DonRamsay
-
Posts
1,209 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Store
Aircraft
Resources
Tutorials
Articles
Classifieds
Movies
Books
Community Map
Quizzes
Videos Directory
Everything posted by DonRamsay
-
Like you Andy, I am not into splitting hairs, semantically speaking. Formality requires a motion to be put, discussed and debated and voted. The result of a vote by the Board is the Board Resolving to do X.
-
Ada, I understood your point precisely. As a Board Member I have a responsibility for the Good Governance of RAAus - goodness knows I've bleated on about it enough in the past. Part of that responsibility is to ensure that the Board meets its obligations under the rules (Constitution). As soon as I have had a chance to get my feet under the table, I will want to gain an understanding of the governance situation and ensure that any deficiencies are remediated. In the meantime feel free to write to the Secretary and express your concerns.
-
Not having been privy to any such meetings I would not know. Clearly, I was speaking on the principle involved and what is allowed/required under the rules. As I understand it there is clerical assistance to the Secretary to produce meeting minutes. I was not suggesting he was too busy or lax - quite the opposite. If there have been electronic meetings and they have not been minuted then that is not in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution. You are entitled to see them under the provisions of the Constitution as we've discussed. You can follow them through Minutes of Board and General Meetings that are published. The most recent Board Meeting Minutes were for the May 2015. The Minutes, some 11 pages are reasonably good. They could be better but at least not bad.
-
Possible different outcomes: Change nothing and continue to incur deficits until reserves are used up and RAAus is wound up - no magazine printed or otherwise. Put the fees up across the entire membership. This advantages those members who would prefer a paper magazine (at all members expense) against those who want a digital magazine and no fee increase.
-
18(ii) provides that "Board meetings other than those referred to in sub-section (i) above may be conducted by electronic means." It offers no dispensation for duties imposed on the Secretary by 14B The face-to-face meetings are well publicised as an adjunct to the AGM and the other compulsory General Meeting. Not sure how you could "attend" an electronic Board Meeting. Our current Secretary is both diligent and hardworking and being Secretary of RAAus is not his day job nor even his usual line of work. We have a very significant and well understood problem with the RAAus website. It is currently the subject of a major revamp and, for my money, it can't come too soon. The Board has an incentive to publish minutes and details of Board Resolutions so that they can act on the Resolutions. There is an AGM coming up at Bundaberg in 5 weeks time. By all means, drop in and meet the Board and ask the question yourself. As a part of my induction I would expect to see the current Board Resolutions Register and Minutes of recent meetings so that I can get myself up to speed.
-
Ada, Medical standards/regulations should be the result of a risk analysis not some absolute. There is ample evidence available from the USA experience of LSA medicals not causing aircraft to fall out of the sky over many thousands of hours and more than ten years experience. As a principle, we should always start from zero restriction and apply only risk justified restraints. Flying is not a privilege it is a right. That right, like for example, free speech, should be constrained only to the extent necessary to protect the public good. Your right to free speech is constrained in that you are not allowed to falsely yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre. CASA should not be allowed to restrict aviation privileges on a whim. Any restriction needs to be evidence based and properly risk justified. There is no risk justification for the RAMPC offered or shown. In my view it was just a spiteful bit of bureaucracy from people who despise recreational aviation.
-
Thanks FT. Any chance you'll make to to AUSFLY this weekend?
-
Rhys, while the Constitution appears to give a member to go to Canberra and look at any file they want, there are a few laws (e.g. Privacy) and contracts that might constrain that right. We can write what we like in the Constitution but it does not overrule any law.
-
Ada, Firstly, my statement of "holding a continuous Board Meeting" is a bit loose in terminology. In fact they are in continuous discussion on specific matters. At some point a decision of the Board is called for and all Board Members are given notice of when the vote will be taken and the matter resolved. Depending on the urgency of the matter is how much notice is given. I am not aware of any matter that would have called for a vote in less than 48 hours though the Board could agree (unanimously), in accordance with 18(iv) to a shorter period. My understanding is that the notice for a vote is usually two weeks. Observers at Board Meetings are there by the grace of the Board's By-Law 5 and not the Constitution per se. As you note, By-Law 5 allows the attendance of ordinary members but does not require ordinary members to be given notice of a Board Meeting. Not much spirit in that. FYI, 14B (ii) was an amendment to the Constitution that I proposed. As to whether it is being complied with is a matter between you and the Secretary. Impolite or just passionate - quite possibly but as for your ocular facility you might need to start with an optometrist.
