Is the RAA self destructing?

[Recflyingdotcomdotau]

Some interisting news I read. Make up your own mind


Treasurer’s Special Report to the members at the 2009 AGM

November 2009 special AGM


This is a special update report I would like to bring up to the membership.

I am concerned that the rate of increase in Employee Expenses is unsustainable.

Our mission statement says “Minimum Bureaucracy” yet in the last two years we have allowed a significant increase in bureaucracy to occur, without a similar corresponding increase in our membership. I must state here that some of this increase in bureaucracy has been forced on us by CASA, but the majority appears to be of our making.

In Fiscal 08 our employee expenses were $508,729. In Fiscal 09 these costs jumped to $651,410, and in Fiscal 10 they are estimated to reach $825,000. This is an increase in two years of over $361K. Or an increase of 62%. All this with our membership remaining fairly static.

Of real concern to me as Treasurer, was the large salary increases granted by the Board at the recent September meeting. When most Australians received little or no wage increases in 2009 due to the economic climate, the board, as a whole chose to approve increases of between 8% for junior office staff, and up to 25% for managers. On top of these increases we must now budget for all the “add on” costs. I am the first to agree that our staff are our greatest asset, but we are a non profit association, funded in the main by member fees. It is my personal belief that we must live within our means.

However it can also be argued that we need to pay the right money to gain and keep the right staff. I see it as my duty as your treasurer to bring this matter to your attention. What you choose to do with this information is entirely up to you. You are the membership. You are the association.

To bring this into perspective we really must look at the cost per individual member.

In previous years our employee cost per member was running at around $56 to $57 per member. This jumped to $68 per member in F09 and I now estimated this to hit $90 per member in F10. An increase of over 60% in just two years.

As treasurer I believe we must seriously address the rate of increase in our employee costs. If it can be shown that some of the increase is due to CASA requirements then I believe we need to seek some cost recovery from CASA. But we, as an association need to “own” this issue, and deal with it appropriately.

Finally, I won’t be seeking re-election as Treasurer, but I would urge the incoming treasurer to be very vigilant to prevent our costs getting out of proportion to our membership levels.

However, we are an association, and you people, our membership, may be quite comfortable with these increases. But I believe, as un popular as it may be for me, it is my duty as your Treasurer to bring this matter to the attention of the membership.



John McKeown
RAA Treasurer.

Nov 2009

[Jabawocky]

Some of you will recall my comments about the admin costs to RAA for the "simple" exercise of taking on CTA endorsements and the effect on the generally happy, law abiding and well meaning older folk who founded the RAA as we know it today.

Well without the CTA.......but all the other overheads, looks like my fears were well founded.

Some folk should think more before becoming too excited about grandure.

Maybe the Skull did the RAA a favour..........:ok:

J

[sleemanj]

Sure is a lot of money. As a point of comparison, in New Zealand, RAANZ's total annual fee is $65 ($51 AUD) per member, less than just RAA's employee cost per member.

Admittedly, RAA probably has a lot more administration to take care of, given it's larger memberhsip base and the differences in regulation (primarily RAA having to deal with aircraft registration, which is done by the CAA here).

But still, that's a heck of a lot of money. There's something to be said for volunteerism!

[Homesick-Angel]

In short NO.But they need to look in the mirror, and be happy not being GA.


I read this today as well..Bad news in all except for the fact the treasurer had the guts to say it like he sees it..
RA needs to harden up and be willing to keep its separation from GA clear and concise.i.e they need to keep costs down,Keep it run by the members, not go for all the privileges (and limitations) that GA have and keep it....well....Recreational!..

[unairworthy]

Have just heard on the grape vine that a new CEO has been chosen. Hopefully he brings the RAAUS into line and sorts out where they are headed. It seems a little bit all over the place at the moment, thats after sifting through the rumours. There seems to be quite a bit of board bickering at the moment too, I wonder what that is actually about?

[Jetjr]

Possibly just growing pains, other bodies forcing cost increases elsewhere.
Also need to see what staff were earning before before increases can be criticised.
The call seems to be for more transparency which is the only sustainable solution.

[Frank Arouet]

Hopefully he brings the RAAUS into line and sorts out where they are headed.

The CEO is a paid functionary and does what the "ELECTED" board dictates is best in the members interests. One hopes he is of a calibre able to fill the shoes of the last very capable employee.

