Board Members being replaced Paid Directors

[turboplanner]

And on local representation at events costing more .. if we are a member organisation it needn't be left to the board members to represent us at events ... I am perfectly happy to turn up and do a few hours on a stand at an event within a couple of hours drive of home to raise the RAAus flag as would many others

And that's one of the big cost benefits of using the Incorporated Association structure with volunteers who can fill dozens, and sometimes hundreds of positions all over the Country.

 

Same goes with the representation structure geographically; the volunteers per State can increase to fill the requirements of the denser States, while at the same time someone is keeping an eye on things at Kununurra and communicating two ways.

 

 

[scre80]

So would it be fair to say, that if Flying Clubs could help fill this void at any event no matter the location, that is a good fit? I think it is.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that states need to be over represented or we have to have a state based system. We need to have the right people in the jobs, if that means they are in NZ, I say fantastic. We need to ensure for everyone one no matter where they are, they feel represented by the right people in the right positions. Hopefully that sums it up well? As for how they communicate, I work remote to my team 95% of the time, and I rely on video conferencing every day, instant chat messages and good old phone calls. There technology is there and it works as long as you can use it effectuvly

 

Also for e-readers, PDF files are quite bad. They work better with files specifically designed for e-readers like epub files. If there is a large percentage of the members that want this, lets raise it. Again it will come done to cost vs demand, and unfortunately if there is not enough demand, then it can not justify the cost.

 

 

[facthunter]

While conferencing might seem a good idea I would rate it at about 30% of face to face on complex matters. Sometimes something critical will come up at a meal time, or outside of the time you are hooked up. That sort of thing just doesn't happen with conferencing. I'm not alone in thinking like this. Plenty of people much more experienced than I am have said so. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

I agree, conferencing is almost a waste of time, doesn't have the atmosphere that being there does, and inflexible.

 

For routine meetings, President in voice mode, members on keyboard live is sensational for a fast flowing meeting with up to 30 members.

 

Email still holds its own for electronic day by day management.

 

Broadcast SMS can go from the President to 5,000 members plus with one keystroke, to all or to regions or to L2s etc.

 

Face to face is for networking, for which members are paying a premium in travel and accommodation, but is good where a weekend is devoted to working through a thorny issue or two.

 

We are lucky these days to have new choices in much more efficient management communication.

 

 

[scre80]

While I agree face to face meetings and iterations is much better by far, when distance and costs makes face to face impossible, then video conferencing comes into place. This is my main work tool and works well but you have to know how to use it well and have the right environment setup, otherwise it does not work.

 

 

[coljones]

While conferencing might seem a good idea I would rate it at about 30% of face to face on complex matters. Sometimes something critical will come up at a meal time, or outside of the time you are hooked up. That sort of thing just doesn't happen with conferencing. I'm not alone in thinking like this. Plenty of people much more experienced than I am have said so. Nev

which is why you replace single instances of face to face with more frequent phone ins. But I can't see why RAA should have fewer face to face but probably need more phone ins. I was under the understanding that the board meetings were long (3 days) and only every 6 months. This is an strong indication that the interactions need to be more frequent and members better prepared. With more frequent meetings those issues that come up on the plane home can be dealt with at the next meeting - brain farts in meetings have a tendency to cause the meeting to disappear down burrows leaving the staff and exec under directed and with a much freer hand do what they want to do between meetings.

 

 

[robinsm]

What will the cost of the paid director be compared to the costs of the elected guys at the moment?

 

 

[facthunter]

The elected "People" are only reimbersed travel costs and their accommodation, meals. The do it for nothing out Love of aviation and sense of duty. nev

 

 

[Keith Page]

An area rep has to get about their region. I am in the Southern Qld section and only have seen one of the southern boys up here. The Nth.Qld rep used to be here all the time he was aware of the members needs.

 

How can they get to know in which direction they need to stear RAAus? I here:- phone, OK.. Most people I talk to on a phone they sound like they are up a hollow log with a mouth full of marbles, "Can not hold a decent conversation" Ya give up.

 

There are people who do not come forward, we only get information from them on prompting, normally it is good information coming from these people. Can not use a useless phone here got to be face to face.

 

Remember these board members are supposed to be guiding RAAus to the future.

 

For the Qld people who go to Old Station imagine the Victorians getting themselves there. Never see them..

 

Remember the board members are supposed to be looking for direction from the members.

 

I read with interest kasper's point regarding the electronic mag. "Got to zoom in and wonder about". Come on be reasonable, that would give me the chitz. I get the paper mag. still.

 

We get told the mag is a good form of communication.

