DWF

An amendment to the Constitution of an Association does not become effective until the amendment has been passed by the AGM (or GM) AND it has been lodged with (and accepted by) the Registrar-general, so would not affect the election at the AGM where it was passed. See Section 33 of the Act: "33. Alteration of rules .... (5) A resolution to alter the rules of an incorporated association is of no effect until a notice has been lodged by the association under subsection (2)." Actually the new Board members have been elected before the AGM and the successful candidates are already the new Board at the AGM. See page 12 of the Constitution: "13. Election of Board Members. (i) .... (ii) ..... The names of the Members elected shall be forwarded to the Executive Director prior to the annual general meeting of that year and the results of the elections shall be announced at the beginning of that annual general meeting. The Members so elected shall hold office from the beginning of the annual general meeting at which their election was announced, until the beginning of the annual general meeting of the Association following the group elections ....." DWF

The proxy form is available on the RAAus web site on the 'About' page - it is an appendix to the Constitution. A .pdf copy of the form is also shown below. The proposed Special Resolutions are also on the RAAus web site in the Members section under "Latest Notices" then "Motions for Special Resolutions". DWF RAA Proxy Form.pdf RAA Proxy Form.pdf RAA Proxy Form.pdf

If the proposed Special Resolution, including the argument(s) for and against, is presented to members early enough to provide an opportunity for debate and refinement then Postal voting is definitely the way to go. I think this format should be encouraged (required?). The only time a proxy could be useful is where there is a motion from the floor. In this case the proxy giver would have to be very confident that the proxy holder held very much the same views as they did. DWF

I do support this motion. I have seen too many cases where the incumbent President and/or committee member(s) are well past their "Use By" date. Egos, cronyism and voter apathy keep them in their positions to the determent of the association. Even the President of the United States only gets 2 terms! There should be enough talent amongst our 10,000 (or so) members to share the job(s) around, give others a go, allow new ideas to be tried, develop new talent and provide some succession planning. I agree that the down side is that a hard working, effective Board member may be side lined for a while but there is an opportunity form them to return to the Board after 2 years if they and the membership so wish. If the person is so useful there are other ways they can continue to be involved in the affairs of the association. DWF

I have not received my August Sport Aviation yet - maybe it will be in the PO Box this morning. Independent of any conflict of interest with RAAus business. May include non-RAAus members. Skills based. There should be a Job Description and Selection Criteria just like any other job. Nomination. Directors would be selected and nominated by a committee of the Board and proposed to the AGM for approval. (This is normal practice for company Boards.) The transition from the current Board structure to the new system may require a bit of working out. DWF

I have had some more thoughts on my post #64 above regarding the RAAus restructure and have moved to the more appropriate 'RAAus organisational restructure' thread .... I think Alpha's post above has some valid points. To misquote an old saying "The price of Good Governance is constant vigilance". DWF

Some more thoughts on the structure of RAAus... continued from my post #64 on the "The divide between north and south Queensland" thread. In that post I propose the following structure: An independent, skills based Board of 5 or 7 Directors. A General Manager/CEO who operates under the direction, guidance and supervision of the Board to provide all the technical, operational, financial and other business functions of the association. An advisory committee of elected (or nominated) members that set the mission and objective of the association and who provide recommendations and advice to the Board on appropriate matters and who, through the President, promote and advocate on behalf of the association. Members of this committee would be selected on skills, interests and ability rather than geographical location. The advisory committee can/should be supported by sub-committees dealing with particular functions or areas of expertise and made up of interested and appropriately qualified members and possibly outside advisers. Under this structure I do not see the need for an elected Secretary or Treasurer. These functions being provided by a 'secretariat' which would be part of the paid staff under the GM. It does not require and should not fall upon a volunteer to undertake these tasks - all the duties of these positions required under the Constitution and the Act can and should be undertaken by the secretariat - the Board should only have to scrutinise and approve their output. I do not see the need for a gang of 3 executive. The day to day operation of the association should be carried out by the paid staff under the GM. Policy and high level decisions should be made by the whole Board. An alternative structure to that above might be for RAAus to operate as an 'association of members' similar to the way it does now, with an elected committee (not necessarily geographically based) and then to set up a company or wholly owned subsidiary of some sort, called say "Recreational Aviation Services" to undertake the first two items listed above. That way the members who wish to can be involved with the operation of the association without becoming bogged down by (or failing to satisfy) the operational, technical, financial and other obligations of the association under the Deed of Agreement and the various Acts and Regulations. I feel the way RAAus is structured needs to change to make it more effective, efficient and compliant. Change necessarily puts people out of their comfort zone and so is often resisted. We need members and a Board willing to 'bite the bullet' and start the change happening. Unfortunately the only way members have of directly influencing this change is by lobbying, proposing amendments and changing the constitution to enable a restructure to take place. There does not seem to have been much action recently from the 'Restructure Committee' or the Constitution Review Committee. This is where the the proposed changes should come from but we have not heard anything so far. Voting for the member(s) who you feel will be effective and take up the challenge is important. To effect change it is even more important to propose well thought out and prepared motions at the AGM and other General Meetings and voting on these. DWF