-
Geoff, I can imagine that in a tender for the member insurance coverage there could be many aspects that could fairly be considered "commercial-in-confidence". Similarly for aspects related to Sport Pilot. RAAus is a not-for-profit organisation. This has implications for taxation of revenues and distribution of surpluses or even assets on wind-up. Its purpose is not to runa business for the profit of its members - financial gain. Its purpose is, broadly for the facilitation and promotion of recreational aviation. It is described in immense detail in the current constitution.
-
From what I can see, the NRMA is overseen by retired ALP politicians and ex sports stars. This is a classic example of where a "popularity contest" does not necessarily produce the best Board. You would expect people who have only known regional representation (ex-politicians) and mindless parochial support (ex-footballers) to come up with a regional representation. The NRMA has been in decline for years. As a recently departed "Gold" member they don't seem to be able to manage the bundling of road service with the purchase of new vehicles But, I digress . . .
-
Col, to "hang around" would, a few years ago, have required you to book accommodation and bring a suitcase as Board Meetings rambled on for several days. Our Constitution does permit ordinary members to attend (but not participate) in Board Meetings. While I would welcome attendance by any member willing to invest the time to observe the Board at work, I would not like to see Board Members constrain their thinking because they were being observed. Better that they feel free to contribute some "left field" thinking and have it debated than keep quiet. A well run Board Meeting where Board Members are well prepared and across the Agenda is not likely to engender a lot of discussion. It is more likely to be a decision process. In the bad old days, Board Meetings waffled on for several days with most Board Members coming to the meetings cold. From what I hear, Board Meetings now are much more to the point. I do not, as a rule, welcome "ex officio" attendance of staff at a Board Meeting. While information to the Board from non Board Members is vital and should be invited from the CEO and Managers they should be in attendance by invitation and for specific topics and time. This may have the CEO in particular coming and going more than is desirable but common sense should prevail.
-
Ada, The Board holds a continuous meeting via the Board Forum. In that case, all discussion is recorded but confidential to the Board - all Board members. All decisions of the Board to have effect must be a formal Board Resolution and assigned a Resolution Number and dated. A register of Board Resolutions is maintained. Under the Constitution, the Board can meet whenever it chooses but is bound to hold two General Meetings per annum, one of which being the AGM. "Secret Meetings" has no meaning to me. Secret from whom?
-
Thanks Maj. We do indeed share those aims. It will be great to catch up at Bundaberg and I look forward to working with you.
-
To be fair, McCormick on taking office just said stop all moves for new privileges for RAAus. No argument or reasons that I'm aware of just stop it until he had a think about it all. But it stayed stopped for the whole of his time in office. It would not be hard to believe that he really wanted to see the back of RAAus and dreamed up the RPL to achieve that and to stop GA pilots moving to RA. The experience in the USA for 10 years of LSA has given the lie to the argument that you need the fitness of an Olympic athlete to be a safe pilot. And we all know the original thinking behind setting ridiculously high medical standards in the first place was to ration the demand for flying jobs during WWII.
-
Full CTA would be doing laps at Bankstown - partial is as you've described it - supervised transit.
-
In the USA the Airline Pilots Union at the last possible minute put in an objection to the easing of medicals for non-commercial flying there. That bastard act went over like a lead balloon with lots of retired airline pilots who like to fly light stuff and not maintain a Class 1 medical. The previous DAS McCormick was the person who trod all over RAAus ambitions for safer MTOW and CTA. He was ably backed up by Farquarson (Jabiru killer) and the AvMed director. Fortunately, all three have now been consigned to the dustbin of history.