[unairworthy]

I think this CEO has been employed as more of a BUSINESS manager versus a flying focus so one would hope that the board has their ducks in a row and feeds him the appropriate information.

Lowering the costs and keeping a lean cost structure would be a good start. Kindof like Jetstar :D

[muddergoose]

From Page 66/67 Chapter 3

Chapter 3 (http://http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/nap/files_white_paper/3-General_Aviation.pdf)

'To improve the sport and recreational sector’s capacity to self-administer, CASA will be introducing
a strategic framework that ensures the sector does not expose non-participants or their property
to unacceptable risks and allows for future growth of the sector. A Sports Aviation Office will be
created to oversee the sector, and a safety forum introduced to assist information exchange within
the sector itself and between it and the safety regulator regarding operational and maintenance
standards in the sector.67 Chapter 3 General aviation
CASA will also implement a Sport Aviation Safety Network to assist self-administering
organisations in implementing risk reduction strategies and to integrate oversight between CASA,
self-administering organisations and industry operators'

Costs will have to be born by someone.

[VH-XXX]

We can only assume that this office will have a number of employees, we just don't know how many yet.

Last year CASA gave RA-Aus $130k to help them self administer. I wonder if as a result of this that they would lose this money or if it would be in addition. With many CASA salaries hovering around $100k these days, any number of staff is going to cost..... someone.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

"Exposing non-participants and their property to unacceptable risk"?????

Sport Aviation Office? Sport Aviation Safety Network? In as few a words as possible...it sounds like the CASA thinks the entire culture of RAA needs controlling....that is a sad day for the 99% of it's members that do do the right thing ALL the time.

XXX, quite correct this office, or rather two offices, is going to have to be paid for by someone....membership fees could double in cost to cover the fee that the CASA will surely levy for the provision of this "support"

[Andy_RR]

User pays as a concept is just rubbish. The major reason for regulation is to benefit the public at large - not to benefit the regulated. Therefore the public at large (i.e. the taxpayer) should bear the cost of almost all regulation.

If the public/taxpayer were to meet the (true) cost of regulation, they might be more choosy as to what and how much regulation they wish to pay for...

I live in hope!

[CaptCirrus]

Going to be interesting to see where and what state RAAus is in over the next couple of years. There seems to be a lot of bickering amongst the members and management as seen from their own website. I have a close friend out at Jacobs Well who's involved with them but he's seen the level of training and maintenance go downhill at a rapid rate of knots. This will only lead to more incidents and more investigations. Imagine how that's going to snowball over time.

[Ndegi]

"I have a close friend out at Jacobs Well who's involved with them but he's seen the level of training and maintenance go downhill at a rapid rate of knots".

What a load of BS!

Over 50% of the RA Aus CFI's are GA instructors and a high percent of RA-Aus instructors are from a GA background. The CASA day VFR syllabus is used for training. Many of the traditional aero clubs are now embracing recreational aircraft as the way to create and retain future membership. I can think of veteran Ag pilots on the York peninsula, the Riverina, Gatton and else where who are RA Aus instructors. I am sure we all know airfields like Boonah where retired airline pilots are giving something back to new generations and new (older) pilots. As with the instructors, many RA Aus members are holders of PPL and higher CASA licences, most students attend aero clubs and professionally run Recreational Flying Schools for their training.

It is easy for our Cirrus friend to generalise and not present facts, but lets look at some freely available information:

Data from the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics demonstrate an overall flat level of growth in total general aviation flying hours from 1991 to 2007, with a peak activity of 1.88 million hours in 1997 and a low of 1.64 million hours in 2004

There is a notable decline in private and business flying hours, which coincides with strong growth in commercial airline activity in Australia.

In contrast to the decline in private general aviation flying hours, recreational aircraft activity has grown significantly over the past decade, from 70,500 hours in 1996 to over 138,000 hours in 2007.


These countervailing trends reflect a long-term structural adjustment within the industry as enthusiasts move into the lower-cost recreational sector. While having its origins in ultra-light aircraft, the recreational sector now includes many modern, sophisticated aircraft types, often administered under a lower-cost regulatory regime than those directly overseen by CASA.

