AOPA Doing Fine.

[Piper Arrow]

http://www.aopa.com.au/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=109

PRESS RELEASE – AOPA BOARD CRUMBLES

This evening AOPA president Marjorie Pagani resigned from the board following what she described as improper conduct by former vice-president Gary Gaunt, who remains on the board as secretary. Gaunt was demoted from the VP’s job last week in Sydney after the board became aware that he had written to the Minister for Transport’s aviation adviser, and the Australian Democrats, advising that AOPA no longer supported the Notice of Motion moved by the Democrats to disallow the amendments to the Civil Aviation Regulations which imposed strict liability on almost all offences. Pagani had campaigned long and hard on behalf of AOPA for the removal of the strict liability provisions, which had been tabled without industry consultation, and without AOPA’s knowledge. At the eleventh hour, Gaunt had advised the Democrats and the Minister’s office that AOPA no longer wanted the regulations disallowed, and that Pagani’s representations were taken independently of the board. The board had not sanctioned Gaunt’s actions, and he was subsequently removed from his position as vice-president. Pagani said that she refused to remain on the board of AOPA whilst Gaunt held any executive position, and that his actions had done irreparable damage to both AOPA and to justice for Australian pilots.

Pagani said that whilst she would continue to campaign for fairness in aviation reform, she would resign from AOPA. She said that although she was extremely disappointed in the tabling of the strict liability provisions of the CARs, she nevertheless applauded Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson, and the National Airspace Implementation Group led by Mike Smith, for the recent advances in Australian airspace reform. :(

[Bart Ifonly]

So much for the A team. Where are you now snarek?

[Lodown]

That didn't last long.

What a shame. So much for elections and the member vote. Good in theory, but then pilots get involved.

[Rich-Fine-Green]

Well I feel like a Goose!.

Yet again, I allowed myself to be talked into renewing my AOPA membership.

Some things never change.


:rolleyes:

[Rudder]

Let me get this right. Gaunt is removed from the board recently. A week later Pagani resigns stating that Guant had acted improperly and without board approval.

Along comes Lawford (from AOPA Forum) and says Gaunt acted with board approval.

FROM AOPA WEBSITE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The board of AOPA regrets that Marjorie Pagani chose to resign last night. However, the action of Gary Gaunt in accepting Minister Anderson's letter to consider representations from AOPA on the strict liability provisions of the 1988 Regulations, and in asking the Democrats to discontinue the disallowance motion, was made with the authority and knowledge of the AOPA board. The board considered that acceptance of Mr Anderson's offer to negotiate on strict liability was preferable to going further towards disallowance.

The board has not crumbled. On the contrary, it has now resumed working to improve aviation in Australia, and it is working to assist pilots and aircraft owners wherever possible.
_________________
Ron Lawford
AOPA President
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The question being, if this is the case why was Gaunt removed from his position last week, surely Pagani was supported last week and that would indicate her version to be correct.

Or is this another battle altogether.

As I indicated else where on pprune, I only recently renewed my subscription after some 15 years... time to definately bail out again I would say.

[logie_bear]

Rich-Fine-Green,

You're not the only one in the same boat mate. A couple of fellas around here joined again this year after an extended break and are probably lost for good this time.

Luckily I decided to follow my gut instinct and put the Visa back in the wallet when it came time to renew.

I was a strong supporter but I've just lost faith. It's a pity cause I know there are some good people in AOPA but it's hard to sell to the young fellas coming through.

l_b

[MaxyB]

Not sure about the board crumbling. Maybe just chipped. Maybe the bit that chipped off had a chip on her shoulder anyway.:}

[d_concord]

MaxyB

Doesn't really matter. While they are busy infighting the industry is getting rolled! Been like this since the early nineties. They can't even represent a united front amongst themselves let alone represent a segment of the industry.

Irrespective of who is right here, how does a letter go to the minister or the democrats with the AOPA committee in disagreement on whether it should be done or not. It hasn't been denied that it went. One group saying it was OK the other not.