-
I look forward to being briefed on all those matters and, in due course, contributing. We will once again run into the reasonable "Board Confidentiality" thing though. The Board must be free to have wide ranging discussions on a topic and arrive (by vote if necessary) at a single Board position. So, those discussions must remain confidential but the outcome, the decisions, need to be communicated at the earliest opportunity. It will be interesting for me to see the Board culture as it has developed since the bad old days. We've had some very good people on the Board working very hard and unfortunately, that would not be obvious to those of us not at the centre.
-
Rhys, I understand the differences and was just comparing, e.g., the safety of the VFR route over the top of Williamtown compared with the Ultralight Lane. Chalk and Cheese. There is a half-way CTA that would be transit rather than full on access. Having experienced CTA for the first time a week or so back flying into Tamworth I achieved a new level of appreciation for how extra safe it is to have a professional maintaining separation rather than the very sub-standard "see & avoid". If you put it to a worksafe examiner at a factory investigating a serious injury and the safety system was "see & avoid", you'd go to gaol. How CASA thinks it is OK escapes me completely. Seeing something that looks like a mosquito with a closing speed of say 300 kph and avoiding it is highly and unreasonably optimistic. In my view, only TCAS type technology is an arguably realistic means of separation while outside controlled airspace.
-
Thanks Nev. We certainly have a very interesting and challenging time over the next 18 months. It will be good to see the Constitutional Reform process that I kicked off in 2012 take some big steps forward. Improving the two-way communication is still going to be one of the biggest challenges and close to the top of the list for me is our awful website. It makes CASA's website look exemplary! In the future, with perhaps a smaller Board of better qualified individuals, I'd still like there to be a form of Regional contact person(s). A sort of local RAAus "go to" person for members who are encountering difficulties with the Administration. Not everybody is comfortable with presenting their issues to the office and/or the CEO. A local person could assist and be known to one or more Board Members and the CEO and facilitate the two way comms that help to break down barriers. I've been doing that sort of thing for the last few years myself.
-
Or, why not offer CTA training, testing and endorsement to the few in RAAus that would find it useful. As you would know, to convert to an RPL is not a trivial or inexpensive exercise. Then, of course, there is the Clayton's Drivers Licence medical that was invented by the mostly despised AvMed nutters. A Class II would be my only option and that is also a very expensive and time consuming exercise and prove nothing other than some more bureaucrats have a steady job producing nothing of value. As the USA moves to a simpler, more realistic and balanced risk medical, CASA headed in the opposite direction. Another classic version of "more safety is better than less". Sounds right but it isn't if there isn't the logical risk management evidence to support it. Not having a CTA endorsement available, RAAus pilots are forced into unsafe corridors like the notorious Ultralight Lane west of Willy or the Tiger Country West of Coffs and Coolangatta. Or some "brave" RAAus pilots bluff their way through CTA and may do it safely enough but at great risk if anything goes wrong. Not something I would ever do or advise.
-
Easily the best answer is not dodgy Ultralight lanes but access to the currently GA only VFR Lanes. For this to work RAAus pilots need the right aircraft with the right engine and avionics and CASA to allow us to train for a Controlled Airspace access. It would be a simple and readily achievable endorsement. Its available with the RPL and it should be available with the RPC - after all they are "equivalent". That's what I'll be pushing.
-
Thanks Rhys. Thanks to all who exercised their democratic right and voted in NSW/ACT and SA. Thanks to those who voted and have put me on the Board at an absolutely pivotal time for RAAus. We have the major issue of our form of Association and Governance and a new, fully revised Tech Manual and the next update on the Ops Manual to be released. This is going to be a very interesting but demanding period for all Board Members. Feel free to review my pre-election statement and hold me to it. As I have long argued, I do not see the benefit of "Regions" and will be happy to talk to any member from any part of Australia, not just NSW/ACT.
-
With the unfounded attack on Jabiru CASA have shown their contempt for the success of an Australian icon aviation business. I wonder if Jabiru will ever recover from this assault? Unfounded? CASA have not, to my knowledge, ever provided good reason why the actions that they precipitously took, were taken.
-
Nothing more telling than the clear evidence of a shrunken industry. Not all CASA's doing but they certainly have been, imho, a major contributor to the trend. Can't forget litigious lawyers in the USA and terrified insurers that all but killed GA off on their own.
