DonRamsay

Rob, The AUF got the 300 ft limit raised to 500 ft and, eventually to 10,000 ft. These concessions were achieved by lobbying governments and persuading the CAA/CASA that such concessions would reduce risks. As to why grassroots died to the extent that it has cannot logically be ascribed to AUF/RA-Aus. The simple fact is that pilots walked away from rag and tube to Jabirus and the like because that was the sort of flying that they wanted to do. The AUF/RA-Aus have never taken any action to make grassroots flying less accessible. Can't comment much on this other than to say that such impositions were from CASA not RA-Aus. Interesting theory. Hard to argue against the feeling that CASA would have a perfect safety record if no aircraft ever left the hangar. That sort of thing has been said of your beloved FAA as well. The recent Av Safety review has called for a dramatic change in culture for CASA and hopefully that will happen. From the little I know of it, NZ has a better aviation experience than Australia from a regulation point of view. Plenty of fabulous scenery to fly over as long a the weather doesn't get you or you have to land on any of those rocky bits. Good luck with that.

Rick, Unfortunately, I don't understand a lot of your post particularly what your suggestion might be. As for the members being in control of the Board we had a Special Resolution passed at the 2012 AGM that reduced the number of ordinary members required to requisition a General Meeting of RA-Aus from approx 500 to 100. That was a timely amendment to the Constitution and, in February 2013, the first such extraordinary General Meeting was called and the Board put firmly on notice to lift their game or they would be removed from office. Since then, most of the Board Members that had provoked concerned members to call for the General Meeting have left the Board or are retiring at the next AGM and been replaced by Board Members who are committed to proper governance and to fixing the efficiency and effectiveness problems of RA-Aus systems and to build a better working relationship with CASA. What this says to me is that members who are prepared to take an interest and, when necessary, take action, can make a real difference. Ross in my experience is a hard working Board Member who is highly motivated to see RA-Aus turn around. He has copped a bit of (in my view unwarranted) flak on here from time to time but is still prepared to come back and provide information on the Board's activities. Having spent time on the Board I can assure you that the Board Members who give it a good go are very busy. There is a constant flow of emails amongst Board Members on current issues, strategy and policy matters. The last few years have been the most challenging experienced by any Board of RA-Aus, ever. As for discussions on here being ill informed and/or months behind that can be the situation. Often when we are left in the dark we deduce what we think is going on or not going on. Natural enough. RA-Aus communications have improved but still have a long way to go and the Board is well aware of that and keen to keep improving. If you look at the President Mick Monck's monthly column in the SportPilot you will see some very useful information.

John, I am not employed by RA-Aus nor on the Board but I remain close to most of the Board Members and the Staff. I speak often with Board Members and the Managers and occasionally with the Office staff. Everything I am told is anything that any member wanting to know could be told - if they asked. It is easier for me because of the personal contacts and knowledge of how it all works. For all that I can't say definitively that multiple year registrations are on the cards. Multiple year membership is quite feasible and will happen. The only complication is the declaration of health standard. But, there is an obligation on every member to report immediately if their health standard drops below the current RA-Aus drivers licence medical standard. What is happening with registrations is that the aircraft files are in the process of being scrubbed yet again. Once immaculate, then we will have something to work with. Both registrations and membership fees are there simply to fill the coffers. The BFR is there to keep the Pilots current and the Annual/100 hourly intended to ensure the aircraft remain airworthy. If the aircraft records are in top notch order then I can't think of a reason why two-year registration renewals would be a bad idea. If you think motor vehicle licences can be renewed for a five year period why not Pilot Certificates? Much more efficient use of office staff time.

Paul Middleton is not contesting a Board position this time. Effectively, Paul retires by the AGM after a very lengthy service to RA-Aus. It is no secret that I did not always agree with Paul but there could be no argument that he meant anything but the best for RA-Aus. Eugene Reid, unfortunately, is running again in Tasmania. In my experience and judgement, he was/is the least effective Board Member. He has been on the Board for an awfully long time and it would be a big step forward if one of the other candidates for the Tasmania seat were successful.

