Engine Off Operations

[facthunter]

I would like to think we are in"UNUSUAL" circumstances, at the moment. Nev

 

 

[Aerochute Kev]

When any Board member proposes any changes now all he gets is the views of a handful of people in the same position he is in, a Board member. The secrecy ensures that. Any proposal put to the members through an electronic voting scenario is simply CONSULTATION, which is probably the easiest way for the Board to consult with a large number of members very quickly. If out of approx 10,000 members, 400 voted on any proposal and 350 were in favour and 50 against, RAAus would then have a very good sample of the memberships views on that proposal. I would consider that to be very good consultation, which Board members have a duty to do but are not currently doing. The Board members can use that sample to guide their decision making process.

 

Consultation was a big platform when some of these Board members were elected but seems either too hard to do or unimportant now!

 

 

[facthunter]

It might be a survey, but I wouldn't credit it with being a consultation of any significance. The rate of participation would be an issue as we get a dismal number who vote at all at election time. I think surveys can achieve quite a lot if they are formulated well and done with a fair bit of experience and insight. They can be very well done electronically too. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

It's chicken and egg FH. The majority have not had the reason for the Association explained to them, and why it needs to be kept vibrant and ahead of the axe at all times.

 

Most see it as a place, like the State Road Authorities, where they get their documents renewed.

 

The Association appears to have been in the position several times of investing money wisely to create a no fee organziation, and that might be something a member would be interested in.

 

 

[SDQDI]

The best way to vote for or against rule changes is to vote for a local representatives and then maintain communication with them. Look at our government setup, while not perfect, we elect members to represent us and they discuss and argue and change laws without our vote on every matter, if we were to have a referendum on every law change the country would stop working all together and it would be disastrous. RAA would be the same, I dare say there is enough arguing between the board members without putting another 8000 (you won't get that many voting no matter how you organise it,) voices in the room it would be bedlam.

 

Yes it is good to be able to discuss things on a forum but using one RAA doesn't own no matter how good Ian's intentions is fraught with complications some of them probably legal. Online voting through the members portal on some decisions would be a start but not everyone is on computers so postal still needs to be considered and as I said before voting on every rule change would be more trouble than it is worth. If you want more info ring your member if that doesn't work ring a different board member, go strait to the horses mouth

 

 

[facthunter]

Turbo, I agree with our first three lines. Regarding the last.. What kind of member would THAT encourage? being a bit of an optimist...? Perhaps HOPING, more than anything, we need the type who is prepared to contribute or the show isn't really worth belonging to. Even if that is only money. Hopefully there would be opportunities for more than money. SDQDI Yes there HAS to be a way for ALL MEMBERS to vote. That is their basic right.. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

The conversation got a little out of context over the last page or so - Ricks question on voting related to voting on Rule Changes, then a couple of people decided to save a PM and had a social chat, then someone jumper to talking about EVERY decision being made by every member, then someone said some don't have computers.

 

If we go back to Rick's question, it is certainly preferable for all members to vote on Rule Changes and important matters like that, and the Constitution underlines that by requiring a special majority, and that will rarely occur.

 

If you read the Constitution you can see where some dodgy rules were introduced, and I'll bet the Members didn't vote them in.

 

 

[RickH]

Then if the "Special Majority' is not obtained , no rule change. Great!

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I'm not sure every rule change for example in the Ops manual should be voted on, i'm sure alot of the changes are pushed by CASA then the board/admin, however the policy of the association should be voted on by the members, electric would be preferred due to costs and time delays with postal voting. As for members not having access to computers, most Libraries have free internet access but if it's deemed not accessible for a decent section of members then maybe other means (i.e. phone in system) could be investigated.

 

As it currently stands, I have very little idea what the policies of RA-AUS are and what they wish to achieve in the future. I have no idea where my elected board member stands on issues or what they wish to achieve, or what they have voted on before. Maybe alot of members don't bother voting simply because all they see is 2 or so names with some personal background information but with no information on where they stand on current and future (read policy/platform) issues.

 

 

[Teckair]

I have no idea where my elected board member stands on issues

And that is the problem. His phone number is in the magazine. The ball is in your court.

 

 

[facthunter]

AND having been in a position of representing people in the past, I suggest you don't wait till you have a skinfull of

 

" courage juice" to phone up and give your rep a serve. HE/ SHE doesn't het paid anything to do the job on your behalf. These days IF you are serious about getting something done you would arrange for an email to be there on the matter at least, prior to discussing it. Nev

 

 

[Aerochute Kev]

I'm not sure that is the answer Tech, as mostly we dont know what the issues are until we read about the the decisions that have been made on our behalf, usually months later. The proposed Ops manual is a prime example, we cant see it so dont know what questions to ask. If the Reps actually communicated with members on the issues they were dealing with I'm sure alot more members would contact them with their views. They have access to the RAAus website to provide information, they just need to use it.

