is entitled to an opinion even if it is to not to have an opinion except to trust the opinion of the person who they give an open proxy to. Democracy is a real bugger at times but it beats a lot of the alternatives. 1
DonRamsay Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 But we need to ensure that the proxy holder is obliged to vote the proxy . . . When we were battling the Board we used to worry that they might just throw away proxies that didn't go their way. To their credit they didn't. Proxy votes are tabulated by the Office and they seem to do a fair job of it. . . . and that if the proxy holder fails to attend the meeting it flows to someone else or the chair and that the office should collate and publish the proxies to minimise misdealing of the proxies. If you make the Chair your Proxy you can't have a non attender situation. On the current form there is the opportunity to nominate a fallback in case your first nominee is a no show. There is probably a need to permit open proxies so that the holder, on the day, can hear the arguments and caste proxies appropriately. That option exists now. I see no need to minimise proxies each member holds as all the members are entitled to be involved in the governance of their association and a limitation on the holding of proxies would disenfranchise them. Agree 100% as did our "founding fathers" who allowed this in our Rules. I recall some legal issues over proxies at one of our leading not for profits where the chair forgot to vote the proxies he had in hand that didn't support an increase in directors fees. He was initially barred for 5 years and overturned on appeal when he successfully argued that ASIC didn't prove that he did it deliberately. This is a salient point and a reminder to our Board Members that they are subject to Company Law which can get very ugly for wrong-doing directors.
Keith Page Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 I thought this thread is:- Relocating the office----- Where to???? Then is this called drift or evolving???? Regards KP. 1 1
DonRamsay Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 A tidal wave of drift. Still, while CASA is grounding Jabiru engined aircraft nobody in Canberra is sweating on where, when or if the office should be somewhere else.
Keith Page Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 Yes Don it is a tidal wave of drift away from track. This CASA grounding of the Jabirus --- to me there are missing links, just who are the main players in the issue, I would just like to know.... We know the couriers but who is loading the shots ???? The mind boggles... These days I just think, shake my head then get on to what I am supposed to be doing.. it is nothing to do with aviation.. Regards KP.
coljones Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 When we were battling the Board we used to worry that they might just throw away proxies that didn't go their way. To their credit they didn't. Proxy votes are tabulated by the Office and they seem to do a fair job of it. If you make the Chair your Proxy you can't have a non attender situation. On the current form there is the opportunity to nominate a fallback in case your first nominee is a no show. That option exists now. Agree 100% as did our "founding fathers" who allowed this in our Rules. This is a salient point and a reminder to our Board Members that they are subject to Company Law which can get very ugly for wrong-doing directors. Hence the necessity to maintain the continued use of proxies as well as seeking postal ballots in a mix to be determined after further mosquito castrating.
turboplanner Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 Well none of that ground breaking momentum is going to cross over into decisive RAA action on a forum with a thread entitled Relocating Office.....where to? It needs the involvement of the people elected to look after the interests of the members, and I haven't heard too much of them for a few months, other than a frantic objection to the Safety Authority which wasn't a good look. 1
Keith Page Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Yes.. Not to far off the money Turbo... That is an extension of the thread I started and got a lot of stick over, "Board member or ROC". As I said I better get back to work. Regards KP.
coljones Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Yes.. Not to far off the money Turbo...That is an extension of the thread I started and got a lot of stick over, "Board member or ROC". As I said I better get back to work. Regards KP. Keith, I can't find "Board member or ROC". Cheers
Keith Page Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Here is the link to the start of the thread.. It's name:- Is this the correct direction..... Thread started on the 14th. December.. Have a read I am not in a position to say a lot, however couple of posters got vey close to the mark, as usual there was the normal dribble from the hounds. http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/is-this-the-correct-direction.128346/ Regards KP.
