Why I will be voting AGAINST the new constitution

[Yenn]

o1rmb.

 

It appears thay you and I are in complete agreement.

 

I cannot se how anyone in their right mind could vote for the new constitution as it stands.

 

There seems to me to be an attitude of push it and hope the majority of members don't really know what they are doing.

 

 

[Keith Page]

I just attended the meeting with the President and CEO at Devonport.After speaking with them and understanding their decision making I have cast my proxy vote as a YES.

 

I suggest everyone attend similar meetings in their own neck of the woods.

I think you need to visit #150 in another thread, if you take the points from this board member, looks like they did not tell you all the truth.

Regards,

 

KP.

 

 

[Fishla]

Which thread?

 

 

[Keith Page]

Which thread?

Query To Raa CEO.

Regards

 

KP.

 

 

[Fishla]

3 initial directors but must call election within 6 months. Explained that paperwork will take 6 weeks or so initially. Happy with that timeframe personally.

 

Only humans get a vote. Explained that original draft had what you wanted but we members said we didn't like that. I agree with current draft - only humans should get a vote.

 

 

[kasper]

OK - I am stopping all posts on this website until further notice.

 

Today - after a 16 month battle with RAAus tech on the registration markings display on my 95.10 trike - RAAus president writes to me cancelling my aircrafts registration and saying it has to be re-registered under 95.32 because I was wrong on the Tech Manual requirements because apparently RAAus has no power to register 95.10 trikes ... despite having registered trikes under 95.10 since 1988!!

 

This feels like a complete piss take and close to persecution - where the f&&& to they get off redefining the RAAus power to register to cancel my aircraft reg - and they do not even provide any LEGAL ADVICE setting out why they come to this conclusion.

 

So until tomorrow when I can find out what the hell they are up to I am signing off because I FEEL that my posts on here are influencing operations of RAAus to me as a member.

 

 

[Admin]

I doubt very much Kasper that freedom of speech on this site would have any impact on the legalities of aircraft registration.

 

 

[facthunter]

One would hope not. Nev

 

 

[David Isaac]

OK - I am stopping all posts on this website until further notice.Today - after a 16 month battle with RAAus tech on the registration markings display on my 95.10 trike - RAAus president writes to me cancelling my aircrafts registration and saying it has to be re-registered under 95.32 because I was wrong on the Tech Manual requirements because apparently RAAus has no power to register 95.10 trikes ... despite having registered trikes under 95.10 since 1988!!

 

This feels like a complete piss take and close to persecution - where the f&&& to they get off redefining the RAAus power to register to cancel my aircraft reg - and they do not even provide any LEGAL ADVICE setting out why they come to this conclusion.

 

So until tomorrow when I can find out what the hell they are up to I am signing off because I FEEL that my posts on here are influencing operations of RAAus to me as a member.

Kasp,

I don't countenance that concept for a singe minute. The Board is way more professional than that and the very thing they stood against when they took office.

 

There will be legitimate CASA induced technicality for sure.

 

Chin up buddy, keep talking and get on to the RAA and sort the issue with them.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Kasp,I don't countenance that concept for a singe minute. The Board is way more professional than that and the very thing they stood against when they took office.

There will be legitimate CASA induced technicality for sure.

 

Chin up buddy, keep talking and get on to the RAA and sort the issue with them.

OK! *RAA is a member organisation. What not the TechManager go off and do something to fix the problem. (He knows the rules/regulations.)

Instead a letter is sent and says your ego is cancelled end of story.

 

These fellows are supposed to be batting for us not playing police people.

 

Now would it be good if one gets, you can not fly this way however we need to XYZ and that will get you going in no time, but it is always this big fight, never a quiet yarn just ends up a yelling match.

 

Regards,

 

KP.

 

 

[Admin]

Instead a letter is sent and says your ego is cancelled end of story.

 

 

[Geoff13]

Be fairly difficult to cancel the ego's of some around here. Lol

 

 

[Keith Page]

OK! *RAA is a member organisation. What not the TechManager go off and do something to fix the problem. (He knows the rules/regulations.)Instead a letter is sent and says your ego is cancelled end of story.

These fellows are supposed to be batting for us not playing police people.

 

Now would it be good if one gets, you can not fly this way however we need to XYZ and that will get you going in no time, but it is always this big fight, never a quiet yarn just ends up a yelling match.

 

Regards,

 

KP.

Bit of a correction here "ego" should read "rego",, I-pad spell check/correct plus I should read 100% before posting.

KP.

 

 

[Admin]

Yeah i think we all knew what you meant but I couldn't help myself whilst laughing especially at the current time

 

 

[Spriteah]

Ladies and Gents,

 

I have decided to come out of the woodwork and make a few comments.

 

Firstly for those of you who don’t know me I am a past board member. I served from 2013 to 2015. I was on the Executive in that time as Treasurer. I witnessed a change of 4 presidents in that short time period. I chose not to re-run and make way for new talent at the last election because I was satisfied the Association was in great hands being guided by Michael Linke, Michael Monck and Tony King. My view has not changed and I am still very comfortable with the current management of RAAus.

