RAAus Treasure's Report - Interesting.

[Guest Cloudsuck]

I found this on the RAAus Treasure's blog. Interesting

 

Treasurer’s Special Report to the members at the 2009 AGM

 

November 2009 special AGM

 

This is a special update report I would like to bring up to the membership.

 

I am concerned that the rate of increase in Employee Expenses is unsustainable.

 

Our mission statement says “Minimum Bureaucracy” yet in the last two years we have allowed a significant increase in bureaucracy to occur, without a similar corresponding increase in our membership. I must state here that some of this increase in bureaucracy has been forced on us by CASA, but the majority appears to be of our making.

 

In Fiscal 08 our employee expenses were $508,729. In Fiscal 09 these costs jumped to $651,410, and in Fiscal 10 they are estimated to reach $825,000. This is an increase in two years of over $361K. Or an increase of 62%. All this with our membership remaining fairly static.

 

Of real concern to me as Treasurer, was the large salary increases granted by the Board at the recent September meeting. When most Australians received little or no wage increases in 2009 due to the economic climate, the board, as a whole chose to approve increases of between 8% for junior office staff, and up to 25% for managers. On top of these increases we must now budget for all the “add on” costs. I am the first to agree that our staff are our greatest asset, but we are a non profit association, funded in the main by member fees. It is my personal belief that we must live within our means.

 

However it can also be argued that we need to pay the right money to gain and keep the right staff. I see it as my duty as your treasurer to bring this matter to your attention. What you choose to do with this information is entirely up to you. You are the membership. You are the association.

 

To bring this into perspective we really must look at the cost per individual member.

 

In previous years our employee cost per member was running at around $56 to $57 per member. This jumped to $68 per member in F09 and I now estimated this to hit $90 per member in F10. An increase of over 60% in just two years.

 

As treasurer I believe we must seriously address the rate of increase in our employee costs. If it can be shown that some of the increase is due to CASA requirements then I believe we need to seek some cost recovery from CASA. But we, as an association need to “own” this issue, and deal with it appropriately.

 

Finally, I won’t be seeking re-election as Treasurer, but I would urge the incoming treasurer to be very vigilant to prevent our costs getting out of proportion to our membership levels.

 

However, we are an association, and you people, our membership, may be quite comfortable with these increases. But I believe, as un popular as it may be for me, it is my duty as your Treasurer to bring this matter to the attention of the membership.

 

John McKeown

 

RAA Treasurer.

 

Nov 2009

 

 

[Simonflyer]

A bit more than interesting i should think..thumb_down

 

 

[Guest JRMobile]

Alarm bells should be ringing for all of us!

[Guest check-in]

Salary blowouts seem to be endemic in the aviation industry. CASA do an audit, make lots of demands on the post-holders. Post-holders can't handle all the demands, so appoint managers etc to take care of the details. Meantime the business expands a little. Next audit, CASA nit-pick the managers, so they need staff to take care of the details, and so it goes; with the staff costs rapidly out-stripping the slightly increased revenue.

 

I have been involved in a couple of AOC start-ups and several audits. CASA officials have told me that they don't differentiate between an airline with two aircraft and another with 20 - the compliance issues are the same , so the structure to deal with those issues ends up basically the same. The last two airlines I worked for both operated only 4 jet aircraft and at their peak both had staff in excess of 200. Both are now belly-up, with staff entitlements and superannuation still unpaid.

 

RAA is not an airline, but in common with airlines it has compliance responsibilities, records etc which have to be kept to satisfy CASA, insurers etc. There are, for example, more RA pilot records to be kept than any airline is likely to have. Also a range of airworthiness matters with a very wide scope. The aircraft may be simple, but there's a lot of different types out there in RAA land.

 

Our worst nightmare would be such a hike in membership fees that we actually lose people because it is no longer the affordable dream. End result being RA will wither on the vine. I have no idea how it works, but maybe a serious look at how much record-keeping can be automated via a good computer system would be a start. Relying on unpaid volunteers for the daily drudge of compliance will never work, so I imagine the existing salaries are there to stay. Peanuts begets monkeys and all that.

 

A real effort must be put into resisting CASA bureaucratic demands while expanding the membership base, with NO further increase in staff levels, or at least increases only proportional to increased member numbers. Also resisting the minority membership that want ever-increasing complexity of aircraft and privileges.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Once again the Directors have acted in secrecy. If they had been open, we could see the degree of pressure for salary increases to ensure we had efficient staff vs unreasonable demands by CASA creating an unreasonable cost burden and there would be 10,000 people in every corner of Australia turning the pressure on at many levels to correct the situation.