I would have thought on such a fundamentally important issue to the industry, this group could at least get their ducks lined up. They haven't even been able to work together for three months.

Talk about the opportunity to divide and conquer on this and other issues. CASA must be laughing at the antics of Gaunt and Pagani and most likely the whole AOPA scenario.

CASA must be saying bring AOPA on if this is the organisation going to keep them in check. AOPA are irrelevant!!

[awetzel]

The answer maybe for all Pilots and Operators to take an invested interest in AOPA, to place the organisation back in the hands of the people it was meant to represent?

Shooting through and leaving the organisation for dead is not going to help. We all need to be involved, and that means voting or putting oneself up to be elected if it is going to change.

If we do not change it no else will. :ok:


AW
www.agacf.org

[d_concord]

awetzel

I'm sure that everyone on the board "had" exactly the intentions that you put across.

This is not an organisation that you would vest your interests in. It has shown itself to be disfunctional and unrepresentative for so long how could you. That said i actually thought they were doing Ok for the first few months.

I'd rather put forward my own opinions, represent myself and give my time to those activities that make a difference. Putting your efforts and vote behind AOPA is wasting your vote.

However the point I make above is one of how does an organisation even put out correspondence that has incomplete ownership at board level!! Let alone a document on this hot potato subject. This letter was clearly released knowing the outcome. How could anyone want to work with these people and your not going to change the whole board all in one go.

Without knowing and being cynical, I would suggest that there may have been another agenda in the release of the letter. It would be a shame if these issues were being given in on in the hope of personal advancement. I certianly hope this is not the case.

[Parablues]

There is no surprise that AOPA crumbled... due to the fact that Spike 007 was not a member! He would have sorted the whole sordid business out! He'd get all of his crony mates in and with a few shifty moves transform it into the Aviation Mafia... Even the donkeys at CASA in Adelaide would have had sore asses - but they already ARE asses! Oops, a bit of a freudian slip there!!!

[QNIM]

Parablue
I say again are we on the same planet
Q :confused:

[snarek]

Bart

I'm in Brazil actually, Forteleza, look it up on a map (can you use a map Bart???) :}

Obviously then I wasn't at that meeting. From my perspective, Marjorie was a fr!kken hard worker, but with a particular "leadership style". That style rubbed some up the wrong way. (ask AndrewW).

She and Gaunt had a run in, as usual there were two sides to the story and I ain't choosing either. Trouble was there was an ulitmatum, not a good way of resolving things, but so-it-goes. The Board chose, Marjorie quit. Not a happy outcome, but no one is irreplacable.

As far as the 'new' Board is concerned, again from my perspective, Ron Lawford is a quiet achiever. Any of you criticisers old enuf to remember the Patroni years??? A quiet Board that got results, had 11,000 members and $500K in the bank!!! Then along came the "BIG PERSONALITIES" and down went AOPA membership.

Seems to me that under Ron L we will move away from personality driven politics into a quieter less obvious mode of operation concerned more with getting results than with what one or two d1ckhe@ds on PPRUNE and AGAF think.

So, you chronic criticholics better dream up another way to whinge about AOPA :}

As always sincerely yours

AK := :=

[Creampuff]

And then Mr Patroni, like so many things Aust Aviation, got Dicked.

Snarek: does the Board intend to fill either or both of the two vacancies, and if so by whom and through what process?

Here's your recipe for survival folks: Gaunt President, McKeown Vice President

[bonez]

Here's your recipe for survival folks: Gaunt President, McKeown Vice President




best left the way it is

as for mck you joke of course

[d_concord]

And here's another example of why this organisation has the problems it has.

A memeber of the board calling people who dissagree with what has taken place "d1ckhe@ds". The fact that a lot of those people are in fact AOPA members really says a lot about the thought processes that probably take place at the AOPA board meetings and the consideration these individual give to their fellow directors and the AOPA members' comments, concerns and wishes.