 

Regards,

 

KP.

 

 

[Downunder]

What will the cost of the paid director be compared to the costs of the elected guys at the moment?

Or, what new profesional skills, knowledge, business acumen, judgement would paid director(s) bring to the table over an all volunteer board?

 

In my opinion it is evedent that the current board tries hard and means well but lacks "something".

 

The recent developments, web site, electronic mag, for example, just don't seem as polished and well thought through as would a commercial enterprise the same size of the RAA.....

 

 

[robinsm]

As does CASA. Do we want a CASA style elephant with bureaucrats at the top or do we want people who understand the ultralight field and the personal nuances of the sport. Hell, I just want to fly the aircraft I built taking responsibility for it on my own and having fun. If I wanted bureaucracy then I would have gone CASA. Looks like another good example of personal responsibility and fun goes out the window. Oh well, I suppose they call that progress....not.

 

 

[coljones]

As does CASA. Do we want a CASA style elephant with bureaucrats at the top or do we want people who understand the ultralight field and the personal nuances of the sport. Hell, I just want to fly the aircraft I built taking responsibility for it on my own and having fun. If I wanted bureaucracy then I would have gone CASA. Looks like another good example of personal responsibility and fun goes out the window. Oh well, I suppose they call that progress....not.

The amateurs almost brought RAA to its knees a couple of years ago. The belt around the head they got at the extraordinary meeting brought out some cockiness on the board which was only fixed by some strategic resignations, dismissals, and new board members. The next election should see the last of the bad old days out the door (I hope). I however don't see that the Big End of Town solution has much to offer itself as the BEoT hasn't covered itself in glory in recent times. Honest members with a care for the membership will probably produce a board that works.

 

 

[DWF]

I live in one of the far flung corners of the Empire in outer WA about 500km from the next nearest RAAus Flying School.

 

 

 

I feel disenfranchised by the current RAAus Board election process.

 

Firstly, in WA, we only get to vote once every other year as we only have one representative and Board members (usually) have a 2 year term, and then, in recent times at least, there has only been one candidate (who is elected unopposed) so, in effect, I have not been able to vote in an RAAus Board election in over 5 years.

 

 

 

I favour reducing the Board size to 7 and scrapping the state based representative system.

 

Instead there should be a system whereby a pool of suitably qualified candidates offer themselves for election and EVERY member gets to vote to select ALL 7 of the Board positions.

 

There should be published selection criteria for candidates and candidate suitability should be determined by a committee of the association .

 

 

 

From what I can determine most of the current Board are doing a reasonable job (for free) but in future it may be necessary or desirable to remunerate Board members of the association/compay to get the quality of persons required to ensure RAAus is run properly, efficiently and in compliance with all the rules and regulations. An aero club style management committee is no longer appropriate for our organisation. It needs to be properly and professionally run.

 

We have a bit of a dilema in that we are really two organisations -

 

1. one running the business of administering and regulating our sport; and

 

2. the other being an (ultralight) aviation advocate and running events and programs for the benefit of members.

 

One solution may be to actually have a 2 tier system whereby we have a small Board to run the business of the association/company and then a member/club based system of advisory committees who can make recommendations to the Board on policy matters they feel strongly about but otherwise look after the social side of RAAus activiites.

 

The main drawback to this arrangement is increased committee structure and almost inevitable increase in costs.

 

What do you think?

 

DWF

 

 

 

 

 

[Downunder]

Yeah, I can go for reduced board members but widen the scope of the voting....

 

 

[frank marriott]

I feel disenfranchised by the current RAAus Board election process.Firstly, in WA, we only get to vote once every other year as we only have one representative and Board members (usually) have a 2 year term, and then, in recent times at least, there has only been one candidate (who is elected us

Unopposed) so, in effect, I have not been able to vote in an RAAus Board election in over 5 years.

Isn't that a membership issue with nobody else prepared from the area to commit or make an effort? (Rather then the system)

 

As does CASA. Do we want a CASA style elephant with bureaucrats at the top or do we want people who understand the ultralight field and the personal nuances of the sport. Hell, I just want to fly the aircraft I built taking respon

True but some people are actively supporting the CASA approach (amazingly, to me at least)

 

It will not be sorted here BUT I hope everyone gives some serious thought to what direction they want RAA to go and then vote accordingly with ref to the proposed amendments as is their right.

 

 

[DWF]

Isn't that a membership issue with nobody else prepared from the area to commit or make an effort? (Rather then the system)

That is only a marginal part of the problem and that part is also forced upon us by the current state based representative voting system.