Comparing apples with apples, we should compare RAAus hours with only the private and training hours in GA (total approx 600,000 in 2008). This is approx 4 times the RAAus hours and this equates with the total accident rate which is also about 4 time higher. However however the 10 year moving average for the fatal accident rate is about 7 times higher in GA.

It’s pretty obvious from the declining trend for private GA flying that the future of recreational aviation is not in GA. Sad but true.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Many of the traditional aero clubs are now embracing recreational aircraft

...so that their resident PPL 'experts' can now be instructors :ugh:

My local Aero Club ditched their professional instructors and paid for several of their PPLs to get RAAus instructor quals and instruct "pro bono".

Get what you pay for I suppose :rolleyes:

[VH-XXX]

A little off the mark with some of the comments in the novel above. There is no set syllabus for RAAus, hence the big variations in training standards. Indeed there are many combined ga and ra schools with very high training standards however there are a number of cowboy operators that are quite the contrary. From what I can see though RAAus is continuing to weed them out of the system.

[cficare]

There is no set syllabus for RAAus....vh-xxx


Yes there is !!!

[Deaf]

...so that their resident PPL 'experts' can now be instructors

From what I have seen RAA instructional standards are far above the fancy dress 19 yo who wants to boost hours for his chance at the jet job.

[j3pipercub]

Then I think you need glasses as well as a hearing aid.

[VH-XXX]

there is no set syllabus for raaus. - yes there is

No there isn't. Each school uses their own syllabus. There is no equivalent of the CASA day VFR syllabus, however I'm willing to be proven wrong if it can be posted here. I am of this belief because I wrote the syllabus and nav plans for 2 raaus flying schools going back 3 years or ago and there were no guidelines.

[maverick22]

There is a syllabus of flight training in the RAAus operations manual. It can be found here:

http://www.raa.asn.au/opsmanual/3-04.pdf

Whether or not some of the shotgun joe operators out there follow the syllabus is another matter though.:rolleyes:

[Ndegi]

From the RA-Aus website - Training Procedure Outline, Rev 18, updated Sep 26, 2009

1.2 Outline of the flight training program
The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority [CASA] issued a refreshed version of their old Flight Instructors Manual in 2005. Issue 2 of this version is available in PDF format (89 pages) and although it is intended primarily for flight instructors, a student will find it is well worth studying. The exercise sequence outlined in the CASA manual is as follows:

•Familiarisation with the aeroplane and air experience
•Preparation for flight
•Taxiing
•Operation of controls
•Straight and level flight
•Climbing
•Descending
•Turning
•Stalling
•Sideslipping
•Take-off
•Approach and landing
•Spin prevention and spiral dives
•First solo
•Emergency and special procedures
•Pilot navigation
•Instrument flying
•Night flying
The RA-Aus syllabus is similar, though the last two sections covering instrument flying and night flying are not included in the RA-Aus flight training program because RA-Aus registered aircraft shall not be flown in meteorological conditions that mandate flight by instruments only nor may they be flown after last light or before first light.

No apologies for the photo of retired naval aviator Michael Apps on the same page. Michael is a good example of experienced aviators giving something back to flying through recreational aviation.

[VH-XXX]

Thanks Mav. Perhaps I should have highlighted the word SET (syllabus). Schools are ultimately free to choose their own so old mate shotgun Joe is still alive and well.

[Frank Arouet]

Schools are ultimately free to choose their own

If the $hit hits the fan because "Shotgun Joe" didn't adhere to the RAA syllabus and corrupted or misinterpreted the flying straight and level, or first solo requirement, he/ she stands to inherit the legal action brought about by the deceased's relatives, not RAA.

How can this be relevant to the thread topic- the RAA is self destructing? Shotgun Joe has taken on his own role as a self administrator of flying training which is not approved by CASA who, by the way, have the overall responsibility for "ENFORCEMENT".

[maverick22]

The school is free to choose it's own syllabus, as long as it covers all the required fields as per the RAA ops manual. The ops manual is a CASA approved document and as such must be complied with, otherwise you will be in breach of the regulations.

GA schools will have their own set syllabus which comply with the CASA day VFR syllabus. This will be contained in their company operations manual which is a CASA approved document. Joint GA/RAA schools will cover their asses because they will just use the GA syllabus for their RAA training, minus a couple of things which are not RAA requirements.