To save me the "joy" of re-reading them all - which candidate?

Rob Judd, If you are wondering where those unarguably great and brave early ultralighters went, have a look in the Tasman sea at the foot of Stanwell tops. That sort of flying was courageous because it came with real risks of dying and a frightening number were killed. That many survived is due in equal measure to good luck and the hard work of the original AUF. The AUF (long before my time) got recognition and support for what they were trying to do and that was go flying in the most basic and fun way with the lowest possible cost and the least possible regulation. The AUF achieved the most important change that has ever been achieved - two persons on board and that allowed for people to be taught to fly as opposed to being self-taught, frequently with very unattractive outcomes. I taught myself to water ski without quite managing to inhale too much of the lake I was learning on. My very young (at the time) daughter was taught to ski and never fell off once during the 30 minute very controlled lesson during which she became a competent skier. Because of our pioneers, I can now fly an aircraft that is as safe or more safe than many GA aircraft at a still affordable cost. The administration of our form of aviation hasn't been great but is in a real upswing at the moment. If you asked around, I doubt you'd find any branch of aviation that has been well administered with a few notable exceptions that I know of like the Skydivers. I personally believe that putting the S in CAA was the root of the problems identified by the recent Av Safety Review. CASA to me seemed to forget about promoting aviation and concentrated on strangling it to death with its approach to snail pace regulation development and neanderthal enforcement attitudes. For all that CASA is the Regulator provided by the Australian people. The current Board is working hard to achieve an adult to adult relationship with CASA. And CASA is responding to that approach positively. It is well understood at the highest levels in CASA that RA-Aus operated within good governance and efficient administration will make their life a great deal easier than an RA-Aus in uproar over poor governance and sloppy administration. RA-Aus has a long way to go to build faith in the membership but I am confident, for the first time in five years, that we are definitely headed in the right direction. To reinforce that direction we need people like Andy Saywell elected to the Board. People like Andy have the clear view of where we need to head and the skills and experience to get us there.

RA-Aus Board and Management are very well aware of how inefficient their systems are for renewal of both membership and registrations. It is high on the priority list for the new CEO. Multiple year membership is back on the agenda as well. Imagine how fortunate RA-Aus would be to have project manager of Andy's experience on the Board. Project Management is a discipline that can benefit greatly any project whether IT or otherwise.

There is no traction for the idea of a paid Board of Directors of any size. The current 13 person Board is sizeable and quite expensive to transport from/to all over Australia and accommodate in Canberra (and Temora) for the two face-to-face Board Meetings. The idea of having 5 Board Members elected and 2 more appointed by the five elected revolves around the extra two bringing expertise that could not be guaranteed would come from a popularity poll. I personally don't favour that idea. The expertise that is useful and not highly likely to come from a bunch of pilots is Legal/Company Secretarial and Finance Management. These skills could be part of the resume of a CEO and augmented by contracted advice. Personally, I have long argued that RA-Aus needs in-house management accounting skills in the form of a Business Analyst to advise the CEO on budgeting and cost control. It is up to the CEO to advise the Board on such matters. The experience of RA-Aus being run by the "Management Committee" has been a lot less than wonderful and resulted in the parlous state from which recovery has begun. RA-Aus being run by a competent experienced business manager is far more likely to be successful. This is especially so if the Board choses well (and I am hearing that they have) and then supports the CEO with good policy decisions. Ra-Aus has not shown the ability to elect good business managers who can spare the time to do the job. There are 15 staff who require top class leadership which I have not seen in RA-Aus prior to the EGM in 2013.

What an amazing thread! Well done the positive commenters and well done Darren, Jill and the new Board for earning these sorts of comments.

