Ex-Presidents Observations

[John G]

In fairness I have tried to stay neutral and let the "newbies" have a go before I waded back into the fray.

 

What is happening to our great organisation over recent times is not palatable to even the most apathetic member. We have seen our standing as an organisation diminish in recent times; CASA is re-asserting control and takeover designs on the most successful member aviation organisation to date. If they have their way we will go the way of GA and wither on the vine.

 

From the latest Board meeting I believe we will see an increase in fees and all manner of excuses on why the fees are justified. As members you will have noted a marked drop off in turn-around times and services offered. If you have been following some of the board member’s blogs then you will have seen that RA-Aus wages bill has exploded by several hundred percent while member services have declined

 

If you haven’t been offended and insulted by the latest offering by our CEO and President in our latest magazine then you have a thicker skin than I do.

 

No, I have no intention of running for office again! I can only handle being kicked in the guts once! But member apathy as I alluded to in my July 2008 President’s column has come to fruition. I have included that column below so that you don’t have to search through your old magazines. For more recent members who want to research some of the history read www.gardon.com.au

 

I have had my go and run out of steam; but I implore all members to take an active interest in your organisation and have a say otherwise we will end up like ALL other aviation organisations/clubs/ bodies in Australia in the past. Don’t say you were not warned when you lose your flying privileges!

 

"reprint of President's Column July 2008"

 

The Good!

 

The Bad!

 

The Ugly!

 

Now who could I be talking about? ..Me ? .. You? ...You all? ....Us ?....RAAus?

 

If we were to stop and think about it we all go through phases in our lives where the heading describes us all. I would like you all to bear with me as I walk you through what I think are the strengths and weaknesses of our organisation and reflect on where we should be heading as an organisation.

 

The Good.

 

We are aviators that enjoy the spontaneity and freedom to fly for the pure FUN and enjoyment that has only been the realm of birds for centuries past. In just one hundred years we have seen the joy of flight turned from one of Joy, wonderment and exhilaration that should be shared to one of the most over regulated pursuits.

 

Fare paying passengers have an expectation of arriving at their destination without death or injury and therefore CASA rightly imposes a hefty regulatory oversight and burden on those that wish to carry passengers for payment.

 

We that fly for FUN also expect to enjoy our pursuit with an expectation of returning home to our families at the end of the day; and therefore some form of regulation is required to ensure sufficient margins of safety are included in the way we fly and maintain our aeroplanes.

 

The only way to achieve complete safety would be to keep all aircraft securely locked up in hangars or spend enormous sums of money on triple redundant systems that can only guarantee that risks are reduced to a more acceptable one in a million as in the passenger carrying world. RA-Aus members, as informed participants, are willing to accept a higher level of risk to be able to fly at an affordable cost by accepting responsibility to operate their aircraft within a reduced regulatory environment that requires their active participation in mitigating and reducing risk.

 

RA-Aus has benefited from a great many people contributing their expertise and time to develop skills and expertise in minimum flying over the years to develop recreational flying to where it is today. Peer development, supervision, oversight and acceptance of responsibility was the cornerstone that enabled the acceptance of recreational flying in the community. The lesson was quickly learned that irresponsible acts of a few could jeopardise the freedoms of the rest of the responsible flyers and peer summary justice was often swift against recalcitrant miscreant pilots.

 

The Bad

 

How many times in our own experiences have we seen clubs prosper and then suddenly disappear after a change of leadership and personality politics. The very things that make a club strong and vibrant can also conspire to bring about its undoing. The fact that a strong vibrant club can disappear overnight due to a well meaning individual is catastrophic for a small community. In time the club usually re-forms and re-builds with a lot of hard work and talented people to fill the void created by the previous collapse. Unfortunately in the “club environment “ willing workers contributing their skills in an honorary capacity do so to the point of burnout or until personal commitments prevent them from continuing on. Mix into this recipe, politics and personalities, we end up on a treadmill of boom and bust of many community based clubs.

