President Resigns ** Then Thinks about it **

[Methusala]

I feel that,no matter the terms in which it is couched, a resignation must be seen to be an offer and it has to be accepted by the official to whom it is offered. Don. (By which post I mean that the official, in the end has to decide whether or not he will accept it.)

 

 

[Captain]

I feel that,no matter the terms in which it is couched, a resignation must be seen to be an offer and it has to be accepted by the official to whom it is offered. Don. (By which post I mean that the official, in the end has to decide whether or not he will accept it.)

Don,

 

It isn't his resignation as President that is the point.

 

He specifically resigned as Nth Qld Rep as well, and I don't see how the Secretary has any right not to accept that, without sending the matter back to the Nth Qld members as prescribed in the Constitution.

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[Yenn]

Will the meeting clarify what is going on?

 

I think the board should be given the questions they are required to answer, before the meeting. in that way they can not claim, that they don't have the answers at their finger tips.

 

I would also like to have the questions spelled out here so we all know exactly what the vocal few are getting at. It is nearly impossible to make head or tail of all the allegations that have appeared on this site. Spell it all out for all of us so that we are all on the same page.

 

 

[coljones]

Methusala, when a member of parliament resigns that's it - finished - finito! The only job left for the person whose job it is to arrange replacements is to arrange a replacement. Neither that person nor the house of parliament involved or even the queen can interfere in the handling of that resignation to set aside that resignation. All they can do is to arrange the timing of the election/appointment of the replacement.

 

In the case of party politics one would expect that the person resigning would have discussed the issues with the whip prior to the resignation so that the party is not disadvantaged.

 

RA Aus isn't a political party and SR made no offer - He resigned.

 

Col

 

 

[Admin]

For those that are interested, this site has received Legal Opinion on the matter and that Opinion is "he has resigned from Nth Qld and thus no longer a member of the Committee and under the constitution, the Committee can not reappoint him to the Committee, only the membership for that region can appoint him through the electoral process"

 

The Committee can appoint him as an Adviser however he can NOT use the title of a Committee Member, he can not represent any select group of members on wide issues, he does not have any voting rights nor can he be involved in any in-camera discussions not pertaining to any item that he is not an advisory of.

 

As to the ramifications of him still participating as a Committee Member, it would then come down to legal proceedings being taken against him individually. Also, the legal validity of any decisions made by the Committee, with his input outside of being appointed an Adviser to the Committee, would come down to proving in a court that his participation in the decision making process altered its "likely" outcome.

 

(My opinion now is...) that if the Committee appoints him as an Adviser they must still hold an election for Nth Qld, appoint a President and appointing Runciman as an Adviser would most likely be against the membership's wishes thus requiring some extensive explaining to be done by the Committee to the Membership

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Methusala,

 

Tendering a resignation could be seen as an offer to resign. Such an offer could be accepted or declined. But, when the email is specifically stated to be taken as official notification that a resignation has happened then there is nothing that can be accepted or declined as it has happened. It is absolute and unconditional. From that point on, only an election can reinstate a person to the Board.

 

In my view, this Board, by illegitimately giving a Board position to Steve Runciman is compromising every decision they now take. If SR had the best interests of RA at heart, he would step aside and end this bad situation.

 

That they tried to hide the fact that SR resigned and the Board's decision to attempt to reinstate him should make anyone wonder.

 

Having now staked their reputations that they were right they have painted themselves into a corner and can't back away from what to me is a looney decision. And RA will be left to clean up the mess so created.

 

 

[nomadpete]

OK, here goes.........

 

Question No:1 to the board:

 

Bearing in mind that SR's resignation apparrently rendered him no longer a member of the Committee under the constitution,will the board please remove him (in accordance with the constitution) from the board, and from his present position of acting President of RAAus, until such time as the conditions stated in our consititution have been fulfilled in regard to his appointments?

 

Please feel free to add all and any tuppence worth's to that starting point (time for me to get kevlar suit!).