turboplanner Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 I couldn't see the connection with the Russian Orthodox Church Keith.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 ROC in this case is Regional Operations Co-Ordinator. These folk are usually well qualified folk who undertake some actions on behalf of the RAAus Operations team in order to prevent our staff from living their lives in the back of a burner zipping from one school to the next etc......If you google ROC and RAAus the first link gives this...which is a duty statement for an ROC. Andy
Keith Page Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 ROC in this case is Regional Operations Co-Ordinator. These folk are usually well qualified folk who undertake some actions on behalf of the RAAus Operations team in order to prevent our staff from living their lives in the back of a burner zipping from one school to the next etc......If you google ROC and RAAus the first link gives this...which is a duty statement for an ROC.Andy Hello Andy back again from being about.. I will repeat myself so no one will have to go looking through other threads/posts. A ROC and board member should not be wearing two shirts.. Be a board member or be a ROC. Being one person who holds both tittles has large avenues to unethical activities with regard to conflict of interests. What is the job description for a ROC? What is the job description for a board member? The other very important point Andy and you are very vocal on this subject, "Good and correct governance". For a person to conduct an audit the person must be a qualified auditor, seeing you are defending the ROCs in this case, could this be a case of unqualified people. I must ask how many of these people getting about have the auditing qualification? Remember it is statuary. Regards KP.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 Keith The matter has been discussed by the board and if you are looking for further comment here by me you wont get it. Feel free to raise with the president and / or the CEO if you want further discussion on the point. I suggest that you provide real examples of "large avenues for unethical activities" because the sentence fragment to me is long on emotion and short on fact........ The potential for conflict of interest has been examined and steps are in place to prevent that occurring. An ROC who is a board member will recuse himself from any discussions involving that ROC activity should it result in escalation to the board. At the end of the day selection of ROC's is nothing to do with the board, Operations select the CEO endorses I provided the link to the duty statement of an ROC in the last post...... Board duty is defined under various legislation...easily researched if you care to google. Statuary.......A group of pigeon toilets..... Andy
rhysmcc Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I'm not too familiar with ROC, is this a paid position or done purely voluntary?
rhysmcc Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Can't see the issue then, a voluntary position who answers/acts on behalf of the Ops Manager.
dazza 38 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I'm not too familiar with ROC, is this a paid position or done purely voluntary? ROC stands for Rate Of Climb.
Keith Page Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Can't see the issue then, a voluntary position who answers/acts on behalf of the Ops Manager. (Forget about the voluntary part of the equation). That is one of the problems, the ROC who is a board member as well ---- answering to the OPS Manager. Regards KP.
rhysmcc Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Keith, to me it's no different then if a board member was to assist in setting up a tent at NATFLY, they are just another volunteer who is taking direction from the manager in charge. A board member doesn't really have any powers (individually), they can't just pickup the phone and tell the Ops manager what to do, and if they were to try I'm sure the Ops Manager is professional enough to alert the CEO and President to any over stepping.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 No direct to staff communications (board related) is allowed, all comm's go through the president and then through the CEO. It hasn't always been that way, but the old way was simply wrong leading to staff working on tasks that the CEO didn't set and wasn't aware of, thus undermining his responsibility and his right to manage his own staff. Please note also that ROC's as a minimum are Pilot examiners which sort of reduces the pool that can be chosen from. Additionally people don't apply to be ROC's they are approached from within Ops (team decision) when and if they are needed, and generally there is a few trial jobs done first starting with very simple and working up from there. Given that Ops choose, and the board don't, and as a board member we have no right to request anything of a staff member other than what we are entitled to as a normal member (ie our own affairs only) then I keep asking and you keep ducking Keith, give me some examples of the conflicts of interest that you are concerned about and I'll tell you if and how they have been addressed.... As an example, Opps will not task an ROC to undertake activities in his own patch, for example an ROC who might run school A at Bundiwoopwoop would never be asked to check out School B at the same airport, rather Ops will bring in another ROC from outside the local area, or themselves if they happen to be in the area. It, to my thinking, is responsible "Self regulation" as we are tasked and constrained by cost, to do. Andy
robinsm Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 what is an ROC? If it is a title then please use the title, not stupid acronyms that devalue the position or whatever it is.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I covered it earlier in this thread here http://recreationalflying.com/threads/relocating-the-office-where-to.114489/page-22#post-473453 Regional Operations Co-ordinator.........at the end of the day its a person who acts as operations eyes and ears at locations a long , or an expensive to get to, distance from Head office. We cant afford to be paying our Ops team to spend their life in the back of an RPT......
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now