 

The “flying club” structure has served RA-Aus extremely well in the past. Having a bunch of people with the same common goal of having FUN flying with minimal regulation and minimal cost was the genesis of the AUF/RA-Aus. In the early days, the fight to win the right to fly outside the established over regulated and costly options available at the time unified members who understood that joint acceptance of responsibility, sometimes at the expense of personal displays of exuberance, was essential for survival of the organisation so that ALL could continue to fly for FUN with a minimum of restrictions.

 

The flying freedoms won by our earlier members and pioneers have obviously been seen as attractive for an increasing number of pilots. We have seen an enviable increase in membership numbers, however with the increase comes new management challenges. Adding to these management challenges is the influx of members that are happy to accept the hard won privileges gained by previous members without accepting the co-commitment responsibilities.

 

The consequences of RA-Aus going out of business due to apathy or personality politics is unthinkable and a luxury we cannot afford. It has happened in other aviation organisations with terminal consequences. Traditionally when we hold elections we have less than 10% of the membership lodging a vote even though they are provided with a post paid envelope and pre-printed ballot paper. Poor member participation could be interpreted as good old Aussie apathy when members are happy with the status quo.

 

In a benign environment, apathy is not in itself debilitating but it does open the door to having the organisation hijacked by a vocal minority that may not have the experience and expertise to keep the organisation focussed on ensuring our continued access to safe affordable aviation with minimum of regulation.

 

The Ugly,

 

More and more as we grow we are seeing an increasing number of members that seem to think that the rules don’t apply to them or that they deserve special treatment. When they disagree with the umpire’s decision they resort to litigation that requires them and us spending huge sums on legal fees usually to achieve the same result. Organisations run along club or membership based rules are particularly vulnerable to renegade member exploitation using litigation.

 

Worst still, we have a very small percentage of members who engage in abusing our office staff when they are unhappy with a particular decision or outcome. Our office staff are some of the most dedicated and hardest working folk I have witnessed anywhere in the country. We cannot afford to have a small minority of unthinking members jeopardise the retention of our staff.

 

The Future?

 

It is not all gloomy! RA-Aus is a strong vibrant organisation that has a great spirit and member support that is witnessed at Natfly and all round the country every day and weekend where more people are out flying for FUN then ever before.

 

I hope that this column stimulates debate on whether a corporate structure would better protect our interests into the future as we continue to grow from our humble beginnings. No the Board and I do not have any plans to move in that direction, but I do want the members to give a long hard think of what they expect from RA-Aus and what are the threats to our survival into the future.

 

Have FUN flying and accept the co-commitment responsibilities that go with it.

 

John Gardon

 

 

[Captain]

I don't know what are the rights and wrongs of John's position, but I am concerned that the Board (or some members of it) feels that it needs to impose, force and intimidate the secrecy provision, to an extent that crucial data is compulsorily kept from the membership.

 

And I pose the basic hypothetical question ..... If a very critical issue (say a major problem with the accounts) arises and there is absolute Board secrecy, how will the members know quickly and what will the members be able to do about it (other than perhaps have a separate audit of the annual report).

 

Election to the Board does not make Board Members omnipotent.

 

If the members are only told what the Board thinks they should know, what the Board condescends to tell them, or what the Board considers should be fed or spun to them, is that in the best interests of the membership?

 

Everything I have observed over the last year or two indicates to me that the organisation is going over the top of it's crest, with a Board that, as a whole thinks that their's don't stink, and as a result problems are most likely on the way.

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

I have the impression that there is just a little too much secrecy from the Board, and that this could be what turns people off putting their hands up for election - it seems too stifling.

 

I'm guessing that Board members get information from members for consideration at meetings, but there is not the flow of information back to the members.

 

The lack of two-way communication does nothing to inspire ordinary members to volunteer - maybe the Board doesn't want volunteers anymore, preferring to make their Board members do all the hack work. I remember they advertised for volunteers in the magazine a couple of years ago (I put my hand up as a volunteer and ended up editing the web tutorials) but have heard nothing from them since then.