 

But we just don't know whether there are genuine unavoidable costs here or whether our elected officials have been dumb enough to appoint caviar eating trough slurpers.

 

 

[shags_j]

don't suppose anyone hasa copy of the financials handy do theyt?

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hello cloudsuck, thanks for the information you have just provided.i wouldnt have known any of that information, with out you showing us.Cheers

 

Hello check-in , just to add to your comments in regards to "alot of different type of our a/c. I read somewhere, that there is approximately 180 different a/c on our register, including scratch builds etc. Cheers

 

 

[shags_j]

Again without looking at the financials I don't think we can comment too much. If noone here has a copy I will request from Canberra.

 

 

[Admin]

Unfortunately the financials are only available to current RAAus members so posting them here wouldn't be allowed besides people can get a copy, edit them, change the figures etc, and then post them up on other web sites. We have seen with our own Ops Manual that has been edited and placed on another website - to my way of thinking a hard copy is better however it is like your front door lock, it only keeps the honest people out.

 

Now what happens if someone downloads that copy of the edited Ops Manual that is on another web site, prints it out and gives it to someone - how can they be sure that it hasn't been edited in some way and they in fact have a real copy - they could make decisions based on incorrect information and you are playing with people's lives here...not playing tiddly winks - there are some unscrupulous people out there doing a lot of damage to our industry and especially the name "Recreational Aviation Australia"

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Once again the Directors have acted in secrecy.

This is from the Treasurer as well... It seems good work already being done by Ian.

 

One item of important note to me was the repeal of a previous motion on confidentially. Excessive secrecy is a real "thing" with me, and I have continuously refused to sign the form requiring secrecy of Board Meetings. Until this meeting where the the new Board Member from Victoria (Ian Baker) also refused to sign I was the only member not to sign. I have no issues with secrecy when "In Camera" But to keep secret other issues discussed at a Board meeting leads to all sorts of corruption and moral issues. I am of the view that everything is transparent to the general membership by default, and only the most contentious and "in progress" issues should be kept secret. "At this stage". Not forever.

 

This requirement, in my opinion, was also against the constitution. Every single member of the RA-Aus has a constitutional right to attend Board Meetings as an observer, and has a right to the the proceedings without secrecy being applied. Vigilance of the general membership is very important and I urge any member who is able to sit in and observe a Board Meeting to make every effort to do so.

 

John McKeown

 

RA-Aus Board Member Southern Queensland

 

 

[shags_j]

Interesting note I was having a look on his blog and noticed that he commented the RA shop wasn't doing so well.

 

Amazed the hell out of me. I didn't know they had a shop. I went to the site and it took me ages to find it.

 

 

[Thx1137]

Interesting note I was having a look on his blog and noticed that he commented the RA shop wasn't doing so well. Amazed the hell out of me. I didn't know they had a shop. I went to the site and it took me ages to find it.

It doesn't exactly stand out does it. Also, it is almost exclusively based on RA branded merchandise. I hate company logos on stuff I wear! Even if it is one I support.

 

Steven.

 

 

[Guest Walter Buschor]

The "wages blowout" seems unreasonable on face value. I'm sure we all want our RAA staff to be paid well and fairly for what they do. 60% over a short period is a lot. What has not been said is what they did get paid BEFORE the wage increases. It just might have been a well paid " love job" , we don't know. If wages where brought in line with the industry fair enough. If not we should express our concerns.

 

I would like to see some figures published and then I'll make up my mind on it.

 

 

[Robert]

RAAus !!!!! Hmmmm Wages blow-out, secrecy, Instead of Minimum Bureaucracy heading down the path of Maximum Bureaucracy. RAAus !!!!! Hmmmmm is this the beginning of the end. Maybe its time for the RAAus to have a long hard look at itself and check where its going. Maybe time for all us members to take a more active interest in where the Board and Administration are leading us.

 

Must admit I was concerned about this when Middo left.

 

 

[Kiwi]

For the full report, read John’s blog site.

 

Rag and Tube Aviator

 

 

[wags]

AGM at NATFLY... yes please.

 

Thanks for bringing all this to our attention John.

 

For anyone who wants to read the blog... The Flying Tigers Recreational Aviation Club

 

As is the case in most organizations, the members are pretty uninterested in what goes on at management level until it has gone sideway and is far outside what can be considered as "normal". Then they will scream like a stuck pig and ask why!

 

Secrecy etc is a thing from the past and I applaud you for speaking up as you have.