 

It is not reasonable to expect all members to contact their Reps on a regular basis to find out what is happening. That will only provide information to one member. There needs to be a regular update on the website of current issues.

 

The Reps are not just there to make decisions on our behalf. They are also there to communicate to the Board the views of the members they represent. They cant communicate members views if they dont tell anyone what they are doing in order to get any feedback.

 

I think the current system of operating has been deliberately designed to minimise any input from members.

 

 

[facthunter]

A..Kev. Probably more true in the past than now. I don't think the average member is really too concerned as long as the things he expects, are happening. Those who invest or care might have more cause to get involved as they have more to lose. There is an old saying..."You don't buy a dog to bark, yourself". There is only a very small number (%) who even vote, which is a real worry if you think about it. I respect and admire those who get up and work for us. If they muck things up, I doubt they set out to do it deliberately. Unless you are actually on the committee you cannot know what the pressing problems are, because only then are you at the coalface so to speak.. If you are dealing with various business people or the authority, you can hardly telegraph your moves to the world and not have problems as a result. Nev

 

 

[AVOCET]

Is it still possible to legally fly an aero plane without having accessed a computer ?

 

 

[David Isaac]

Yes it is, but why wouldn't you access a PC? The quality and accessibility to information increases safety significantly.

 

 

[facthunter]

That would be a fair question. It's probably getting more difficult as time passes. As a principle It is not supposed to be a requirement. Nev

 

 

[Aerochute Kev]

I agree with some of what you say Nev, but you dont buy a dog and turn it loose without having any control over it. Our current system allows us to vote for a Rep but then not have a system of keeping them accountable or knowing what they are doing. The only thing we can do if they screw up is not vote for them next time. Not a very good way to run any business or organisation I would think. New Reps have in recent times promised to change the world and have not only failed to do so but are unable to say why things cant change. This is the primary reason I still believe we need a complete new Board. By changing just a few at a time they are still locked into the old way of doing things. I am not saying all of the Board are bad, just that there is enough of the "old guard" left to influence and ensure things cannot happen the way they should. We will probably still be having the same problems in 3 years time if we continue to change only a few reps at a time like we seem to be doing.

 

Its hard to argue things are getting better when the basic roles RAAus is there for (registration and administration) still cannot be done accurately or in a timely manner.

 

 

[AVOCET]

The last time I had a map subscription it cost over $740.00 to set up .

 

It might not be compulsory to use a computer , I phone / tablet , but defiantly cheaper , unless I had to buy these devices just for flying .

 

 

[facthunter]

Kev, I hope we are not having the same problems in 3 years time. That wouldn't be reasonable.. Perhaps I have more faith in the current RAAus. group than you do. Aviation generally hasn't had a good run for a while, in my view. Structurally, I can't see that you can just get rid of everybody and start from scratch. Continuity and experience is not a thing you can just throw away, without losing something. Nev

 

 

[rhysmcc]

You're more likely to vote if you know what exactly you're voting for. Having 10,000 members calling in doesn't solve this issue. RA-AUS is a representative body, they need to have the policy as a matter of public record and put systems in place to gauge members views.

 

 

[Teckair]

I think people should participate and work with the system we have. Sacking the whole board sounds like madness to me. Being a volunteer Area Rep must be a very thankless job, no wonder they don't take forums seriously. It is so easy to be critical about things. How much input do you think GA pilots have about the rules CASA makes?

 

 

[turboplanner]

I get a great kick out of the excuses from people holding the Association back by claiming there are hordes out there who don't use computer, or who can't get on to the internet.

 

There may be a few, camped by a creek who don't have a landline I admit, but I get a good laugh when those same people say they use a GPS (and infer nothing else) for their navigation, or talk about the latest EFIS system going into their aircraft.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I think people should participate and work with the system we have. Sacking the whole board sounds like madness to me. Being a volunteer Area Rep must be a very thankless job, no wonder they don't take forums seriously. It is so easy to be critical about things. How much input do you think GA pilots have about the rules CASA makes?

Most if not all members of RA-AUS have not seen the draft ops manual which will become our updated "rule book" nor any of the changes. CASA at least lets industry see upcoming changes and consults in the way of welcoming submissions regarding the changes.

 

 

[facthunter]

The RULE book might just have been "required" material (from above). at this point in time... Nev

 

 

[David Isaac]

Most if not all members of RA-AUS have not seen the draft ops manual which will become our updated "rule book" nor any of the changes. CASA at least lets industry see upcoming changes and consults in the way of welcoming submissions regarding the changes.

This a vexed issue, the original intention was to promulgate the draft for comment, but due to the very tardy lack of effort of a certain employee who was engaged to write the draft, RAA was backed into a corner in terms of meeting a deadline to get the draft manual to CASA.

This really was a disgraceful situation, we all should have at least had the opportunity to comment, because once it is adopted it will be the rules by which we are governed. This situation is a legacy of a previous board and management.