Board versus management - we've been over it so many times. Don't worry about he semantics, RAA needs the Board of part-time amateurs to leave the management to do the job of running the show. The Board are quite capable of making the policy decisions but do not have the time and in many cases, the expertise, to be the Management Committee. Organisations are different. I think I know this one fairly well and it needs the Board to stay out of the office and get on with the important policy considerations.

If you have a picture of yourself as your avatar and stick your neck out a lot, it is hard to hide and they find you

John, I just noticed in the July edition of SportPilot on page 15 an article about the selection process. Seems there were "more than 30 applications for the role . . .". DOn

Thanks Neil and all the others who have taken the time to read and absorb my (frequently) long winded explanations. Don Thing I most enjoyed about the last Natfly was the good fellowship. Meeting up with lots of people that I see only once a year is what keeps me coming back to Natfly. With the smaller crowds this year it actually made it even more friendly. And there is a chance if you take the time to track down the Board Members and get a first hand account of things we often just speculate about here. In particular, I had great chats with Ross Millard, Jim Tatlock and Trevor Bange. Very encouraging that we have folks like this on the Board now. Also met up with people I've only ever swapped posts with and that is always rewarding.

DWL, I do see your points and there is logic to it. But the error comes from thinking that all I was up to was taking potshots at Board Members. What we were being, I believe fairly critical of, was the poor decisions of the Board and the overt secrecy with which they were operating at the time. There has been a major turn around in Board performance since then because they were held to account at the extraordinary general meeting in 2013 and subsequent elections. If the Insurance had not been allowed to expire then I could have stayed on the Board. But, my house and super are assets of my family and I don't have the right to risk those while I pursue an attempt to get RA-Aus onto a proper footing. But, leaving the Board surely should not bind me to go silent and allow maladministration to go on regardless. My intent was not to crucify those who stayed on the Board but to get them to change and become more professional and communicate honestly with the Members. The current Board has even sorted out the appalling situation we had with Association Insurances, something the previous Boards never got close to getting under control.

John, while I am aware of the process, I was not a party to the execution of the process - that of course is the realm of the Board and its recruitment sub-committee. If you would like to know more, you would need to address that question to your Region's representative on the Board. Regarding access to the Board Minutes, Rule 36 of the Constitution says: "36. Inspection of books. The records, books and other documents of the Association shall be open to inspection at a place in the ACT, free of charge, by a Member of the Association on request at any reasonable hour." Don

