Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest Maj Millard
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.

The board executive ( Pres, Sect and treasurer) meet either face to face or electronically once a week. They may or may not be joined by the CEO as required. They then communicate ( usually via the board President) with the other board members either personally by phone, but more usually via the board forum.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Guest Maj Millard

David,

 

Maj,while I may agree in principle, you opened yourself up on this one. RAAus is NOT a company ...( yet) ... it is an association of members; and until that changes that is how it should be managed.

By referring to 'company confidential' I must remind everybody that the RAAus is an approx $2.5 Mil per annum entity that conducts financial business on a daily basis from its Canberra headquarters. We are incorporated in the ACT and are required to conduct business to the regulations contained within that incorporation. On that basis we must by necessity conduct ourselves along best standards of business practises....regardless of what you ( or I) wish to call it.

As I stated previously we as an organization are very fortunate to currently have a CEO of the caliber that we have in Michael Linke. And I am proud to say that I was one of the four-person recruitment team who chose him from over 30 well qualified applicants.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interested in this discussion. Having been on several committees in the past I certainly understand the concept of decision making, commercial in confidence etc. From what I have seen since joining RAAus I believe that in general the board are doing a very good job. And by all accounts it is far better than in the recent past, but not having seen that I can't really comment on it.

 

One area of real concern that I do see is the "perception" that the board is not communicating (both listening and talking to)with its members. Whether that is correct or not I am not going into here but if the perception is that they are not listening or talking to the members then they really are on a slippery slope to oblivion. Members want two way communication and successful boards and committees not only provide that but are easily seen to provide it. Just my humble observation.

 

As I say it is a perception of non communication. It does not matter what we had before it is what the members see now that matters.

 

Personally I think the board have opened up some very good lines of communication since I have joined and I have personally seen it on more than one occasion. But in the end it is what the member perceive that will matter.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard
Yes, things are a lot better then a couple years ago because we are not grounded. But in terms of an open board commenting with members, I don't see the amount of change you do. Quote....Rhysmcc......Have you or have you not been receiving my NQ board member on regular occasions over the past 18 months or so ??.......You are on my Email list, and you have replied to them on a couple of occasions. Do you read them at all ?...and answer me this, did you receive a similar newsletter or any personal communication at all from my predecessor Steve Runciman as NQld rep ?...

 

Have you received the CEOs Enewsletters on regular occasions in the past 12 months ?.....did you receive similar Enewsletters from any previous CEO ??...

 

How can you possibly and realistically state...."I don't see the amount of change you do" quote.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Maj I have received (and read) your emails and the CEO's eNewsletter. I didn't say there was no communication, what I said was I didn't see the amount of change that Nev had indicated. For me communication is more then getting a newsletter, the work you've done has been great and well above the previous NQ member however I still think there is room for improvement, not so much from yourself but the Board as a whole, in involving members in the discussions.

 

As an example, the last 6 eNewsletters dating back to July actually contained no member involvement or discussion about any of the resolutions passed at the GM Board meeting. No details on the modernisation system, no details on MTOW and CTA privileges, nothing on the process of the strategic plan and development of a policy manual, we've received nothing on the constitution update yet and no information regarding any of the subcommittees currently formed.

 

I'm sorry if this sounds critical of your performance, the fact we are all still able to fly indicates the Board is doing work but yet there is a complete lack of involving members in anything other then electing the board every 2 years (in my case).

 

 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard
Yes Maj I have received (and read) your emails and the CEO's eNewsletter. I didn't say there was no communication, what I said was I didn't see the amount of change that Nev had indicated. For me communication is more then getting a newsletter, the work you've done has been great and well above the previous NQ member however I still think there is room for improvement, not so much from yourself but the Board as a whole, in involving members in the discussions.As an example, the last 6 eNewsletters dating back to July actually contained no member involvement or discussion about any of the resolutions passed at the GM Board meeting. No details on the modernisation system, no details on MTOW and CTA privileges, nothing on the process of the strategic plan and development of a policy manual, we've received nothing on the constitution update yet and no information regarding any of the subcommittees currently formed.

