An idea

[Admin]

There is so much going on with RAAus behind the scenes including improprieties by management which can only serve to make the board ineffective and impartial which is not what any member would want from the body that is suppose to do what they can to ensure the safety of 10,000 - 11,000 people.

 

So, I have come up with an idea that I wonder whether it has merit or not with you people. I hope that it would go a long way to helping RAAus to become a respected and professional institution within the aviation industry.

 

As there is so much of this going on, so many things being said, accusations being made etc etc etc. I know 75% of what I have heard is true due to having the proof in my possession but what about the rest...is it true because if it is then there is major problems, severe improprieties being undertaken by senior management. So how does a member ascertain fact from fiction, how do they get to hear accurate information and incorrect accusations are debunked?

 

My idea is to have an independent person, a type of ombudsman, who can independently investigate, with full permissions and without board influence, any accusations, hearsay, improprieties etc that members may have or claim?

 

The RAAus Ombudsman could NOT be an RAAus member, would come from an investigative background, be not in the Industry in any way nor be known to any board member or CASA representative. They would have the powers to hear any member's accusations of improprieties, investigate without any hindrance by anyone associated with RAAus and publicly report back to the members of their findings on any application made to them. If the accusation was unfounded then the accusation is listed and stated that it was unfounded, if the accusation was substantiated, the Board must act by implementing the Ombudsman's recommendations.

 

For example if the Ombudsman found that an accusation of impropriety by the CEO was found to be true, the Ombudsman recommends the CEO be removed from the Association, the Board must immediately remove the CEO from the RAAus and a new CEO be acquired...THAT is in the case that the improprieties by the CEO were proven to be true.

 

The RAAus, in this way could only be considered by the Industry and the Association's members as being an entity that can be respected, acts professionally and is completely accountable.

 

The only way this could be done is by a member submitting to the Secretary a request that a member vote be held to change the constitution to incorporate this...and this needs to be done within the next month or so.

 

The Constitutional change would also require reference to how the Ombudsman is appointed and in a way that would safeguard the integrity of the position free from any influences.

 

So, what do you think? Is it a good idea? Could it put a stop to hearsay and bring accurate information out? Would it bring more integrity to the Association and trust in the Board Members and Staff and would it assist in ridding the Association of undesirables in management?

 

 

[Teckair]

In theory that would be a good idea problems could include

 

The selection process, how can it be determined that no RAA personnel know the applicant?

 

Who would the RAAus Ombudsman be accountable to?

 

Who decides if the job is being done as it should?

 

Would someone with no knowledge of aircraft and all that is associated with the same be able to make good decisions without having to seek advise from aviation involved parties who may have their own interest in mind?

 

Richard.

 

 

[Yenn]

What would it cost? The way accusations have been flying around lately, we would need a team of ombudsmen, but I note that those accusations are never followed up with any evidence, only suggestions that we should phone someone for their off the record say on the accusation.

 

If the accusers can't come up with hard evidence, then in my opinion they should be disregarded.

 

 

[Admin]

That's what I thought the person would do, come up with the hard evidence and be able to do something about it instead of what you say is the problem...you have exactly highlighted the problem, the idea I had could be the fix

 

 

[turboplanner]

I take it that you haven't bothered to check on your future then.

 

 

[Admin]

? Turbo

 

 

[turboplanner]

You were a bit quick for me I was responding to Yenn

 

 

[damkia]

My reading is that RA-Aus is an "association" under the stewardship of CASA. If we have internal issues in RA-Aus requiring attention, then surely CASA are the first to be approached? Perhaps look towards their Accident Investigation team who are generally considered to be suitably detattched from the Admin side of CASA to ba an adjudicator? A true "Ombudsman" is not needed as it is the administrative personnel (clashes/power struggles, from what I can make of it) rather than the processes that appear to be at fault. Another option may be to approach the industial regulator or something along the lines of VCAT for an adjudication.

 

Ombudsmen = customer complaints about an organisation (ie Telecommunications Ombudsman for complaintas about service (process))

 

Adjudication = settling internal issues by agreed to demarcations of duties (ie Fair Work Australia and QANTAS dispute)

 

 

[Avspectator]

There is no Accident Investigation team in CASA. CASA does not investigate GA accidents or RA-Aus accidents. There is pretty good explanation on the Temora accident- Lessons thread.