RAA 2021 Election

[FlyingVizsla]

RAA Board Election is open for voting.  A change from previous years - the Election Statements are on line (not in the magazine) and you will be voting on line too.  I watched the "meet the candidates" live stream, where only two participated.  Luke Bayly (a current Board Member) and Simon Ozanne (who unsuccessfully stood last time).  Rod Birrell "did not respond" whatever that meant.  There are two seats up for grabs.  You can watch it on YouTube or Facebook.

 

Members should have received an email from Verovoting.  Those without an email will get something in the mail.  The election opened 1st Sept and closes 28th Sept.

The Constitution limits terms to 3, so there will be a number of current Board Members who will not be able to stand again.  If elected, it will be Luke's last term.  Same with Eugene and other long term Board members.  

 

Consider carefully, and vote.

[FlyBoy1960]

According to the advice we received at our club meeting when asking who we should vote for, apparently Rod is only there for the title and doesn't do the work needed. 

 

He "claims" to be "the Director" of the company. Recreational Aviation Australia (RA-Aus)    this is not true   https://au.linkedin.com/in/rodney-birrell

 

 

 

He claims also to be the CEO of topaz sport aircraft but the name is not listed with ASIC and is available for registration

 

Yes. This business name is still available.

TOPAZ SPORT AIRCRAFT

Get this name now

Secure it today before someone else does!

 

whilst this does not show any criminal actions it does show that being entirely truthful and accurate about these facts is questionable.

Personally, I voted for the other 2 guys but, I take my hat off to anybody who put their name forward !

 

[FlyingVizsla]

I did comment on a previous election, on the independent report on the Board, which showed 3 Directors were uncooperative or under performing.  I had hoped that they may have changed their attitudes.  Rod was one.  Back in the days when there were 13, several were passengers, only there for their own benefit.  I have been copying and digitising the early AUF magazines and it is appalling that meeting reports mentioned Board members who arrived with their meeting material, sent a month ahead to allow consultation with their State members, was still unopened when they arrived in Canberra and hours were wasted while they read it.  Most were CFIs of their own schools and were looking after their own interests.

 

RAAus Board Election 2019 - Page 3 - Governing Bodies - Recreational Flying

 

Part of the report said ...

.. struggle to engage several members as they do not respond to emails, return phone calls and so forth. Alan Middleton often criticises the engagement of board members but fails to return calls and takes an aggressive tone in email (on one occasion I called him 4 times in relation to some out of session matters with no reply). Rod Birrell and Eugene Reid are similar.

 

I wasn't greatly impressed with Simon.  He has had a year to get immersed in RAA, but seemed to not have much of a grasp of the issues.  Luke is good value.

[coljones]

On 04/09/2021 at 5:35 PM, FlyBoy1960 said:

According to the advice we received at our club meeting when asking who we should vote for, apparently Rod is only there for the title and doesn't do the work needed. 

 

He "claims" to be "the Director" of the company. Recreational Aviation Australia (RA-Aus)    this is not true   https://au.linkedin.com/in/rodney-birrell

 

 

 

He claims also to be the CEO of topaz sport aircraft but the name is not listed with ASIC and is available for registration

 

Yes. This business name is still available.

TOPAZ SPORT AIRCRAFT

Get this name now

Secure it today before someone else does!

 

whilst this does not show any criminal actions it does show that being entirely truthful and accurate about these facts is questionable.

Personally, I voted for the other 2 guys but, I take my hat off to anybody who put their name forward !

 

A bit of a hatchet job! The site you went to isn't ASIC, probably just wanted your money. Topaz has website, https://www.flytopaz.com/.

, 

[kgwilson]

On 04/09/2021 at 5:35 PM, FlyBoy1960 said:

 

 

He "claims" to be "the Director" of the company. Recreational Aviation Australia (RA-Aus)    this is not true   https://au.linkedin.com/in/rodney-birrell

 

 

 

 

 

Look at the Contacts page of the RAA-Aus Intranet. He is listed as a Board member.

 

https://www.raa.asn.au/our-organisation/contact/

 

CEO: Matt Bouttell

Board: Michael Monck (Chair), Luke Bayly (Deputy Chair), Trevor Bange, Rod Birrell, Barry Windle, Eugene Reid, Andrew Scheiffers

[FlyBoy1960]

Sorry BUT a board member is not a director

[turboplanner]

1 minute ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

Sorry BUT a board member is not a director

They are directors of RAA Ltd, members of the board of directors.