 

I'm sorry if this sounds critical of your performance, the fact we are all still able to fly indicates the Board is doing work but yet there is a complete lack of involving members in anything other then electing the board every 2 years (in my case).

The CEO, Board President and other board members ( including myself at Old Station...at all my costs) have been active all year attending Fly-ins, and other functions as a trial temporary replacement for this years Natfly event. At all of these events, and including the past AGM at Cessnock NSW they conducted members face to face forums, or question and answer sessions, as by the way they are doing this very weekend at Ausfly in Narromine to directly engage with members. Additionally the AGM at Cessnock was live recorded and made available to all on the web, and it is further planned to make available a live-link Question and answer link at the next one where remote members can direct questions in realtime direct to the CEO or members of the board for answering.

 

At any of these past opportunities, and indeed this weekend at Narromine any member has had an opportunity to engage directly.

 

I do not think this in any way justifies your statement that " there is a complete lack of involving members in anything other than electing the board every 2 years ( in my case)

 

If you are having personal problems engaging with any of these considerable efforts that we are making, might I suggest you double your efforts rather than to continuing complaining about them not happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be better to contact board members with SPECIFIC concerns .Don says he will take submissions from all over, and I doubt he is the only one.

 

YOU elect them and that is the advantage of this type of association. You don't elect anybody in the CASA. and there you have virtually NO say . I believe we now have a more responsive structure, with different people that will function better than previously where unless you were "someone" you didn't get anything done.. Nev

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard
I guess we will see what gets decided on our behalf at the upcoming board meeting and how much consultation actually took place before reaching those decisions.

There is always the opportunity for any member to call the CEO directly with any question or enquiry. Unlike past CEOs this one will actually answer the phone and engage willingly with members. If you don't get him first time I guarantee he'll get back to you at the first opportunity...usually same or next day.

Members have to realise that things have changed considerably with the current team in the way th whole organization operates.

 

You can largely thank the current board for making these changes happen on behalf of the members.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
GG I am not so sure about that. Id have to look at the constitution which is weak in many areas.My understanding is that a member must be financial at the time of voting. The member cannot vote until the voting papers are produced which is only a few weeks ahead of vote close. The vote should be valid if the member is financial at the time it is received. But that also has its problems and I never asked the returning officer if they assessed the validity of membership on the basis of the official vote close date or the date at which the vote was received.

 

If a member votes and subsequently finds they are not financial, it would be the responsibility of the member to become financial before the vote period closed and then contact the returning officer to advise that the members vote is valid at the time of vote close.

 

Assumptions on my part, but I think sawing sawdust. I would think that if my membership was valid on the day RA Aus receive the vote it may be a defensible position ... but then again I should read the constitution again because it was a few years ago.

Without looking at the Constitution and the relevant Incorporated Associations legislation I'm just guessing but it seems to me that a vote is cast when it is placed in the post (Postal Rule) so that membership should be valid the same day for the vote to be valid.

 

Kaz

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of necessity, in any organisation or Government, the members elect their representatives to make decisions on their behalf. Members then decide, after the fact, if the representative has done a good or crap job and vote accordingly at the next election.

 

I voted for DonR because I trust him to make decisions that are in the best interests of RAAus. It may be that my trust is misplaced and if so I'll vote against him next time. I do NOT want an email from him before every board meeting asking me (and his other members) how he should vote on a particular issue. How would I know which way to vote? I haven't been involved in the discussions nor can I know all the facts. I don't want to read a 100 pages of information, financials and budgets to see if a certain decision is affordable or not, or if it fits in with the organisation's strategic plans or goals. My life is busy enough. But I can't make an informed decision without knowing all the above. So I'm happy to leave it to the guy who represents me and has read all this stuff (hopefully).