DLW, I think it is important that you have the facts at your disposal before making assertions about what I've been up to for the last, say, three years. I earnestly hope that you are interested to know the facts and that once in possession of the facts you might be prepared to revise your concerns about what you think I've been up to. Unfortunately, I can't suggest a useful way for you to discover what went on in the period between September 2011 and May 2012 on the RA-Aus Board or from May 2012 until the present in RA-Aus governance matters, in particular. You seem to be ill-informed at the moment and I grant you it is not easy to find out what has been going on at the core of RA-Aus. What I can tell you, and you can accept it or not as you choose, is that from 2010 I had become quite concerned about the poor governance of RA-Aus. A few concerned members, including myself, attempted to find out what was going on by putting questions on notice to a meeting at Natfly 2011. The answers to the questions were most unsatisfactory particularly from the then President Eugene Reid. In the end, Steve Runciman (recently elected Treasurer) stepped forward at the Meeting and agreed that the "Board had got it wrong" and that it would all be fixed. Sadly, nothing material ever came of that promise that I'm aware of. It seemed to us that it was going to be very, very difficult to get any change in the Board's lack of respect for the Constitution of RA-Aus just by asking pointed questions and so I was nominated to run for a "seat" on the Board for NSW/ACT Region. I was successful in that election in no small part due to the support of members of Recreational Flying and the many other members in NSW/ACT who were very unhappy with what was going on at RA-Aus HQ in Canberra. In that election, the sitting Board Member had been on the Board for some 12 years and his unseating was a clear expression of the dissatisfaction by the NSW/ACT Members who took the trouble to vote. At the Board Meeting immediately following the AGM, I was elected to the role of Treasurer and became, thereby, a member of the three-person Executive that ran the Board's business between face-to-face Board Meetings. In my relatively short time on the Board (8 months a little longer than an "instant") we achieved some useful things including upgrading of the Office computer hardware and telephone systems. I also proposed and had accepted that a Constitution Review Committee be commissioned with reviewing and proposing a re-write of the Constitution. I was appointed to Chair that Committee and went on to commence that work but the Committee was canned by the President after I resigned from the Board. I frequently found myself being overruled (2 to 1) by Runciman/Middleton in matters where I considered RA-Aus was not acting in the best interests of the Members. Matters became very difficult when the Insurance that covers Board Members Liability was allowed by the the CEO to expire for the second year in a row. Last minute, week by week extensions were advised by the Insurer with no real guarantee that the extensions were worth worth anything at all. For about six weeks Board Members hung by this thread risking their houses and superannuation. In the end, two of the Board Members who properly understood this risk resigned from the Board. The remainder, to this day, I believe did not comprehend the risk they were running. I had repeatedly requested that RA-Aus obtain formal legal advice on the nature of the personal risk for Board Members but that was not acted on by the President of the time. It was untenable to remain on a Board that was, in my opinion and to put it mildly, not risk averse and when there was no certainty of insurance cover. I was happy to serve the members of RA-Aus but not prepared to bet my house and superannuation against predators like Slater & Gordon. Despite having resigned from the Board, I continued to actively work for the Members of RA-Aus to bring the Board to account for their failings. This involved proposing changes to the Constitution to make the Board more accountable to the members and culminated in the extraordinary General Meeting in 2013. That Meeting precipitated the resignation of an ineffective Treasurer, exposed serious deficiencies in reporting of Membership numbers by the Secretary and lead, I believe, to the eventual resignation of the then President Runciman. Since that extraordinary General Meeting, there has been a strong trend for improved performance by the Board. Since the Board Elections in 2013 we have had the basis of a competent, responsive Board and I am confident that with the retirement of some of the old guard at the coming election and the election of new blood like Andy Saywell, we will have a Board that is well fitted for meeting the significant challenges RA-Aus is facing. My offer to assist the new CEO is just a continuation of the work I did for Mark Clayton. Mark recognised that the 25 or so Amendments I had proposed to the Constitution had merit and he could see I had a fair understanding of the RA-Aus Constitution and the Act which governs that Constitution. As such, I was able to advise him in matters relating to elections and meeting procedure and proof read notices being sent to the membership. While I had problems with the Board in 2011-2013 and I had no regard for the work of the previous CEO, I recognised Mark Clayton as a person with considerable ability and as somebody who had a good strategy in mind to bring RA-Aus into the 21st Century. DLW, does this answers your question about what I meant by offering to assist the new CEO? DLW, I'm sorry you find my colourful language offensive. However, I can't think of a better way to describe the mess RA-Aus found itself in in 2013. Years of mismanagement had membership and aircraft records in disarray. Members were facing months with their aircraft confined to hangars as a result. Flying schools were unable to operate for months at a time yet still had to face ongoing costs for their aircraft. This is not a situation that developed overnight. It took years of mismanagement for it to get to that state. Would a "steaming pile of excrement" be more accurate/acceptable? How would you describe it? I have never backed off from my drive to have RA-Aus Board respond to the Constitution. The Constitution embodies the Rules set by the Members as to how RA-Aus is to be operated. As mentioned above, I have been involved in a mountain of work to put to the Members and obtain a 75% "Yes" vote for changes to the RA-Aus Constitution to improve the way the Board operates and communicates with Members. For example, this year, for the first time ever, Members will receive the Annual Financial Statements at least 21 days before the Annual General Meeting. Go back to 2012 AGM and you would find that a Treasurer Eugene Reid offered a half-baked, one page summary of the financials to a fraction of the Members who attended the AGM, during the AGM. A vote was then called for the Annual Financial Statements to be adopted by the AGM, virtually sight unseen. At the same Meeting the then Secretary (Middleton) assured the Meeting that RA-Aus had a rapidly increasing membership approaching 13, 000 members and asked that his report be approved by the AGM. Subsequently it was found that the Membership was closer to 10,000 members. This year Members will have been able to give full consideration to the Annual reports of the President, Secretary and Treasurer well before the AGM commences. Members will then be in a position to ask questions and satisfy themselves on the reports before voting for their adoption by the Meeting. That's what I've been "playing at" and I hope you don't still consider that to be "throwing stones . . from the sidelines". So, tell us DLW, what have you been doing for RA-Aus for the last three years?