Better to put your support behind something like AUSAC which I note AOPA didn't want to support. At least it's starting from a greenfield position.

Of course it's being developed on the basis that AOPA is ineffective!

And yes, I'm a member of AOPA...but not for much longer!!

Yours sincerely

one of those "d1ckhe@ds"

[Rudder]

I couldn't have put it better myself d_concord.

Surely this is all some sort of Joke.

At no point has anyone put forward an explanation, just a defense that "no one understands and no one loves me". This is clearly what argueing in defense that it is all about pulling AOPA down.

We don't have to do that snarek, you and your board are doing fine all by themselves.


Signed,

Another one of those "d1ckhe@ds" (and also for not much longer)

[tobzalp]

Keep all this in mind come the 27th. These people are responsible for the support of NAS and the Education of pilots!

[awetzel]

awetzel

I'm sure that everyone on the board "had" exactly the intentions that you put across.

This is not an organisation that you would vest your interests in. It has shown itself to be disfunctional and unrepresentative for so long how could you. That said i actually thought they were doing Ok for the first few months.

I'd rather put forward my own opinions, represent myself and give my time to those activities that make a difference. Putting your efforts and vote behind AOPA is wasting your vote.

However the point I make above is one of how does an organisation even put out correspondence that has incomplete ownership at board level!! Let alone a document on this hot potato subject. This letter was clearly released knowing the outcome. How could anyone want to work with these people and your not going to change the whole board all in one go.

Without knowing and being cynical, I would suggest that there may have been another agenda in the release of the letter. It would be a shame if these issues were being given in on in the hope of personal advancement. I certianly hope this is not the case.

d_concord, and anyone else

How do you think we should move forward so GA gets’s proper representative? It is very hard for oneself to represent themselves with aviation issues at Government level or local community level without a collective backing. Should the Aviation community form another representative body which is an action group? We have just seen the sell off of the Sydney Basin Airports unopposed by any aviation body or group.

Would be interested in your thoughts.

Thanks

AW

[RBERTRAM]

To all that really wants to here the truth and help AOPA and GA.

It is very sad that Marjorie has resigned as president but I feel I do have to clarify some misunderstandings as to the conduct of all parties. For a start Gary was never removed from his position as vice president a motion was put forward for this but not supported by the majority. There was then a motion to remove all the Executive to resolve the personal issues between them and allow the remaining directors to attempt to help resolve these issues, this clearly did not happen so nominations were then called for president, to which Marjorie was re-elected. 1st vice president to which Ron Lawford was re-elected, when it came to 2nd vice president Gary was nominated along with myself the end result being that Gary was defeated and I was elected in the position Gary was however elected as company secretary.

Please understand that we are only human and occasionally personalities clash, as with any other board of directors. One of the leading factors to the whole mess would be the lack of communication between the board members. There are many sides to a story and no matter what is said in respect to past conduct I believe that all parties did believe they were acting in the best interest of the members, no one ever wins when things like this happen and believe me there are casualties out of this, which is very sad.

As for the accusations that the board did not sanction Gary's actions again that is not true and again the lack of communication between the executive and directors plays a major role in this. Last night the board felt in majority that the positions held at that time should not change and that we should move forward, Marjorie felt that she could not do this and resigned her position. No one really knows whether or not the disallowance would have got through or not my understanding is it wouldn’t, what is known is we do have a letter from the minister that clearly states that he will consult with AOPA on strict liability issues that is where the dilemma starts devil you do devil you don’t either way we could loose, so as some of you may see things are not always black and white.

For those of you that know me personally you know I am not a person that lies or fabricates the truth to suit individuals needs there is so much to do to reclaim GA from the ashes and we all owe it to ourselves to make it work. Lets move on and learn from this the board has agreed to communicate better and consult as required. There are allot of people out there that would like to see AOPA fall I will give it my best to prevent this from happening.