 

Peter T

 

 

[Gentreau]

Pete, would it not be prudent to first ask the board to confirm or deny the sequence of events which led to the situation ?

 

1. Did SR send an email resigning as President ?

 

2. Did SR send an emal resigning as Nth QLD representative. ?

 

3. If 2 is correct, then why did (certain members of?) the board feel they had the authority to reinstate a regional representative who had resigned, without reference to the electors of Nth QLD ?

 

If it is clear to the board members that they risk a vote of no confidence by sticking to the story without accepting that they may have breached the constitution and/or overstepped their authority, they may break ranks and leave certain members to sink or swim on their own......

 

The other question which occurs to me is what efforts have been made to communicate the situation to the RAA members of Nth QLD who may not be aware that they no longer have an elected representative omn the board ? Maybe if more of them were aware they might get the pitchforks and torches out themselves.

 

P.S. If one of those who recieved the original email was courageous enough to print it out and go swear on oath that it is a true and unedited copy of the original, they could do the members a great service and also effectively nullify the first two questions above.

 

 

[nomadpete]

Sure, the lead up questions are required first. I hadn't thought of that.

 

1. Did SR send an email resigning as President ?

 

2. Did SR send an email resigning as Nth QLD representative. ?

 

3. If 2 is correct, then why did (a majority of) the board feel they had the authority to reinstate a regional representative who had resigned, without reference to the electors of Nth QLD ?

 

4. Bearing in mind that SR's resignation apparently rendered him no longer a member of the Committee under the constitution,will the board please remove him (in accordance with the constitution) from the board, and from his present position of acting as President of RAAus, until such time as the conditions stated in our consititution have been fulfilled in regard to his appointments?

 

5. Has the Board informed the RAAus members that the Elected Committee member for Nth Qld has resigned, and that the constitution requires a by-election to select a replacement? If not, will they please do so? When is this planned to occur?

 

Now that I look at it, the process does seem to demand a lot of separate questions, and maybe a flow chart.

 

Peter T

 

 

[drifterdriver]

After searching through my emails I found the following

 

On 03/05/2012, at 3:17 PM, Nick Sigley <email address removed - admin> wrote:

 

Gentlemen

 

I am tendering my resignation from the board of Recreational Aviation Australia from this moment 316pm 3rd May 2012.

 

Nicholas Sigley”

 

 

[kaz3g]

RAAus Constitution Cl 17:

 

"The association in general meeting may by resolution, subject to section 50 of the Act, remove anyMember of the Board from office before the expiration of the Member's term of office."

 

Section 50 of the Act imposes a requirement that the rules of natural justice be followed. A statement would need to be made as to why a Board Member was being made the subject of such a resolution (the charges), and the Member would then need to be given the opportunity to respond (a statement in defence). The decision taken by the association would need to be reasonable in the circumstances having taken into account all the evidence.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Gentreau]

It seems to me that the answers given to the first few questions may help those members present to decide on resolutions they may wish to propose later in the meeting

 

 

[Admin]

I removed my post here as it didn't really make sense because I answered my own question...sorry

 

 

[cherk]

I removed my post here as it didn't really make sense because I answered my own question...sorry

.. the answer was.........

 

wishing all here a very safe new year\!

 

 

[Captain]

Pete, would it not be prudent to first ask the board to confirm or deny the sequence of events which led to the situation ?1. Did SR send an email resigning as President ?

 

2. Did SR send an emal resigning as Nth QLD representative. ?

 

3. If 2 is correct, then why did (certain members of?) the board feel they had the authority to reinstate a regional representative who had resigned, without reference to the electors of Nth QLD ?

 

If it is clear to the board members that they risk a vote of no confidence by sticking to the story without accepting that they may have breached the constitution and/or overstepped their authority, they may break ranks and leave certain members to sink or swim on their own......

 

The other question which occurs to me is what efforts have been made to communicate the situation to the RAA members of Nth QLD who may not be aware that they no longer have an elected representative omn the board ? Maybe if more of them were aware they might get the pitchforks and torches out themselves.

