pilotjames

I personally know of a similar event on a dam where a photo was taken and submitted through the appropriate channels, the pilot was contacted within a short time (a few days), the pilot was cautioned and a remedial action plan was commenced. The pilot was duly dealt with justly and was back in the air following some further training and lectures at his personal cost. Cost to RAA, a couple of letters and phone calls. Direct remedial cost to the pilot for his training and lectures/ study and "egg on his face". He now advises he won't do that again. The issue put to bed and finalized in about two weeks. Vey efficient on RAA's behalf. Overall a good PR exercise.

What happens when you are on board a sinking ship if you want to survive. What will be left for the incoming board in September and what will be their liability exposure once they take over???

I would be and am very confused about this election announcement also. Under our constitution I believe if a vacancy occurs within 6 months of a due election, then there is no need to call an election. No by election has been called for the Qld position, declared vacant about 10 days ago, but now we have one called for WA. In this case we now have two board members who have stood down within the 6 months and in both cases it has already been announced by RAA that the nominations for these respective positions has already closed on 31st May for the respective positions. Both positions have already been announced that they have been filled already, unapposed. How do you have an election for someone who does not exist any more. Ed Smith has already been elected unopposed to WA and in Qld you have Tony King and Trevor Bange elected unopposed. The Executive cannot even get the holding of elections correct now. That is the way I understand the election process. Perhaps someone out there more up on the constitution could advise me if I am incorrect.

"Never occur again" kaz3G said in post 371. History over time has a habit of repeating itself. Inaction on this issue by board / executive could well lead to inaction by staff / board / executive on any other matter/s. Lets look only at the last 5 months. Following on from the February EGM we have board member/s saying "we will do it better", "it will not happen again", etc. Here we have another situation that may even be a bigger gaff than last time. Following on from the February EGM we find an email on how the Board had beaten the members at the February EGM. Now we have the President / Executive lording it over other Board members and the general membership yet again. They are now becoming a law unto themselves and when something else arises they will once again say, we have won the last two big issues, now bring on the next round and we will win it also, as we have abdicated any members rights. No checks and balances, no control by the membership or by fellow board members of the Executive.

Oscar, in post 20 has hit the nail on the head. This is the future way forward for RAA with about 6 to 8 board members having a number (more than the current 2) face to face meetings per year. Bring it on.

Communication is the name of the game. If the board had released the minutes of meetings, including board meetings, like they were supposed to, we would have know about the SMS problems and the failures of the board a lot sooner and then those of us at the EGM in February could have directed the board down a different. O I forgot, they never listen to the members anyhow, so that is why we are here now. We told them over and over again at the EGM about various issues, they said they were listening, we would do better, but they did not listen to the members really and here we are again, at another crisis in our movement. This new SMS system is going to generate a lot of strain on our flying schools to implement in time. Not their fault though, it was the Boards fault, they sat on their hands, did not communicate with the members or with each other enough, now they have a lot to answer for again. North Qld has a by election looming, so we will be looking seriously here as to who we put onto the board. It is good to see that we have some new faces coming on the board in September. We want more new faces and for the new board elected to ensure they look very closely as to who they elect to executive positions. We do not want any repeats like we have being having over and over again in the past twelve months or so. Board solidarity for management is a must, but it must be done legally and comply with our constitution, and comply with all governance principles and procedures, and any contractoral arrangements that RAA may have such as with CASA (Deed of Agreement) which is what the past board and executives have not being doing. I see that Mick Monck is running in NSW. He comes across as very educated and experienced working for and with big boards, and is a strong supporter for change in RAA. His portrayals at the EGM meeting in February were very spot on and he was willing to get up and say his comments eloquently. Pity I am not in his electorate, he sounds like a very good candidate. There is a couple of more in NSW who also sound very good, but we have never heard any inputs by these over the past months so it is impossible to evaluate them. Mick Monck appears to have been there, has been doing a lot, has offered to help the board on a number of matters and has already shown that he is open to communication with his mail outs to some members. It appears that he has now been willing to put his hand up to give us, the general RAA membership, his valuable assistance. He is not one of the silent majority that everyone keeps referring to.

I know my CFI well and I totally disagree with the log book photocopy requirement for your BFR. When you do your BFR, a form is completed and the CFI submits this to RAA and it appears on your file. End of action. If however your testing CFI DOES NOT submit the form for you (which is a requirement of him) then your file is not updated. The next time you come up for any action on your file by staff at RAA, you will be requested to submit a copy of your log book page that shows the instructors signature that shows you have had a BFR, it is then end of story. If you don't want to submit copy of the page of the logbook, ENSURE your testing instructor submits your paperwork. Know your testing instructor and make him accountable.