It is unfortunate that the instructions on the ballot form relate more to an election of one person rather than two. The instructions don't invalidate the election process but could be more helpful and less unhelpful. You can vote 1 to 5 or 1 to 4 or 3, 2, or just one and they would all be valid. There would be a difficulty if you put more than one tick on the form. That would probably invalidate the form. To be safe, number 1 to 5 (even though 5th pref is pretty meaningless). Don

The reversion to the title "CEO" was a deliberate choice by the Board. In Government circles, General Manager did not imply Chief Executive. Lee Ungermann had experienced this effect. It was not done at the request of the new CEO. While Turbo may not be happy with the title or the role, to me it still makes perfect sense in an organisation this size to have the work of the Executive function done by employed staff. That leaves the Board in a pure policy mode and oversight of the executive function. None of our Board Members have the time to be the Chief Executive even if in the past Steve Runciman attempted that, unsuccessfully in my view. It is quite fair to "hold our breath" and see if the right selection has been made. At the time of recruitment you have two choices - employ the best candidate or go through the employment process once more. I guess there is a third approach much favoured by Eugene Reid - appoint a mate with no selection process. From what I know of the process this time it was professional and has the quality to produce good candidates and choose the best of those. For me, I'm prepared to give MIchael Linke a real good go and I'll write to him offering him any assistance he thinks I can provide. Mark Clayton, in my judgement, was the best CEO by far of the last three or four. Let's hope that Michael Linke can build on the good work and the achievements of Mark. Michael Linke has the advantage of the support of a highly qualified business person in our President Michael Monck plus his partners on Exec. Treasurer Jim Tatlock and Secretary Tony King. It is shaping up as a period of competent stable Board operation. In the latest SportPilot (July), Mick Monck has foreshadowed the coming major restructure of the Board to get it down to a workable size and cut Board Costs in half. This restructure is going to require everyone to drop parochial considerations and start thinking about what's the best for RA-Aus as in Australia not just RA-Tasmania or RA-WA. We must get away from popularity polls electing legions of CFIs. RA-Aus needs a Board comprised of people who have real business credentials. RA-Aus Board needs to have what all Boards need . . . sound business expertise, a strong sense of good governance, some professional legal and accounting capability and a clear view of where RA-Aus needs to be in five to ten years from now. We can either go with the desperately needed reform or shove our heads back in the sand and have more of the crap we've had to put up with over the last 5 years or more and end up in the same pile of steaming manure that inexpert and nepotistic Boards and Management dumped us in.

Let's welcome Michael to our Association and wish him the best as he takes on this very challenging role. Let's also give him some space and be supportive while he comes to grips with the many issues that confront RA-Aus. Reading the President's Report in SportPilot these days gives me considerable comfort that we are finally in good hands and that, while a long way from being out of the woods, we are definitely headed in the right direction. The fact that the new CEO starts with the unanimous support of the Board must be encouraging to us all. Now all we have to do is get our fingers out and vote in the current Board Election process in those RA-Aus Regions where we have a choice. We need to ensure we have a Board that can give the new CEO the latitude to get the job done and the oversight to ensure We have some excellent candidates in NSW/ACT. Andy Saywell is well known on here for his considered posts. He is certainly number one on my ballot paper. Col Jones is similarly well known to us and has invariably demonstrated sound judgement. Michael Apps has been a real asset on the Board and has done and is still doing more for Aviation in Australia than anyone else personally known to me. I have great respect for his intellect and integrity. I know he has been very frustrated by some of the Board shenanigans of the past. For all that, I think Michael Apps has done his share and then some and it is time for some new players like Andy, Col or Greg Doyle to have a go.

