RAAus Election 2023

[FlyingVizsla]

The RAAus candidates have been announced.  I was beginning to think that members were losing interest as the last election was unopposed and before that they had to make an appointment.  Now you have a choice.  There are 2 positions available and 5 candidates.  Members can sign in to the RAAus website and go to Governance -> Board Election.  Each has a statement and an email for contact.  Three are current or past Board members.

 

[kasper]

Shame raaus   this time did not even make an attempt to call for nominations in accordance with with requirements of the constitution.  
 

real shame is the govt corporate regulator has directly said that it’s up tot the members to hold the company management to account and after 6 years of asking I’m over it.  
 

maybe one of the actual board members might take an interest in running elections correctly … and can pm me here - I have up sending all board member emails.

[Flying_higher]

I’d be keen to know what you mean here  I saw the notifications asking for nominations. Obviously others  did too given there are 5 nominees. 

[turboplanner]

6 hours ago, Flying_higher said:

I’d be keen to know what you mean here  I saw the notifications asking for nominations. Obviously others  did too given there are 5 nominees. 

You're saying one thing, Kasper is talking about another.

 

The Consitution of every organisation lays down the terms and conditions for an election, then when an election is required then the individual rules for conducting an election, and included in those rules should be at least one that provides for Natural Justice, otherwise you would get things like someone announcing at a Meeting "Me and me friends  called for nominations for an election last night and I'm the new Treasurer/Secretary etc."

 

[Flying_higher]

Fair enough. 👍🏻

[coljones]

On 28/07/2023 at 8:38 PM, kasper said:

Shame raaus   this time did not even make an attempt to call for nominations in accordance with with requirements of the constitution.  
 

real shame is the govt corporate regulator has directly said that it’s up tot the members to hold the company management to account and after 6 years of asking I’m over it.  
 

maybe one of the actual board members might take an interest in running elections correctly … and can pm me here - I have up sending all board member emails.

In what way was the call for nominations not in accordance with the rules?

[kasper]

1 hour ago, coljones said:

In what way was the call for nominations not in accordance with the rules?

Two simple ways 

1. the RAAus is not permitted to have any action required under the constitution purely online.  There are reserved members who on conversion refused to permit online therefore RAAus cannot ever do anything purely online until the last of those members ceases being a member. 
 2. Where are the written and published - not online - rules of the election that comply with the constitution?   A nomination pack does not comply - that’s a description of a process that is supposed to comply with the rules. 
 

And a simple test of the adequacy of the rules is to say where does it give anyone the power to appoint a returning officer or set the timetable of an election?   There is no written rule set approved by the board in compliance with the constitution nor had there ever been.  
 

These basic faults in the process were pointed out every time RAAus held an election for the past 5 years by me .

 

directly with the ‘returning officer’ and by email direct to every board member in an attempt to get some actual process in place.

 

this year I am not bothering because it’s just a. Waste of time and effort. 
 

but given that every single director has been appointed by a flawed process I’d really wonder what the concern that a person in that position should be for personal liability in the case something actually goes wrong and an unhappy person starts poking into how they weee appointed and if there are faults in that process. 

 

I’ve always said to the previous CEO and directors that I was trying to HELP and not just causing problems and stirring.  I even nominated one year to get ‘appointed’ so I could sort out basic compliance concerns from the inside but I’m just over it all. 

[turboplanner]

52 minutes ago, kasper said:

Two simple ways 

1. the RAAus is not permitted to have any action required under the constitution purely online.  There are reserved members who on conversion refused to permit online therefore RAAus cannot ever do anything purely online until the last of those members ceases being a member. 
 2. Where are the written and published - not online - rules of the election that comply with the constitution?   A nomination pack does not comply - that’s a description of a process that is supposed to comply with the rules. 
 

And a simple test of the adequacy of the rules is to say where does it give anyone the power to appoint a returning officer or set the timetable of an election?   There is no written rule set approved by the board in compliance with the constitution nor had there ever been.  
 

These basic faults in the process were pointed out every time RAAus held an election for the past 5 years by me .

 

directly with the ‘returning officer’ and by email direct to every board member in an attempt to get some actual process in place.

 

this year I am not bothering because it’s just a. Waste of time and effort. 
 

but given that every single director has been appointed by a flawed process I’d really wonder what the concern that a person in that position should be for personal liability in the case something actually goes wrong and an unhappy person starts poking into how they weee appointed and if there are faults in that process. 

 

I’ve always said to the previous CEO and directors that I was trying to HELP and not just causing problems and stirring.  I even nominated one year to get ‘appointed’ so I could sort out basic compliance concerns from the inside but I’m just over it all. 