 

We do however need to be kept informed on the performance and solvency of our organisation. If the Board are making a complete dog's breakfast of things we need to know about it and we have the right to call a special meeting at any time, in between elections, and sack the lot of them if we wanted to.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
  • Winner 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well put Peter.

 

Apologies to all in advance for the length of this post but, I thought it was important to contend the communication issue. Nobody on the Board now would argue we've got it right - yet. But, I know they understand the need to do better. When it comes to matters dictated by the Constitution, there is no argument - it just has to be done.

 

As everyone knows, "democracy" was something some Greeks dreamed up in one little City/State called (in English) Athens . This was a system of government where those who were entitled to vote (and it was far from universal suffrage) voted on every issue that was decided. Representative democracy evolved from that system but is markedly different. In a representative democracy, we elect people to make the decisions for us and some of those decisions while good for the country may not suit us as individuals. Members are entitled to lobby Directors on any issue in advance or in arrears of a decision being taken. There are few decisions that can't be undone if there is a demonstrated need.

 

A Director is required to use their best judgement based on their education/experience and research on the issue. They should balance that judgement with the thinking of the other Directors and the sentiment of the constituency. I use the word "sentiment" because it is often not much more than that. A Director who is doing the job right needs to work hard and invest considerable time on the issues, argue with fellow Board Members and come up with the optimum answer - for the entire organisation and not just the local voters or a vocal minority. I'll leave it for others to judge the work put in by some before cranking up their keyboard. And, incidentally, we on this Forum constitute a noisy minority. Not saying the noise isn't a good one just that we are a very small sample of the membership (some are not even members) and not a random sample. Perhaps we are closer to a sample of those who take the trouble to think about issues and vote in elections?

 

One of the things I found when on the Board in 2011-12 was that I was so busy with RAAus matters that the time available to communicate with the members on this Forum was at a premium. Too busy doing to talk about it. Not a good situation and one that I do not expect to be repeated in this term.

 

Over the last five years we've put some 25 Special Resolutions to the Membership directed at forcing the Board to communicate better with the members. Things like ensuring that we got the full Financials well in advance of the AGM not a pathetic scrap of paper at the AGM. It is definitely chalk and cheese now compared with those days.

 

I guess my questions are:

 

  • Have you emailed a Board Member and advised them of your disappointment on the quality of the two-way communication between the Board and the Members?
     
     
  • Have you offered some guidance as to the type of information you feel you should be getting?
     
     
  • Have you offered your feedback on decisions taken or provided your thinking on issues not yet resolved?
     
     
  • Have you asked the Staff (CEO) why something you expect to be able to see on the Website is not visible?
     
     
     
  • Have you given the Board the opportunity to indicate whether they think they are doing well or could do better?
     
     
  • Have you given the Board an opportunity to counter suggestions that they have not consulted well enough on a particular issue?
     
     

 

 

Doing stuff yourself always seems to achieve better results than talking to unconnected people about what could be better.

 

I attended the RAAus briefing at AUSFLY on the weekend and learned some really interesting things about what the Board has in their sights regarding CTA and an MTOW increase and about the newly re-written Tech Manual. Some of that was in the minutes of the last Board Meeting - well worth a read.

 

I took the opportunity to have a chat to Michael Linke and Mick Monck at the RAAus stand and I didn't have to get in a queue to do that as they were readily accessible. Their mobile numbers and email addresses are published to make it easy for members to communicate with the Board.

 

It is true that if all 10,000 members individually posted questions to the Board the result would be a log jam. By the same token if anything like that ever happened, the Board and CEO would get the message 5 x 5 that they need to be initiating better communication to prevent the need to ask the questions.

 

One area the Board and all of us know that they can do better is our decrepit website. Their is some real money (yours) being spent on it to bring it into the 21st Century. Still, I have some concerns why the content is not being maintained better in the interim. It looks at the moment like somebody has just given up on it. With a decent website/portal and a user-friendly content management system there will be no excuse for crap on the website.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 4
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
As I say it is a perception of non communication. It does not matter what we had before it is what the members see now that matters.