 

P.S. If one of those who recieved the original email was courageous enough to print it out and go swear on oath that it is a true and unedited copy of the original, they could do the members a great service and also effectively nullify the first two questions above.

Gentreau,

 

I have been involved in exchanges of emails with the Board over recent weeks.

 

FYI, SR has confirmed to me that he did, in fact, resign.

 

Further I have no reason to believe that the email is inaccurate that I posted here as a copy of his resignation email, where he explicitly resigned both as President and as Nth Qld Rep.

 

The Secretary has been the one who has advised that he is satisfied that SR can be reinstated.

 

I have therefore asked the Secretary for a copy of his briefing note to RAA's Legal Advisors and for a copy of their advice. I have also approached that legal firm directly. To date I have not had a reply from the Secretary. The legal firm have advised client privilage, as expected.

 

But I did receive a note from one Board Members asking that I stop asking questions &, to paraphrase, basically for members to go away and stop seeking information. I have also seen another email which confirms that a number of Board Members have also asked for copies of what I requested above, and they (the Board) have not been given that information.

 

I suspect that therein lies the crux of the RAA's problems (in addition to a dysfuntional CEO/Management Sturcture as described by SR in the latest magazine) where the Executive somehow have the power to ignore requests from the Board.

 

While the Executive have the responsibility to handle the mundane day-to-day issues associated with the running of the RAA, the President, Secretary and Treasurer are actually servants of the Board as a whole, whereas this and recent past Executives think that they are above the Board on ticklish issues. An example is that I am advised that some Board Members asked for details of the CASA Audit failures and still don't have that data.

 

If a Board Member's requests for information are ignored by the Executive, the entire structure of the organisation is corrupted.

 

So in my opinion, if the Executive wish to operate that way, then they also need to accept 100% responsibility for the litany of errors, mistakes and c*ckups that RAA has experienced over recent and not-so-recent times, resulting in some members still being grounded through no fault of their own during the Xmas/New Year period.

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[turboplanner]

And they have to wear the financial outcomes of that.

 

 

[ave8rr]

But I did receive a note from one Board Member asking that I stop asking questions &, to paraphrase, basically for members to go away and stop seeking information. I have also seen another email which confirms that a number of Board Members have also asked for copies of what I requested above, and they (the Board) have not been given that information.

Regards Geoff

I bet that board member was looking to have as many members as he/she could round up to vote for the board position!

 

 

[Sloper]

l maybe seeing this as simplistic here's why.

 

l would submit questions to the board on why they ignored the constitution, qoute the area's and ask for specific answer.

 

You would find that they are compelled to answer/respond.

 

Now l bet if legal action was taken agaisnt a board/member and it was shown that they had not acted within the constition the insurence company would not cover legal liability and the board/member would personely become liable not the insurer or RAA

 

regards Bruce

 

 

[Captain]

l maybe seeing this as simplistic here's why.l would submit questions to the board on why they ignored the constitution, qoute the area's and ask for specific answer.

 

You would find that they are compelled to answer/respond.

 

Now l bet if legal action was taken agaisnt a board/member and it was shown that they had not acted within the constition the insurence company would not cover legal liability and the board/member would personely become liable not the insurer or RAA

 

regards Bruce

Nothing simplistic about that Bruce, but as I said above, it appears that even some diligent Board Members can't get the info that they need to do their jobs effectively.

 

Further, it appears that the majority may have voted for SR's reinstatement without examining the flow of correspondance to/from Porters Lawyers. Either that or the to/from written advice has been withheld from those Board Members who are still requesting it.

 

If so, they accepted the Secretary's verbal advice.

 

If that proves correct, RAA has crash-hot governance, eh?

 

So get prepared to add this to the litany of other "mistakes" as SR likes to call them.