You're right. And from that flows a lot of potential issues.

[FlyingVizsla]

I watched the Live Steam of the Candidates last night.  The questions could have been better - a couple answered "What he said ..." A fair bit of waffling.  You can watch it again on YouTube.  Probably a link on the RAAus members portal.

 

Diversification of income stream to relieve the pressure on membership and registration fees was raised but not explained.  It sounded like offering fees for services to external bodies.  Improving the membership offering mentioned getting ATSB to investigate, CTA, more aircraft, bigger role for schools (from a CFI), remove red tape.

 

I encourage you to listen to the broadcast and make up your mind about who to vote for.  Voting opened today and is open for a month.  Those without email have voting papers posted snail mail, so there will be a delay to results with an allowance for a vote posted at the last minute to make it to Canberra. 

 

Whatever you think about the process, at least cast a vote or you will get the same again.  🙂

[Airsports]

NEWS - Recreational Aviation Australia Elections - Call to action.

 

As you all know the RAAus Board elections are now open for voting. The outcome of these elections will matter to you as recreational aviation pilots.

 

The purpose of Recreational Aviation Australia, above all else, is to look after its members. Unfortunately this policy is no longer the guiding principle of RAAus. Using Part 149 regulations senior RAAus employees are now taking what most see as unjustified punitive action against pilots, aircraft owners and flying schools.

 

RAAus’s current penalty centric anti-member method of operating needs to be changed.

 

Taking action to change RAAus's focus to a "cause no harm" operation will require a momentous cultural overhaul of the organisation as a whole.

 

This necessary reform will not happen if current serving RAAus Board members are re-elected.

 

I ask that you consider voting for those candidates standing for Board positions that have offered to fix this cultural problem.There is only one candidate who has directly stated his willingness to reform the way RAAus works and how it interacts with its members, that Board candidate is Rogin Taylor.

 

Rogin has stated publicly that he will advocate for and represent RAAus pilots, aircraft owners, flying schools and maintainers in all areas and in particular where members have been adversely affected by RAAus policies.

 

Please consider voting for Rogin to be elected as a RAAus Board member. Online voting for RAAus Board members is now open and an email link will have ben set to you by RAAus to enable this voting to occur.

 

You can vote for two candidates as two positions are available. To ensure the possibility of reform may I suggest you consider supporting either Andrew Johnson or Jim Tatlock as suitable candidates for your second vote.

 

This is a call to action, if you are a RAAus member, student pilot or pilot please consider voting now for a Board candidate, let your friends know of the problems facing RAAus. We need as many pilots of a like cause voting at this election.

 

The “worse than CASA” tag is the most common reference I now hear from members in the field and this needs to change.

 

Unfortunately most RAAus members do not vote in Board elections, based on previous elections with 10,000 RAAus members we can expect 90% of members will not vote.

Encourage those you know to take the time, look at the candidates statements and vote, it will make a difference.

 

Please feel free to contact me or Rogin Taylor on 0417 646 075 if you have any questions.

 

Regards

Rod Birrell

Airsports Flying School

RAAus pilot #35

0422-446622

 

RAA Rogin Taylor - 2023 Election Statement.pdf

Edited September 9, 2023 by Airsports

[Flying_higher]

If you've got such an axe to grind, why don’t you share with us your specific gripe. I for one will be then seeking the RAA to tell us their side of the story. Otherwise your plea for members to vote for your mates is baseless.  

[Airsports]

Hello Flying Higher,

 

Perhaps some background information first, before responding to your post, I am both a founding member of the Australian Ultralight Federation and Recreational Aviation Australia, my original purpose and goal was and is to ensure RAAus and its members achieve their ambition of flight with the minimum amount of regulation and red tape. I started teaching pilots to fly in hang gliders and then in ultralight aircraft, my school now uses a small fleet of light sport aircraft for flight training. In all I have 50 years of experience safely teaching pilots how to fly and 40 years acting as a volunteer for both the AUF and RAAus. I have served on the RAAus Board or many years since its inception. I do feel I have the experience to be able to give some insight as to what RAAus has achieved over recent years, its corporate ethos, its culture and its plans for the future.

 

The efforts of the original AUF/RAAus founders was aspirational, after only a few years we proved our goal was not only achievable it has now become a rock solid fact of life. I have no wish to harm RAAus. in fact I want it to remain strong and continue to grow. I have made a  lifetime commitment to RAAus I do not want to see it fail. To achieve this goal we need the right RAAus management team in place. I submit for a strong future we need some new representatives on the RAAus Board. This is hardly revolutionary out of a Board of 7 to support a potential change of 2 new Board members.