 

[jackc]

I would hope that being on the RAA Board Of Directors, people all ready there or seeking election do not have financial interests in Aviation businesses.   Would this not be a conflict of interest?  In that RAA has a regulatory responsibility that members must abide?

[turboplanner]

10 minutes ago, jackc said:

I would hope that being on the RAA Board Of Directors, people all ready there or seeking election do not have financial interests in Aviation businesses.   Would this not be a conflict of interest?  In that RAA has a regulatory responsibility that members must abide?

What happened to not giving a .......................?

[jackc]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

What happened to not giving a .......................?

I want information because I am a paid up member.

Turbs, do you not sympathy for a poor F…… farmer who is in drought?  Where, is your care factor 🙂

[turboplanner]

12 minutes ago, jackc said:

I want information because I am a paid up member.

Turbs, do you not sympathy for a poor F…… farmer who is in drought?  Where, is your care factor 🙂

Well with this hat on you need to do some hard work to see just what the conflict status is with the current group standing.

Usually no one bothers to do the due diligence.

[facthunter]

Ban People who run  and instruct at flying schools WHEN you have  aircraft manufacturers sponsoring the Annual fly in???

  IF an Instructor of many, many years is still alive he/she must know a bit about U/L planes and flying them . Something that could well be lacking in the present group. In the past there's been some completely outrageous bagging of Birrell in the magazine which they control so he wouldn't get the opportunity to refute it. At the time and since I've NEVER seen such outrageous behaviour in any respectable organisation, putting such libelous and extreme allegations out , so I'd take some of these "facts" with a pinch of salt, if you want to be fair. Clearly "THEY" don't want him there, so what could that mean? Do you see "YOUR" organisation as the "New GA"?. it IS a monopoly so should represent all of us. and be answerable to all of us.  Nev

[FlyingVizsla]

All candidates are required to disclose any financial interest in aviation on their election statement.  I would expect candidates to have some "skin in the game" and as RAA members they should have some aviation experience.  I would be suspicious of someone who does not fly wanting to be a Director, also someone who is, say, the Largest Importer of Ultralights might try to use his influence.  But at the end of the day they are one voice in 7.  The Board need to know a lot about running a business. setting policy and negotiating with Govts.

[facthunter]

What is the point of running a business (balancing the books) if the "Essential Essence" of the business is lost? How good is the negotiating  with Gov't when the owner maintenance is sacrificed to a weight increase which itself was a declared priority of management for some reason or other. Bigger at any cost equals loss of  care for the existing members. No one in GA wanted the RAAus to be the New GA and neither did the existing members.. The board has "someone" who fly's a plane Oh goody so things are all right. Do a "funded by members to Oshkosh so  WE officially have a presence there. . If you have a conflict of interest you are careful to not vote on issues concerning that issue. That's a given but it's a concern nonetheless Nev

[Yenn]

If we want to fly without coming into the GA arena, then RAAus is the way to go.

If we need to be trained and I assume that anyone who cannot fly will need to be trained, then we need an instructor. To be an instructor and train RAAus pilots you have to be a member of RAAus and comply with all their regulations. Why would you be a member and not have the right to vote as someone here has suggested.

I would have thought that instructors would have a highly defined interest in keeping RAAus going and expanding.

If you fly a Drifter or a Thruster or another similar plane and want RAAus to only look after your interests, then you have missed the boat. We gave up control of RAAus when we voted for it to become a company, rather than an association.

RAAus is not going to look after any one sort of pilot ahead of another unless it suits the aims of RAAus and having read the aims of RAAus I wonder who came up with them originally. It seems to be a catchall aim. Anything that flies is ours!

Just try to vote in the best person to suit your aims and if you don't see anyone who does that standing for the position, you can stand next time around.