 

To my knowledge, there are subcommittees of the Board, but no specialist working groups where ordinary members could be co-opted. Is there such a business model for similar aviation organisations overseas? (e.g. EAA chapters) Does it work? Certainly worth looking at, otherwise the Board will complain that they are overworked.

 

Finally, members jump up and down about there being too much secrecy, but what justification do these members have for greater disclosure of information? The demand for less secrecy must be justified for a reason - it could be due to the slowness of RA-Aus to work on a particular issue, in which case those affected members have a right to be kept informed of progress. I've outlined my reasoning for less secrecy - to get more members volunteering their services.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Is there anything to stop an ordinary member going to the meeting, making notes, and publishing same on the forum?

 

What we got out of the meeting through RAA channels seems rather thin pickings. If we could put out more then perhaps we could engage the members better.

 

WE got our mag on Friday and I found the CEO's column a bit hard to understand in places. I understand there are some issues that all they can say is that it is progressing, but I would like to hear more of what the Board actually decided.

 

Sue

 

 

[facthunter]

Comment.

 

Agree with Burbles .You don't feel part of it. There is a lot of untapped knowledge out there that doesn't appear to be used or welcomed. Groups could be formed to research matters and provide a report back to HO. Survey your MEMBERS then you can represent them better. I think we have tried to get BIG regardless.

 

ALL like organisatons should be under one umbrella and ensure that we are not working against each other. The maximum amount of autonomy should be available so the essential operational differences are preserved. Simple planes stay that way and the complex ones are given more oversight. User pays so you don't pay for somebody's extra work.

 

The management of most organisations would have something to fear by getting together, because their little kingdoms might be threatened. TOO bad...

 

ALL that matters is that the PILOTS get a good deal. That is what it is about. Get OFF the back of people who want to fly for fun. By the same token don't allow a FEW cowboys to jeopardise our future, (as they have).

 

Re Tizzard his style is a bit cryptic, but we are all different. His background is very adequate for the job he is in. Nev.

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

Groups could be formed to research matters and provide a report back to HO.

Yes, yes! That's what I've said in other threads. But it would only happen when a Board member takes this idea to the next meeting and gets the Board to ratify it.

And I am not under any confidentiality agreement, so I can say that at the AGM there was quite a lot of discussion (dissention?) from the floor about the amount of detail presented in the financial report - the items in the report were very broad and that there should be a more detailed breakdown under "Miscellaneous expenditure" for example. They even had their auditor explaining why items in this year's report differed from last year's, and justifying the amount of disclosure in the report.

 

There was a lack of a cohesive response from the Board - the Treasurer saying that if you want that detail in a report, anyone can ask for it, and another Board member opposing this - that the Board should provide that information as a matter of course anyway (regardless of who may want it) because "RA-Aus is YOUR organisation". There was also some lack of preparation - some Board members were unprepared for some questions from the floor. Perhaps the lack of a united voice from the Board (and that the members don't seem to present a consistent message) is why there is secrecy.

 

 

[Guest rocketdriver]

FWIW, I once had the misfortune to stand for and be elected to a city council in country Victoria. Interesting.

 

Meetings were ALWAYS open unless the matter under discussion was a commercial or “in confidence” matter (sensitive info re tenders for example). This was always about the details of something, (not the decision, which was always made public)

 

However, the decisions arrived at in open session were ALWAYS discussed beforehand amongst the councillors and (except for rare occasions), we all knew which way it would go before the council meeting.

 

Based upon this past experience in the oversight of a public body, I believe that the board meetings should be open to observers (not interjectors!), EXCEPT when commercially or personally sensitive issues require closed discussion. And all board decisions should be arrived at in OPEN session.

 

If this was to happen, it would be my guess that the real discussions and decisions would all happen by way of informal conversations between board members, (as probably happens now anyway) but the actual decision and the positions of the various board members would be open to member scrutiny.

 

I also think that almost no one would bother to attend the board meetings (other than the board members and senior staff that is!)

 

Question.

 

Is this such a big change from the current situation?

 

 

[turboplanner]

You make some very good points John, this will explode, it's just a question of which issue will be the one to ignite it. Then there will be a clean out.