 

I was an advocate for change. The poor governance, pathetic infighting, bullying and systemic self- serving amazed me. Not to mention total disregard for process, leaching money to poor decisions due to incompetence and the reality that you don’t know what you don’t know. The board was being run by a bunch of flight school instructors, many who lacked the skills required to oversee a large organization. Yes they meant well but they were not equipped to manage 3 million dollars turnover and near 10’000 members. The proof of this was the dismal mismanagement of the office which CASA then used to suspend privileges. And the irony is not lost that those from CASA were also part of the problem!

 

At the heart of the problem is the constitution. We started as a club. Model rules were adapted. We grew and grew. We got to big too quick. Many organizations then collapse. RAAus didn’t but that was due to good luck. We were lucky to get good guidance when we needed it to survive and are now well on the way to being an industry leader. The constitution will cement this good luck into good practices.

 

We need to continually evolve. The proposed constitution is good and will suit our Association into the future. I urge you to vote yes. Is it perfect, of course not. Ten different people in a room could debate pros and cons forever. But it is a great step forward. It can be altered into the future. I am sure some sections that the majority think are good now might be found to be not so good. They can be altered.

 

I urge all members to vote. I will vote yes and I encourage others to vote the same as I truly believe this is a great step going forward.

 

I have encourage some long time board members to get out of the way and let the organization move forward. Regional representation is a joke in this day and age. It costs members money and gives no benefit.

 

In response to the email circulating from Rod Birrell I personally like Rod and fully acknowledge he has done a lot for the RAAus movement over the years. I am disappointed that a current board member would send out miss-information. I urge all members to consider what motivation the email has been written for? If these are his concerns why were they not adequately raised during the development process? I would suggest there may be a self-serving agenda which has no place in our organization.

 

Yours in Safe Aviation,

 

Jim Tatlock.

 

 

[turboplanner]

At the heart of the problem is the constitution. We started as a club. Model rules were adapted. We grew and grew. We got to big too quick. Many organizations then collapse. RAAus didn’t but that was due to good luck. We were lucky to get good guidance when we needed it to survive and are now well on the way to being an industry leader.

Jim, I don't disagree with most of what you are saying, but arguing that the constitution prompted a change from an Incorporated Association to a Limited company is misleading.

 

There was no need to go down that path, and the alternatives should have been discussed openly.

 

Sure we started with Model Rules; the new Association has that option, and these are the very simplest template for the smallest Association, and can be added to at any time, or completely disregarded and replaced right at the start.

 

I just quickly found this simple explanation from the Queensland site:

 

 

If the heart of the problem was the constitution, then the Association has had several years to build it to suit the exact operatations of Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.

 

That includes things like:

 

An SMS section

 

A Compliance and Enforcement section, bringing in volunteers Australia-wide

 

Technical Section

 

...and so on where many of the current thorns and challenges could be addressed on a day to day basis.

 

But that simple solution isn't being proposed here, and instead there's just electioneering on a vague future operation.

 

 

 

[Yenn]

The proposed constitution is so flawed that it will have to be amended as soon as it is adopted, so why not do the amendments before the vote. As far as the old constitution being bad it was really the people who were administering the RAAus than flaws in the constitution that were the problem. It seems to me we have taken a sledge hammer to crack a tiny nut and the head of that hammer is deformed.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Henny Penny kept saying that the sky was falling, and she ended up eaten by the fox.

 

 

[gandalph]

Turbs, you've used the first person plural pronoun WE in several of your posts in this thread implying that you are in fact a member of the Recreational Aviation Association Australia. I have seen several posts that suggest otherwise, and I believe I may have implied recently that you were not a member. If I was wrong I apologise. Would you care to clarify this point for us?

 

 

[turboplanner]

The comments are matched to the tense.

 

 

[gandalph]

Is that a yes or a no?

 

 

[Scotty 1]

Are we voting on a complete document: no, Disciplinary Procedures etc.

 

Are we voting on a correct document : no, even those that are promoting and pushing for a yes vote say it could be done or worded better and will be fixed at a later date.

 

Get it right first.

 

We can not vote for individual special resolutions, it is a yes or no vote for all resolutions.

 

I have voted and it is No.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Thanks Jim. There is a fellow who is one of the bravest people I've met. Despite the unrelenting hostility he faced early in his term he went on to be a very good Treasurer. It was from Jim that we got the first decent Financial Reports out of RAAus after absolute rubbish reports.

 

Jim was at the centre of the near perfect storm that took RAAus within weeks of winding up and it was Jim and one or two others that pulled RAAus, kicking and screaming, out of the poo.

 

Jim knows the current Constitution better than most if not all who post on here and had a hand in the proposed constitution. He is easily in the best position to know if it is worth saving the current constitution or if we needed a rewrite and whether the proposed constitution meets the needed reform and is fair to members.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Now that a SEVENTH version of the Constitution has been released, inside the 21 day period, what legal status will the vote have?

 

 

[SDQDI]

Now that a SEVENTH version of the Constitution has been released, inside the 21 day period, what legal status will the vote have?

It is hardly the seventh version Turbs.

The email is labelled as the seventh update BUT it is just an email explaining a few minor points of the constitution which hasn't changed since the final draft. So more bringing half interested parties up to date rather than a new update.