Another factor here was I seem to remember a request from the new team to be allowed to get on with it, but some of you cant help but comment on every single issue that the board has done and even reporting AOPA to ASIC, if any of you really believe that any board member is corrupt then shame on you ASIC are there for real issues they are not to be used as a personal tool to get back at AOPA. I will not mention any one by name those who do this know who they are, I would like you to stop, I will now stick my own neck on the block if you have issues with what I am saying or AOPA please call me my personal number is 0408 637212 and I will promise to answer any questions you have about board conduct.

To conclude the board has not crumbled perhaps a hick up in fact I believe it will grow and become stronger over the next few months to say we are too busy disagreeing with each other is also untrue as you are all aware things in this industry change daily and we have to remain flexible and possibly change tactics on the run we are not always going to agree on all issues that is why we vote. Like most of you I struggle to work in this industry daily and you have my promise to attempt to make it better for all so I ask you once more help us make this work and my door is always open and I will listen. RB
:ok:

[Creampuff]

Ron

Congratulations and good luck.

Some handy hints, given in utmost good faith:

1. Make this the last occasion on which you talk about or publish anything about Board deliberations, outside the Board.

2. Make this the last occasion on which you publish anything without getting it proof-read and corrected first.

It’s a cruel world, and one of its many cruelties is thatLike IQ tests and mathematics, grammar has often served as a social marker, signalling the divide between the bright and dim, the elite and the rabble, and in rare instances, the sane and the silly [Professors Michael Meehan and Graham Tulloch]

[NOtimTAMs]

Creampuff

Perfect spelling and grammar have also hidden many an agenda proffered by the unscrupulous :E - or have been a manifestation of obsessive compulsive disorder....:yuk:

Safe flying :ok:


PS : Ron

Thanks for your apparent candidness on the matter.

[pesawat_terbang]

Well

Having been involved with a lot of aero clubs in my past I can see a familiar thread emerging.

The good work of a few dedicated AOPA people is being constantly undermined by the whinging of a very small, unstable minority, who will never accept the will of the majority of AOPA members, as expressed in the election, and will only shut up when they have destroyed the association.

These few noisy stupid people will be the downfall of GA in Australia, but only if we allow it to happen by paying any attention at all to these idiots, wherever they post.

Read the posts, identify the names, work out who has put up (i.e who is doing the work) and who should shut up.

Then support the people working their guts out, understand it isn't easy and is never a smooth runway, and give them your full support.

PT

[RBERTRAM]

"I posted on Prune a response to Marjorie Pagani's AOPA press release relating to her resignation from the board due to the actions of Gary Gaunt".

In that post I said: "the accusations that the board did not sanction Gary's actions again that is not true". That statement was factually incorrect, and I wish to apologise unreservedly for making that statement, and for any embarrassment it may have caused Marjorie Pagani.

This apology has been endorsed by Ron Lawford, as president of AOPA.

[Poox]

Now Ron, don't respond to this, but it looks like someone's told you what to say - a lawyer maybe...

A legal sounding apology...after writing your view of what happened. You seem like a good honest player to me...so were you threatened with legal action??

Don't answer that either...

No, let's think...a possible legal threat...to a current baord member...could be from a litigious cow...

Who has a beef with the current board? Who's been public about it? Who has legal quals....

Hmmm I think I know who might be threatening the current board with legal nonsense...Can you work it out?

[MaxyB]

Poox

I think you might be onto something there.

I'd heard that this crap went on. Lawyers threatening action everytime something doesn't go their way. I reckon it stinks.

Why can't these losers just let the new board get on with the job? How can the board possibly be effective and look after our rights when they are having to fight rearguard actions from disgruntled idiots?

Not Happy

MaxyB

[pesawat_terbang]

I posted a while back on this phenomena, but related to aero clubs.

What I think has happened.

Ex-Pres Pagani tried to do something. The rest of the committee didn't support it.

She spat the dummy and quit.

Now she wants to bring the whole house of cards down along with her.

