An Industry Lobby Group

[compressor stall]

One of the things I can see that lacks in this country's aviation circles is a body that effectively represents industry to CASA and government.

In a nutshell it should.

a. represent all sectors of the aviation community, business owners, pilots, engineers.
b. be non political
c. not be interested in union issues (trying to represent both owners and pilots/engineers here)
d. have an effective voice to CASA, media and the Minister

It could also have a secondary role in sharing information.

The whole idea is to have a body that would reflect the interests of everyone from the Flying School owner, to the owner GA charter operator, to the small regional airline and all the aforementioned's employees.

This would ensure that the regulator and minister hear a loud and united voice. Similar organisations overseas seem to get results, we can do the same here....

Comments....?

[Lodown]

Nothing wrong with the idea Stallie, but I have one question...Where does the group get its funding?

[Joker 10]

You could try the Alphabetical Organisations, they purport to represent every body.

[compressor stall]

One model I have in mind would be if it there was something in it for almost any company, then a company membership of say a few hundred bucks a year should work.

And what's in it for the companies / industry to make them want to join?

A voice that makes DOTARS / CASA / Ministers listen and take note and work with industry. I appreciate that this would be a bit of a chicken /egg thing - companies would only join if they saw results first.

On the other hand, the more immediate benefits for companies could be:

NPRM's deciphered and interpreted and made relevant for industry people. i.e. "Here's the NPRM, here's the way it will affect you, here are a few solutions / compromises. Which way do you want to push?"

Also industry assistance (as opposed to the regulator's "guidance material") in setting up schemes (SMS, DAMP to name two topical ones).

The idea is just an embryo at the moment, and any further ideas or input welcomed.

[Rudder]

Great suggestion but unfortunately doomed.

ASFA tried to pull together an organisation like this about 4 years ago and in fact got it through the formative stages. It then withered on the vine as apathy and each and every secular component of aviation decided that either they alone represented aviation (AOPA by way of example but not alone) or that they just didn't want someone else representing their individual voice (such as QANTAS but also not alone).

It even got to the stage of meeting with the minister and the then head of CASA Bruce B. I was there and can still remember Bruce saying it would be great to see it succeed but his closing words was good luck as he didn't think it would for all the reasons above.

In the past there was the GAA which was as close as a GA organisation got I would think.

If you want to follow it through talk to someone from ASFA that was there then. No use relearning mistakes already learnt.

[Torres]

Some years ago there used to be the Regional Airlines Association (RAA) and the General Aviation Association (GAA) - think they are now the Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA) (http://www.raaa.com.au/).

Looking at their Membership, I suspect they may have a good lobby machine with Government.

They are the only credible aviation organisation I know of that represents all sectors of non airline aviation.

[RadioSaigon]

Damn good idea Stallie, similar thing tried in NZ years ago with the formation of the AIA (Aviation Industry Association) which, from memory, was funded by levy. Their aspirations were initially high, as were expectations... unfortunately reality and internal politics intruded. It didn't take long before AIA morphed themselves into a quasi-regulator, which is pretty much what they are now. As an industry representative body, they may be still relatively effective at some levels, but overall they are really too close to CAA and government to be effective at meeting the aims of their original charter.

[CaptainMidnight]

In a nutshell it should.

a. represent all sectors of the aviation community, business owners, pilots, engineers.
b. be non political
c. not be interested in union issues (trying to represent both owners and pilots/engineers here)
d. have an effective voice to CASA, media and the Minister

It could also have a secondary role in sharing information.
RAPAC has been doing all this for years, and just about all aviation representative groups, companies and organisations are members, either directly or via a rep group.

CASA only provide the secretariat and pay for the venues.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - RAPAC (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD:776267797:pc=PC_90463)

The problem seems to be that individuals or organisations are not members of a representative body, and therefore don't have input to or be aware of things going on. But that is their fault, not the representative body .......

[cogwheel]

ASFA tried to pull together an organisation like this about 4 years ago and in fact got it through the formative stages. It then withered on the vine as apathy and each and every secular component of aviation decided that either they alone represented aviation (AOPA by way of example but not alone) or that they just didn't want someone else representing their individual voice (such as QANTAS but also not alone).

It even got to the stage of meeting with the minister and the then head of CASA Bruce B. I was there and can still remember Bruce saying it would be great to see it succeed but his closing words was good luck as he didn't think it would for all the reasons above.


That organisation was AUSAC (http://www.ausac.aero/)which had links in its early stage to ASFA. It's chairman was (and maybe still is?) a senior manager with NJS and even got QF on board, but conditional on them representing themselves as they saw fit. AOPA management of the day turned their back on the process as they insisted they represent themselves.

AUSAC has gone quite of late and I think it is very much dormant and as said above someone has to fund it. The industry is very much its own worst enemy in these matters as a previous industry association that had some success in the ealry 90's (I think it was called the Aviation Industry Assocition [AIA]) had both AN & QF supporting it, but then along came a new management in AOPA and that ship sunk about that time.

The simple answer to this question is YES, the industry needs a truly representative organisation to bat for everyone, but self interest seems to be well above doing something for the greater good and sadly I don't think it will happen.

Of course it suits CASA and other Government Depts to have an industry that is divided and unable to represent itself across the board.

During times that we have had such a body (eg: the early 90's) the industry was indeed listened to. I remember one meeting in CBR about that time when the CAA (or whatever it was then) proposed changes to user charges. After much heated discussion, the leader of the then Association walked out of the meeting and was followed by all the other industry leaders of the day. Guess what? They were all talking again very soon and the industry achieved much of what it was trying to achieve. As indicated above that very successful group was sunk by a change in management of one of its major members. (ego again I guess??)

Bottom line is that it is all about funding. Everyone agrees we need it, they still want their own say and nobody wants to pay!!!
:ugh::ugh::ugh:

As said above, the RAPAC process has been successful for almost 30 years now and that is mainly because it has been supported by CASA/ASA and its previous entities. Its works best when industry has pro-active people involved, but that has always been the case.:D:D