......mod

I suspect (and I don't think I am the only one who does so) that the only reason the majority of RAAus members are in fact members of RAAus is because to is the only acceptable (legal) alternative to GA if you want to build and/or fly ultralight aircraft. Give this 'fact (assertion?)' it is hardly surprising that this majority have little interest in how the organisation is run or who runs it, as long as everything is going along smoothly. Very few of the decisions to be made by the Board or functions of RAAus are geographically based (i.e. they do not affect only one particular area/location but apply to all members). It therefore seems to me that there is very little rational for the selection of Board members to be geographically based - apart from the parochial concern that members in one area feel that members in another area have too much influence on the Board. I feel that the Board should be skill based with its members elected/selected on their qualifications to run an organisation such as ours. I also think that at least some Board members should be completely independent so their decisions are made in the best interests of the objectives of RAAus. I am not saying that current or past Board members put their own interests ahead of those of the association but transparency and good governance suggest that at least some independent Directors on Board is desirable. I don't think the Aero Club management committee model works any more for RAAus! RAAus is now a two headed beast. One part provides services to and regulates (in part) the operations of ultralight aircraft pilots and builders and (should) operate on business lines. The other part is still the association which sets the objectives of the organisation, advocates for members, promotes recreational aviation and provides member services such as the magazine and fly-ins. The difference between these two functions needs to be recognised and the organisation (re)structured to meet the needs of both functions. To my mind the structure of RAAus should be something like this: An independent, skills based Board of 5 or 7 Directors. A General Manager/CEO who operates under the direction, guidance and supervision of the Board to provide all the technical, operational, financial and other business functions of the association. An advisory committee of elected (or nominated) members that set the mission and objective of the association and who provide recommendations and advice to the Board on appropriate matters and who, through the President, promote and advocate on behalf of the association. Members of this committee would be selected on skills, interests and ability rather than geographical location. The advisory committee can/should be supported by sub-committees dealing with particular functions or areas of expertise and made up of interested and appropriately qualified members and possibly outside advisers. One thing that disappoints me with RAAus is that, despite there being regional Board members and apart from helping to run 3 fly-ins, it provides very little, if anything, in the way of regional or local social or educational events, almost no communication about what is happening at HQ and what the burning issues are, etc. Some of these should probably be driven by local members but I think the organisation could do a lot more to encourage and facilitate such events. DWF

Have you sent in the required photos and W&B?

Do you realise that most of the posts on this thread currently form a significant part of the RAAus Safety Management System by undertaking part of the "Safety Promotion Function"? Keep up the good work! DWF

I have just had another look at the 2012-13 Deed of Agreement with CASA. It was signed on 25th Sept 2012, so, if the Deed runs for 12 months, then it is still the current Deed. 13.1 of the Deed says "The Organisation" [RAAus] "will ensure that the Specified Personnel will conduct the Schedule B Functions in a diligent and competent manner and will comply with this Deed." 'Schedule B - General tasks and functions' lists the Compliance Functions, Standards Functions and Safety Promotion Functions that RAAus has agreed to and CASA has paid for. 1.1, the Definitions section of the Deed, says "Specified Personnel for the Schedule Functions means those persons named in Item 3 of Schedule A. The Deed is a 24 page document but only 23 pages are shown on the RAAus web site. Page 17 is missing. Page 17 contains (part of ) Schedule A. So, Item 3 of Schedule A lists the Specified Personnel who are to carry out the Functions specified in Schedule B. But page 17 is missing. Is this by chance or can we read something else into it? As far as I can ascertain, none of the Milestones (regarding an SMS) on Schedule D have been achieved. DWF

I have just checked the RAAus web site. There is an Executive update and an SMS update! The sky has not fallen in. The Board has had a meeting with CASA and it seems a new plan to implement an SMS has been agreed. This is getting better than Blue Hills (remember that?). I await the next exciting episode. DWF

If you don't understand the principles of navigation and rely solely on your GPS, once you are out of the circuit you are just a passenger, the back box is the PIC. If it goes on the blink, you are LOST! DWF

Children! Children! Take a deep breath. I think that the way the STCC appointment was handled was clumsy, at best, and not in accordance with the principles of good governance. However that is all water under the bridge now. What is important is that there is someone now in that role and that there is a PLAN! TP I beg to differ! CASA, at least, do not necessarily require a "full time SMS Manager". The CASA document "SMS for Aviation – A Practical Guide 2 - Safety policy and objectives" states that: "Safety manager Appointing the right safety manager is critical. This role can make or break an SMS. A large organisation might have a dedicated safety department, led by a head of safety management. A medium-sized organisation might have a separate safety manager, possibly with a small number of staff, whereas a small organisation might just appoint a part-time safety manager, or add these duties to an existing role." While RAAus has a large number of members it only has a small number of staff and so could be considered a small organisation for the purpose of this debate (?). That said, I do feel, however, that RAAus should have a full time Safety Manager - at least until the SMS is sorted out. So, the question in my previous post has not been answered (although Andy seems to infer that there is one - or at least one is planned) - Does RAAus have a Safety Manager? If so, who is he/she? They are certainly not listed in the RAAus web site contact details - as they should be, IMHO! DWF PS: Sorry about the different font sizes. I still haven't got this editor fully figured out.