May be we do need to contact everyone individually to try and get a definitive response.

 

The Strategic Plan 2015-2018 states:

 

  • Jan 2016 - June 2016 Commence roll out of training courses. Priority one training course is an L1 training course.
     
     
  • Following successful delivery of this training course we will deliver three further courses; including L2, saftey management and instructor training.
     
     

 

 

We then see a position posted for a Training Coordinator with a list of criteria, but nothing since. Has anyone been employed?

 

We have heard that the new Technical Manual is soon to be released, which I assume will include what a L1 will, or will not be allowed to do, but we have not been told much about this. The '3 month trail' is still up on the website. So is the training course going to be in addition to the on-line test?

 

So, are there going to be changes, or not? So many questions ... but who to ask?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who to ask? I would suggest emailing your local Board Member or the CEO as a starting point. It will make it easier to communicate if they know you are interested of course. One very good point you raised though is the one about the training coordinator.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
We then see a position posted for a Training Coordinator with a list of criteria, but nothing since. Has anyone been employed?

Clare O'Dwyer has been appointed training coordinator. I assume she will be introduced in the next magazine with an explanation of her role.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clare O'Dwyer has been appointed training coordinator. I assume she will be introduced in the next magazine with an explanation of her role.

Magazine, what magazine. Oh hang on, you mean the faux magazine , the claytons magazine. The magazine you have when you don't realy have a magazine. ( unless you pay through the nose for it).

 

 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is good to hear they have appointed someone ... Thank you for the information Happyflyer, I wonder why her appointment hasn't appeared in the e-news though, surely this is big news and consistent with the strategic plans, so a big welcome could have been announced?

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
That is good to hear they have appointed someone ... Thank you for the information Happyflyer, I wonder why her appointment hasn't appeared in the e-news though, surely this is big news and consistent with the strategic plans, so a big welcome could have been announced?

I only found out because I saw her name on the schedule for the upcoming CFI conference.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Maj also tell the RAAus staff to not all stand at the. RAAus stand and talk to each other...they should get out with a logo shirt on and talk to everyone at the flyins in all different areas and situations...including having a few drinks and socialising ..its great they where there, but they dont need to be chained to the stand to be super effective..

 

Thats not criticism just a solution to better communication

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard
Hey Maj also tell the RAAus staff to not all stand at the. RAAus stand and talk to each other...they should get out with a logo shirt on and talk to everyone at the flyins in all different areas and situations...including having a few drinks and socialising ..its great they where there, but they dont need to be chained to the stand to be super effective..Thats not criticism just a solution to better communication

Thanks for that....obviously they are 'chained' to the stands to perform certain duties ...mechanise sales, membership recruitment, and to be available for enquiry and consultation. Generally when office staff are manning the stalks at events they are on the clock so they are on duty under direction from the onsite managers. In my experience the management ( CEO, board Pres, Ops and board members) do get out and about when they can to engage in free discussion with members. Generally you'll catch them at the bar with everybody else in the evenings, unless they've already left with travel commitments. But thanks again for the imput, I'll see it gets passed on.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly the NRMA is now bribing their members to vote in board elections with a chance to win a new car.

 

You'd get 10,000 votes in RAA board elections if you could win a plane! 003_cheezy_grin.gif.c5a94fc2937f61b556d8146a1bc97ef8.gif

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Interestingly the NRMA is now bribing their members to vote in board elections with a chance to win a new car.You'd get 10,000 votes in RAA board elections if you could win a plane! 003_cheezy_grin.gif.c5a94fc2937f61b556d8146a1bc97ef8.gif

Everyone is complaining about having to fund a magazine, can you imagine the outrage if fees were increased to cover a give away plane !

 

There would be more whining than a pommy diff. !

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...