 

There are many reasons why people don't "put their hand up" for the Board and disinterest is often not the issue. Being a Board member is a big commitment and not one to be take lightly.

 

 

 

I want people on the Board who will represent my interest as an ultralight aviator - not necessarily as a Western Australian. I have not yet encountered an RAAus board issue that is purely a WA problem.

 

But more importantly I want Board members who have the skills, qualifications and experience to ensure good governance and run our association in an efficient, effective and professional manner.

 

Parochialism should not come into it!

 

Personally I would not have a problem if all the Board members came from the one area as long as they were the best people for the job.

 

 

 

IMHO the way to achieve the best Board we can get is by having a field of suitably qualified candidates standing at elections where ALL members can vote to select the Board members for each and every currently vacant Board position.

 

 

 

DWF

 

 

[facthunter]

It will be a quantum leap to make the lot paid full time, even if you drop the numbers required. You also change the nature of the organisation, probably irreversibly, if you do change. Staff expect to have a salary increase with years of service and there are long service leave etc to fund. This organisation should remain a member elected board I feel. It's dual function will always be a matter of balance, between authority and member welfare. Nev

 

 

[Keith Page]

The amateurs almost brought RAA to its knees a couple of years ago. The belt around the head they got at the extraordinary meeting brought out some cockiness on the board which was only fixed by some strategic resignations, dismissals, and new board members. The next election should see the last of the bad old days out the door (I hope). I however don't see that the Big End of Town solution has much to offer itself as the BEoT hasn't covered itself in glory in recent times. Honest members with a care for the membership will probably produce a board that works.

You recon the good new days are getting better and better?

Electronic mag.. as I am told it is a two page thing on a tablet.

 

State representatives be in a cluster..

 

I will not go any further or I will incriminate myself.

 

Regards,KP.

 

 

[storchy neil]

that oops kp:oops: neil

 

 

[jetjr]

The state based model is designed to ensure you dont get four of seven members from a single active club or region. Assumably focussed on local issues driving RAA policy

 

With current voting numbers this would be pretty easy to achieve and manipulate

 

 

[facthunter]

How many local issues have ever been identified? What examples of this problem are potentially looming? Nev

 

 

[jetjr]

Natfly relocation, meetings and fly ins

 

Movement of head office

 

Funding and rationale for all the above

 

Descisions on compliance and maintenence may not appreciate lack of regional services

 

Im not really saying either approach is right or wrong just that there are risks to national voting of all board members whenever you have low voting numbers and few choices some can be elected by a small group of supporters..

 

We have seen accumulation of CFI on the board previously and this led the organisation down a track. Not saying it was bad one but influenced by their skills and paradigms.

 

Real chance you will end up with most of the board living in Melb or Syd.

 

 

[DWF]

The state based model is designed to ensure you dont get four of seven members from a single active club or region. Assumably focussed on local issues driving RAA policyWith current voting numbers this would be pretty easy to achieve and manipulate

By that logic we are probably more likely to get vested interest groups such as Powered Parachutes or Rotax Owners or 95.10 enthusiasts than state based lobby/interest groups.

 

 

 

As FT has says, how many isssues that are state specific have ever been identified?

 

 

 

The state based model does not ensure anything except the likelyhood that we do not get (all) the best people available for the job AND many members do not have the opportunity to vote for these best people.

 

 

 

DWF

 

 

[facthunter]

I'm not in favour of staying in Canberra, but there's no rush.

 

I'm not in favour of changing states representation either but I don't really believe that there are many state's specific issues (except using multigrade oils in cooler climates).

 

CFI's are probably as a group, amongst the most knowledgeable of the members about what is actually going on with CASA and other operational things of all our members. Could they UP check complexities or go for more training hours. Maybe but I haven't seen any evidence of it.

 

Where we went down a track would be more about people hanging on to control of "their" organisation for too long rather than geographic considerations or being CFI's.

 

Canberra is not a particularly easy place to get to by air, but is reasonably accessible from Sydney by road.

 

Apathy shown by low voter activity is always a risk in any organisation. Even if you don't personally know the candidate, it's not much trouble to ring up a few people you trust and discuss it with them to aid your voting effectiveness. If there is only one candidate in your ballot you get no say in any of it. Nev

 

 

[jetjr]

I agree on both issues,

 

DWF point re interest groups is valid concern. Having opinionated voices on the board is possible to have stimulated CASA vs Jabiru action. Small things can have deep consequenses.

 

Diveraity on the board is required to prevent any interest running too fast.

 

As far as payment goes, not sure wages required but certainly costs covered.