 

On Rogin Taylors candidature, I only know Rogin from the information he has presented to me by email and phone about his election. I did not know Rogin was to stand until RAAus released his details and his election statement.  

 

On the harm caused to RAAus members by RAAus employees the cases are real, significant and numerous. Those adversely affected  often will not speak openly about their cases in the fear of further reprisals from RAAus officials.  The solution here is not releasing the cases themselves, no one want to go through a trial by media. The solution is changing the culture within RAAus to put in checks and balances to ensure RAAus officers to not harm RAAus members - we are not a police force, we should not become an unpaid enforcement agency for CASA and we should not be stopping pilots flying or putting flying schools out of business without just cause.

 

Please now speak with Rogin yourself, I am sure he will explain independently what the problems are with RAAus and what action is needed to make RAAus a better organisation.

 

Regards

 

Rod Birrell

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by Airsports

[KR2 Alan Middleton]

Several axes to grind.  Firstly, could someone please explain why Michael Monck is allowed by the current Board to run again after 3 consecutive terms, on the face of it against the Constitution?  I think needs an urgent explanation but I cannot seem to get one out of the Board or RAA.

Edited September 9, 2023 by KR2 Alan Middleton
misspelt

[turboplanner]

16 hours ago, KR2 Alan Middleton said:

Several axes to grind.  Firstly, could someone please explain why Michael Monck is allowed by the current Board to run again after 3 consecutive terms, on the face of it against the Constitution?  I think needs an urgent explanation but I cannot seem to get one out of the Board or RAA.

Are you referring to the Constitution of Recreational Aviation Australia Limited, ACN 070 931 645, V3.0, As amended 12 May 2022.

 

If so, then what you are alleging will either be a breach or not, and if it is the same Constitution will give you the pathway to address it, and I emphasise the "you". What has happened in the past is that people have blurted out issues on social media and (a) by the time they get around to doing anything constructive the target has outwitted them or (b) they just expected other people to do it for them.

[Flying_higher]

21 hours ago, Airsports said:

 

On the harm caused to RAAus members by RAAus employees the cases are real, significant and numerous. Those adversely affected  often will not speak openly about their cases in the fear of further reprisals from RAAus officials.  The solution here is not releasing the cases themselves, no one want to go through a trial by media. The solution is changing the culture within RAAus to put in checks and balances to ensure RAAus officers to not harm RAAus members - we are not a police force, we should not become an unpaid enforcement agency for CASA and we should not be stopping pilots flying or putting flying schools out of business without just cause.

I appreciate you've been around for a while and that you say you don't want to cause harm to RAA, But 'm still none the wiser for what management are alleged to have done. It's still hearsay if you ask me. Given that, I'd prefer a steady hand at the wheel personally.

 

The only thing I can find on google is that Mr Taylor appears to have had a prang last year. Seems to be an interesting accident too, so maybe the RAA threw the book at him? “I Thought We Were Going To Drown!” Plane Crash Survivor Shares Story - Mackay Whitsunday LIfe (mackayandwhitsundaylife.com)

 

Whilst I don't disagree that we don't want police officers running the RAA, there are rules to be followed and I guess management need to uphold these rules, particularly since Part 149 came into effect - of which I believe you were a Board member at the time that was brought in.

[kasper]

22 hours ago, KR2 Alan Middleton said:

Several axes to grind.  Firstly, could someone please explain why Michael Monck is allowed by the current Board to run again after 3 consecutive terms, on the face of it against the Constitution?  I think needs an urgent explanation but I cannot seem to get one out of the Board or RAA.

Well yes and no to the three years.  
 

you can stand as many times as you like and there is nothing to make you say anything about the 9 yr rule when you stand.  
 

the issue is that the elections is not the appointment as director it’s the process to nominate to the board someone to be appointed at the AGM in November following the election.  It’s that AGM that has a Special Resolution attached to it under the constitution. 
 

so you CAN stand for election as many times in a row as you like and you don’t have to disclose anything at the election time about your appointment.  
 

it’s just that when the AGM happens and he is appointed that appointment must be by special resolution … and it always will be as any hint of members actually planning to turn up and vote it down or gather proxies to do that same will - based on past experience- be met by incumbent directors and management ensuring they either hold proxies to support it.  
 

and as fewer people attend the AGM than vote you are pretty much going to get a special resolution through

 

so until there are a proper set of rules that make people state if they need a special resolution to be appointed and that is in place for the election you will see on the ground process that you may not expect and which will be difficult to avoid/challenge/change. 
 

and that is because as a company in its current form ASIC will not involve themselves in breach of constitution as they expect that the members through the AGM are actively involved and will do it themselves.  
 

failing that as a member you are limited to instituting at your own cost legal action agains RAAus and they have all the member cash behind them. 