I was going to ask - "What has happened to Mr Breitkreutz?" "Did he ever take up the job of STCC?" If so (or not), there have been roars of silence regarding the SMS and other STCC responsibilities. Is anyone doing the job? DWF

Russ It depends on the type of GPS you have. Most non-TSOed GPSs have a method of connecting to a computer to upload waypoints and routes. Read the manual to determine the required format and procedure. Usually, if you load/enter your waypoints into a spreadsheet the data can be saved in a file format suitable for transfer to the GPS. DWF

So have you obtained any useful information or just passed the time of day? Why not? Too busy to recruit one? Not considered necessary by the board? Surely a Board member could spare some time to post some plans and information on the web site. Most people could be trained to do it in an hour or so and it could be done from the comfort of their own home if necessary. I am confident that the GM and his staff are doing their best to extricate the Association from the mess we have been landed in, however there is very little information available to support this confidence. Maybe it is more hope than confidence. In WA we do not currently have a Board member! We are currently receiving the same amount of information from our Board member as we have had for the last 2 years. If members were kept informed of plans and progress via the web site, magazine and possibly emails the Board and staff would not have their time taken up by being pestered with queries from concerned members (as would be the case if we all followed your advice and made the call) and they would be able to get on with the important tasks they have been paid/elected to do. A few minutes a week devoted to keeping members informed would save everyone a lot of time and angst. (And possibly considerably reduce the posts on this site. ) DWF

All deadlines passed without delivery. No milestones met. SMS education/assisted introduction - zero. The report card is not good! It will be interesting to see what milestones and deadlines will be set in the next Deed. RAAus is not in a good negotiating position. At least we (the members) will now be aware of what RAAus is expected to achieve - and when. DWF

" the AIDC acronym standing for Australian Institute of Company Directors" ???? ? DNA strikes again?

The RA-Aus constitution says: "12. Constitution and membership of the Board. (iii) The Members of the Board, will elect, at the beginning of the Annual Board meeting, presided over by the Public Officer, the Members of the Executive, from within the Board." Unfortunately it (the constitution) does not specifically cover the situation where a member of the Executive resigns his/her office but remains on the Board. However, precedent and common sense (a somewhat rare commodity) would indicate that the same process would be followed to elect a replacement member(s) of the Executive from within the remaining Board members. The problem may be getting someone else to nominate. The Model Rules in the Act are silent on this issue. So, if one (or more) members of the Executive resigns the office but remains on the Board the vacancy should be resolved at the next Board meeting (which should be held asap and may be held electronically) where an election for the office would be presided over by the Public Officer. Where there is a will there is a way. I don't think the sky is falling in just yet. DWF

Denny. I owned and flew a Skyfox tail-dragger for a number of years and have about 300 hours on type. I have also flown a number of Gazelles. The two are completely different animals near and on the ground. If you can't fly a Gazelle you can't fly anything (IMHO). On the other hand the Skyfox tail-dragger (I think they were called an Impala) is very directionally unstable on the ground - you have to anticipate and correct any deviation almost before it starts - wait a second or two too long and you will be describing circles on the runway. That said, I enjoyed the challenges it presented and it gave a great sense of accomplishment to complete a flight (and more particularly a take-off and landing) without incident. And don't relax while taxiing - you haven't completed the flight until the aircraft is tied down. So yes, the CA25 is challenging enough - if you can handle one safely you will be a real tail-dragger pilot! A good tailwheel endorsement aircraft is a Cessna 170. Unfortunately there are not too many available for that purpose now. The C170 is easy to control if handled properly but will still bite if you do the wrong thing. Good Luck. Don't let me put you off. The CA25 is a fun aircraft to fly once you master it. My old CA25 aircraft is now RA-Aus registered and flying at Bindoon. DWF

For a start the Ops Manual makes no mention of a SMS or how one should operate or who should do it. It is a document in drastic need of revision! DWF

There is an old adage that says: "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." DWF

I have asked RA-Aus Ops for a copy of the RA-Aus Risk Management Manual referred to in the SMS template sent to FTFs. Thought it might give some clues on how to develop a SMS for my (very small) FTF. No response so far, but it has only been a couple of days yet. DWF