 

Can't get out of my mind that CASA is hell-bent on a path to destroy RAAus. They can't do it directly because we are the largest group of aviators in this country and that wouldn't sit easily with the public, but they can certainly "bleed us dry". Clandestine ways of achieving your desired outcome... maybe?

 

Let's get the AGM to Nat-Fly, not in 2012 but in 2010. Change of venue can mean a change in schedule surely? It is the real "gathering of the clan" and at least we will get the numbers (hopefully) and hence input to ensure an eye is kept on matters that affect us all. At minimum we will all be better educated about our organizations business.

 

Thanks again for your efforts and for enlightening us on this.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I'm sure we all want our RAA staff to be paid well and fairly for what they do. 60% over a short period is a lot. What has not been said is what they did get paid BEFORE the wage increases.

Good point Walter. This may be a storm in a teacup, but we don't know and are not in a position to accept it because there's no transparency.

 

 

[turboplanner]

As is the case in most organizations, the members are pretty uninterested in what goes on at management level until it has gone sideway and is far outside what can be considered as "normal". Then they will scream like a stuck pig and ask why!Can't get out of my mind that CASA is hell-bent on a path to destroy RAAus. They can't do it directly because we are the largest group of aviators in this country and that wouldn't sit easily with the public, but they can certainly "bleed us dry". Clandestine ways of achieving your desired outcome... maybe?

(a)

 

This is the norm for almost every single Club or Association in Australia, and is a part of our Australian psyche, so it isn't going to change.

 

The first part of it makes managing a large Association very easy, because there is very little interference from the members.

 

The second part of it, when things are allowed to go sour turns it into a nightmare with hundreds of people offering hundreds of solutions, calling for resignations etc.

 

I've posted previously about running an organization in Victoria with about 1500 members, easily coping with total transparency, and getting 100% unanimous support from the various member groups.

 

As I recall a number of posters disagreed with this pushing the line that the Board should be allowed to get on with its business without interference, but that's just a cop out and a failure to manage.

 

I've had a lot of experience dealing with corruption and incompetence in Local Government, and in every case it only developed because there was no transparency and people were not aware of the downhill trend.

 

We wouldn't want to see that happen to RA Aus

 

(b)

 

I don't think CASA is hell bent on destroying us, because I hear exactly the same complaints from GA, and in particular the charter and RPT guys who are the backbone that we need to keep airports vibrant.

 

It seems to me its a classic case of the inmates being in charge of the jail, and the Minister and Shadow Minister failing to step up to the mark and manage the current out of control situation.

 

Once again, with better transparency within RA Aus the 10,000 of us would be in a better position to help the management because of our numberts and geographoc spread.

 

But we don't know what these CASA pressures are do we.

 

 

[Kiwi]

Thanks for bringing all this to our attention John.For anyone who wants to read the blog... The Flying Tigers Recreational Aviation Club

 

.

John has two blog sites, one is for Serious posts and information for all R A Aus members, this site is Rag and Tube Aviator

John’s other blog site The Flying Tigers Recreational Aviation Club

 

( in his own words) “ is a lighthearted Blog Site for members of the Flying Tigers Ultralight Club.”

 

Kiwi

 

 

[Guest sirius]

Less than sweet grapes?

 

The report appears to have been published on this and other websites by the immediate past Treasurer. Perhaps the new treasurer should comment on the figures.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Hey i'd like to know who it was that instigated the 'secrecy clause or requirement', for the board members, and meetings ?. And I take my hat off to those, including Ian who refused to sign it, and consiquently got it thrown out. Who instigated it, and why wern't members made aware of it's existance ??................................................................................................

 

 

[shags_j]

Shouldn't that be part of the minutes?

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Well yes it should be...but may not have been, due to the secrecy clause !! ??..I'm confused.

 

 

[Guest sirius]

Most organisations have confidentiality agreements to safeguard against commercial or in confidence matters. This is not to say that you can't get access to minutes etc, but generally you have to attend the office and take notes only. This is a lot different to a "secrecy" clause which would stop people from making their own opinions known on forums such as this. As a general rule, any comment that is not damaging to the organisation to which that person was elected to should be acceptable.

 

Are you sure it's a "secrecy clause" we are talking about?

 

 

[Yenn]

A worrying post but what I hate to see is the quoting of percentage increases. They mean absolutely nothing. What happens if the staff had been paid a pittance and got a 100% increase which still only gave them a fair wage?

 

Give us some real numbers or I will think this was started by a journalist.

 

Nowadays I dislike seeing managers getting the big percentage increases and the lesser mortals getting lesser percentages.