[Airsports]

Hello Fly Higher;

 

What management have done is to allow private company to give senior RAAus staff the ability to run their own punishment based private police force within RAAus. They can and are causing great harm to RAAus members. 

 

I only hope you do not need to report an incident to RAAus yourself as to report is no longer a "no blame" exercise (as it is within GA), even worse I hope you do not decide to fail to report an incident to RAAus as that is also an offence.  

 

I am not trying to change your mind here, please vote for the persons that you feel will look after RAAus its members and its future.

 

As I have said before I believe RAAus will be improved if we have some new views and skills on the RAAus Board. 

 

Rod Birrell

Edited September 10, 2023 by Airsports

[facthunter]

Would it be better to send the  report to  CASA stating you wished them to deal with it.?      Nev

[kasper]

12 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Would it be better to send the  report to  CASA stating you wished them to deal with it.?      Nev

Nope.  Casa have nothing to do with corporations law and actually the disciplinary actions of RAAus - if any - are rooted in our constitution which is up to the members to enforce as the regulator - ASIC - is not interested.   
 

My edit to this post is that  I want to be very clear - I have no knowledge or involvement in any RAAus disciplinary actions or complaints.
I am simply reading as a member and solicitor the constitution and clarifying from my understanding what goes where and when.  

Edited September 10, 2023 by kasper

[facthunter]

CASA stated we would never be subject to anything more restrictive than would be under the CASA. RAAus is always compromised with it's members rights and what .CASA has expected it to do. By Law its CASA's responsibility as I see it.  ANY PERSON becoming aware of some unsafe operation is required to report it to CASA.. So I thought.  Nev

[Flying_higher]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

CASA stated we would never be subject to anything more restrictive than would be under the CASA. RAAus is always compromised with it's members rights and what .CASA has expected it to do. By Law its CASA's responsibility as I see it.  ANY PERSON becoming aware of some unsafe operation is required to report it to CASA.. So I thought.  Nev

I guess thats what I'm saying here Nev. CASA only allow the RAA to do so much because RAA is not the regulator, only an administrator. That means that RAA can only do whats in their manuals otherwise they're breaking the law (Part149). Base on this, and from what I can see in their documents, in particular their disciplinary procedures (https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/man-2016-04-occurrence-and-complaint-handling-manual-final-2.pdf), I can't see how they can go outside of this otherwise CASA would be down their throats. And its my understanding also that they have to tell CASA everything thing they do with relation to enforcement to make sure they aren't just doing stuff willy nilly, as is being suggested on this post.

 

I do appreciate that these are your views Rod, and likewise, you're entitled to them and for who you vote for. I just think if there are going to be suggestions that RAA is being unfair and that new board members are going to be able to fix your concerns, I'd like to know what the circumstances are.

 

I also want to say that when I googled Mr Taylor and came across the article, I wasn't inferring he'd done anything wrong or if this is the reason he's obviously upset. 

[facthunter]

A bit of extra scrutiny never goes astray.  I think we have lost the essence for the AUF. That doesn't mean we have to revert to the simple and basic planes that were once the norm. we just need more member input to be recognised and used for the asset it should be. Not a Top down show.  The board works for us not the other way around.  WE all should be involved in POLICY matters. Nev

[turboplanner]

6 hours ago, facthunter said:

A bit of extra scrutiny never goes astray.  I think we have lost the essence for the AUF. That doesn't mean we have to revert to the simple and basic planes that were once the norm. we just need more member input to be recognised and used for the asset it should be. Not a Top down show.  The board works for us not the other way around.  WE all should be involved in POLICY matters. Nev

Not in a limited company.

 

That's what members voted for, or the tiny rump of members voted for.

 

The members still have the processes to wind up the Limited company and go back to being an Incorporated Association with Geographic Committee of Management for local representation and involvement.

 

The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia has 220,000 members over 440 clubs.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Is there information available about the performance of existing board members?

For example, their voting pattern, any comments/speeches that would be relevant?  Their attendance record?

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

Is there information available about the performance of existing board members?

For example, their voting pattern, any comments/speeches that would be relevant?  Their attendance record?

You would have to ask the Company Secretary, although the girl on the switch in Limited companies knows the most.