[facthunter]

Well Yenn it's a monopoly which is contrary to the requirements in an earlier document which constantly referred to an alternative "parallel Path".  Where we are at now is a result of many factors not the least being the chaotic state of the AUF/RAAus governance and internal wrangling at the time but also the total rejection of the Casa 's ceo McCormick of anything built  of uncertified parts by ordinary people. He was a poor pick because of his background and  "fixed" attitude. so we went backwards at a great rate of knots. while he was there.. Nev

[turboplanner]

18 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Well Yenn it's a monopoly which is contrary to the requirements in an earlier document which constantly referred to an alternative "parallel Path".  Where we are at now is a result of many factors not the least being the chaotic state of the AUF/RAAus governance and internal wrangling at the time but also the total rejection of the Casa 's ceo McCormick of anything built  of uncertified parts by ordinary people. He was a poor pick because of his background and  "fixed" attitude. so we went backwards at a great rate of knots. while he was there.. Nev

Where we are at the moment is the result of repeated lethargy by the membership.

They could have removed any of thes obstacles and the drift away from the core RA purposes, but again and again stayed away in droves.

[facthunter]

People always leave the work to others if they can and the usual talk was" I just want to fly". Apathy it is called.. RAAus went from a members show to a Business where you are the customer that has to cop the changes without any direct representation effectively.. AS for a projected policy.. Do the members have any control of that and are they aware of where it's going? Nev

[FlyBoy1960]

they talked extensively about RA-Aus going to AirVenture at one of the presentations at our airfield. Whilst, several people went most of the things were funded by them as individuals including the time taken away from work.

 

The total cost to RA-Aus was less than $2000 and this included one return airfare from Canberra to Chicago. All other costs of the other people in the team, accommodation, food and everything else was born by the individual.

 

The reason that they went from  memory was to establish a very strong relationship with the EAA and also get involved in the ASTM process so they understood exactly what was going on with light sport aircraft that are validated to ASTM standards.

 

sure, they had a few drinks in the afternoon with different groups but that is part of networking. I say again the total cost was less than $2000 and RA-Aus believe they have this back tenfold in new or improved relationships that truly benefit the organization.

 

Again, I'm just parroting what they said at the meeting from memory about 2 years ago

[facthunter]

Well that's a good contribution and thanks, but the perception has to be considered too. It  didn't look good  in the context of where we were at at the time. We could hardly enthuse about what we have here, either unless you quote total membership etc. That hides the real picture .Nev

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

People always leave the work to others if they can and the usual talk was" I just want to fly". Apathy it is called.. RAAus went from a members show to a Business where you are the customer that has to cop the changes without any direct representation effectively.. AS for a projected policy.. Do the members have any control of that and are they aware of where it's going? Nev

You were the one who said no use having a dog and barking too.

Now we no longer have the dog and no one is bothering to bark becaise they were all shut down by people who pretended they knew what they were doing.

[jackc]

4 hours ago, FlyingVizsla said:

All candidates are required to disclose any financial interest in aviation on their election statement.  I would expect candidates to have some "skin in the game" and as RAA members they should have some aviation experience.  I would be suspicious of someone who does not fly wanting to be a Director, also someone who is, say, the Largest Importer of Ultralights might try to use his influence.  But at the end of the day they are one voice in 7.  The Board need to know a lot about running a business. setting policy and negotiating with Govts.

However,  they are part of a body that regulates our Aviation sector.  IF they are part of an Aviation business, in my eyes it’s a conflict of interest.

[turboplanner]

23 minutes ago, jackc said:

However,  they are part of a body that regulates our Aviation sector.  IF they are part of an Aviation business, in my eyes it’s a conflict of interest.

Why?  Aviation decisions need to be made by people with extensive aviation experience.

Directors from the steel industry need extensive experience in that industry if they are to set policies which will work.

 

 

[jackc]

Just now, turboplanner said:

Why?  Aviation decisions need to be made by people with extensive aviation experience.

Directors from the steel industry need extensive experience in that industry if they are to set policies which will work.

 

 

And what about politicians who run this country……what experience in that field do they have?  Their track record is rather ordinary.

In our case aviation experience is an advantage.  It is in MY opinion, unethical that they have financial interest in an Aviation business whilst being  a board member/director of RAA etc.

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, jackc said:

And what about politicians who run this country……what experience in that field do they have?  Their track record is rather ordinary.

In our case aviation experience is an advantage.  It is in MY opinion, unethical that they have financial interest in an Aviation business whilst being  a board member/director of RAA etc.

Well as you would know the value of the opinion of a shareholder is limited to the number of shares he holds. What counts is what is allowed by the Limited Company's documents, so if anyone has concerns there, they should find a copy and then they'll know, whereas the value of an Incorporated Association is that if there was enough concern to carry a motion the constitution could be changed to reflect that concern.