 

And further, if it should prove to be the case that the majority voted based on inappropriate advice, then I will be crying from the rooftops that RAA has been officially out of control and in a flat spin at 400 ft while flown by a majority of amateurs. (How'd you like to be the provider of the Director's and Officer's Insurance?)

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[dazza 38]

Gentreau,I have been involved in exchanges of emails with the Board over recent weeks.

 

FYI, SR has confirmed to me that he did, in fact, resign.

 

Further I have no reason to believe that the email is inaccurate that I posted here as a copy of his resignation email, where he explicitly resigned both as President and as Nth Qld Rep.

 

The Secretary has been the one who has advised that he is satisfied that SR can be reinstated.

 

I have therefore asked the Secretary for a copy of his briefing note to RAA's Legal Advisors and for a copy of their advice. I have also approached that legal firm directly. To date I have not had a reply from the Secretary. The legal firm have advised client privilage, as expected.

 

But I did receive a note from one Board Members asking that I stop asking questions &, to paraphrase, basically for members to go away and stop seeking information. I have also seen another email which confirms that a number of Board Members have also asked for copies of what I requested above, and they (the Board) have not been given that information.

 

I suspect that therein lies the crux of the RAA's problems (in addition to a dysfuntional CEO/Management Sturcture as described by SR in the latest magazine) where the Executive somehow have the power to ignore requests from the Board.

 

While the Executive have the responsibility to handle the mundane day-to-day issues associated with the running of the RAA, the President, Secretary and Treasurer are actually servants of the Board as a whole, whereas this and recent past Executives think that they are above the Board on ticklish issues. An example is that I am advised that some Board Members asked for details of the CASA Audit failures and still don't have that data.

 

If a Board Member's requests for information are ignored by the Executive, the entire structure of the organisation is corrupted.

 

So in my opinion, if the Executive wish to operate that way, then they also need to accept 100% responsibility for the litany of errors, mistakes and c*ckups that RAA has experienced over recent and not-so-recent times, resulting in some members still being grounded through no fault of their own during the Xmas/New Year period.

 

Regards Geoff

I would not like to be in the secretaries shoes, if he gave the nod that it was OK for SR to continue after resigning.

 

 

[Captain]

I bet that board member was looking to have as many members as he/she could round up to vote for the board position!

Furthermore in his email he described those who are presently criticising or asking questions as Quote ...... from an unthinking, unenlightened and uninformed minority with personal issues to pursue. Unquote

 

 

[jakej]

from an unthinking, unenlightened and uninformed minority with personal issues to pursue. Unquote

 

Begs the question - will he enlighten & inform us so that we can think about it ??

 

Jake J

 

 

[Captain]

from an unthinking, unenlightened and uninformed minority with personal issues to pursue. UnquoteBegs the question - will he enlighten & inform us so that we can think about it ??

 

Jake J

That's the irony of it all Jake, which I pointed out in my response today to that Board Member.

 

My original email asked 3 questions, the response to which was to tell me to go away and stop bothering the Secretary when he is so busy, and then calling me one of the "uninformed" ..... for seeking information.

 

Worry not all RAA members who are grounded. You are in good hands.

 

 

[Gentreau]

Gentreau,I have been involved in exchanges of emails with the Board over recent weeks.

 

FYI, SR has confirmed to me that he did, in fact, resign.

 

Further I have no reason to believe that the email is inaccurate that I posted here as a copy of his resignation email, where he explicitly resigned both as President and as Nth Qld Rep.

 

..............

My suggestion to get a notarised copy sworn on oath is to avoid the basic defense that a print-out of an email could have been altered.

 

That removes one possible hurdle.

 

 

[Guest GraemeM]

That's the irony of it all Jake, which I pointed out in my response today to that Board Member.My original email asked 3 questions, the response to which was to tell me to go away and stop bothering the Secretary when he is so busy, and then calling me one of the "uninformed" ..... for seeking information.

 

Worry not all RAA members who are grounded. You are in good hands.

Captain, are you at liberty to tell me who this board member is so that I can be sure I never vote for him in the future?

Graeme.