New CEO July 7, 2014 | members RA-Aus would like to welcome aboard our new CEO, Michael Linke. Michael comes to RA-Aus with a wealth of experience in managing businesses through periods of change and we are looking forward to using his experience to take us into the next phase of our future. It’s worth noting that in the recent report by the ASRR it was stated that RAAOs need to work on their governance and Michael’s skills and knowledge in this area will certainly play a role in satisfying this requirement. Michael will officially commence in the new role on 7 July 2014, however, he has already begun engaging with the staff to ensure he can hit the ground running and start working from day one. Michael will be given the responsibility for modernising our offices, improving processes and delivering greater value to our members and other stakeholders. Moreover, he will play a significant part in shaping the future of RA-Aus and ensuring we have a solid base to build on in coming years. His appointment was a unanimous decision by the board and we look forward to working with him in the coming years. We hope you, the members, welcome him with equal enthusiasm and I’m sure he looks forward to meeting you when the opportunity arises during his tenure. Michael MonckPresident

I like the availability of the "unhelpful" thumbs down but it really needs the person offering that opinion to back it up with some logic so the person making an alleged unhelpful comment can be set straight in their thinking. With the Agree or Like buttons no explanation is needed.

Well said Andy! Allow me to be the first to give you a strong endorsement for your candidacy. I am certain you are exactly the sort of person our Board needs. Experienced and progressive in your thinking. We are fortunate in NSW/ACT in having a strong field of candidates. I was disappointed though to see Michael Apps nominates again. Michael has been doing great things for Aviation since before I was born! He has in his time on the RAA Board been a wise head and I have never heard him say or write anything I would disagree with. We could certainly do a lot worse than Michael but it is about time for some others to step up and have a go. For all that, I would recommend that RAA members read all the election statements for their region and make a choice and vote! For RAA to be a real democracy, we need more than one in five to cast a vote. More apathy will certainly lead to the eventual demise of RAA. Strong participation will make RAA strong and the Board properly accountable to the members. We have two Board Members to elect in NSW/ACT so make sure you vote for more than one candidate. Col Jones is well known to us on RecFlying and I value his contribution.

And then whinging about the Board they were to lazy to vote for or against.

Oz, all sounds good but takes time and effort. Board Members are part time and unpaid. Most also have a "day job". We also are currently between General Managers. There is already a lot of information available through the Members Portal so don't hold your breath waiting for a webinar. CASA and the ATO have enormous resources compared with RAA and what is feasible for them may not be so easy for RAA. Jim Tatlock gave an excellent presentation on the state of RAA finances at the General Meeting at last Natfly. I haven't had a look but the essence of it should be in the minutes on the RAA website. If you have particular queries, ones that may or may not have general interest then you should direct them to Jim Tatlock or the President who is also a NSW/ACT members rep on the Board. One dollar a week extra is not going to break any of us but it is a step in the wrong direction when affordable safe flying is the reason for RAA's existence. There is a lot of work to be done to lower costs but lowering costs is very much achievable. But, we have to be prepared to move with the times and, e.g., have an electronic magazine, web based membership processing, etc. We also have to back the current Board in their fight with a rampant CASA hell bent on imposing costs on RAA so that CASA will look good. The formal SMS and SMS manager are not required of GA and there is no evidence to say that they are essential for RAA. Hopefully, the Aviation Safety Review will cause CASA to pull its horns in and have them appreciate that "more" and "better" are not the same thing.

OB, Why not ask the person who can and will give you a straight correct answer? Viz., Treasurer Tatlock. He answered the question at the Temora General Meeting last Easter. For to those who were not there, there are the minutes published on the RAA website.