This is not only pathetic, but seems to me it has become typical of the actions of past presidents for at least the last few terms.

Unfotunately the position of President attracts huge self interested egos, absolute in their knowledge that they, and only they, are right in everything. It has been that way for many a year now.

When that little fantasy crumbles they go about destroying the very thing they promised us, by standing for election, that they would cherish.

AOPA

These people make me :yuk: and I personally damn them all to hell along with all the lawyers!!!!! (and if they happen to be both, weeeelllll!!!).

BUT, with that off my chest, the remainder of the Board seems to be quietly getting on with it :ok:

Well, when they can spare the time away from responding to :mad: lawyers and their evil threats.

PT

[ugly]

I've known Ron for quite a few years now, and know he is an extremely hard working and honest person who has the advancement of aviation and GA especially at heart. I'm sure that he didn't intentionally mean to mislead or embarrass anyone.

[Poox]

Not content to de-stabilise with legal threats, I've just heard that they are trying to get an EGM together.

I won't be signing anything those mongrels try and put in front of me. I didn't join AOPA for this sh*t.

Country lawyers and retired Q captains...that's all we need.:rolleyes:


Let the current team get on with the job!!!!

[snarek]

Suffice to say I am being careful in what I say!!! :(

Ron Lawford is an excellent President. He is a quiet achiever who includes his team in both preparation, action and praise.

Ron Bertram is an excelelnt Vice President. He is an open honest gentleman who never wishes anyone ill-will. he is also a magnificent instructor, he is highly knowledgable and works his @#$% off representing our members.

There is, as always, some agitation on the Board. Same old same old.

But the other eight are trying to ignore it and are just getting on with the job.

Please rally behind them.

Thanks to all the GENUINE aviators out there who are giving us their support.

Andrew

[Dogimed]

Good luck to the new board.

Good luck to Ron Bertram, a man I could not be happier praising.

Dog
:ok: :ok: :8

[triadic]

As a member of AOPA for over 30 years I applaud the comments of Ron B and am most disappointed that he has obviously been threatened in some way. It is good at last to see open comments from some Board members - the first time in maybe ten years. (provided they speak in accordance with policy and in a responsible manner) It is also good to see the Presidents face on TV.

All the actions of members must always be in the best interests of AOPA. This especially applies to Board members. It is always sad to see the egos that seem to explode once the status (?) of Board member is achieved.

Marjorie had her opportunity and she failed, so now that she has chosen to move on, she must let it be and as a previous scribe said don't bring down the pack of cards on the way out. It will only backfire in the long run.

I might add that I supported Marjorie at election time, but her failure to listen to the membership together with some poor decisions only brought about the circumstances we have seen of late. It was only a matter of time !

Ron Lawford has taken the reins and we should all support him and his team. Yes there are one or two bits of dead (rotting?) wood still on the Board, but I am sure they will get the message and move on also. Once that happens we can move forward as one again.

[Bob Nash]

It is indeed unfortunate, that there is again division at Board Level.
Rather than give up on AOPA I believe that this is a signal for all of us at grass roots level, to take some time to look at our organisation, and rather than sit back and let some one else do all of the work, put our hands up and offer some assistance.
There are many difficulties that need to be addressed, and it would seem that it is to much to expect that a few elected Board members, have the time and expertise to deal with all of these issues, without some input from those members who they are trying to support and work for.
To take the responsibility to work for this Board, require a great deal of dedication of time and effort, and it seems to me that they have been asked to do everything themselves.
The difficulties over the past few years, would seem to indicate that maybe we should consider changes, so that our elected Board members are given greater support and assistance.
There have been suggestions that we have area representatives, who could be non executive officers for AOPA and who would be used to channel information through to members in their area.
We have in place already affiliated aero clubs, so why not make these affiliated Aero Clubs, area representatives. This would enable grass roots members to have more say, and to be actively involved in discussions, before decisions are reached.
How can we know if the decisions arrived at are good ones, if we do not know about the lead up discussions and arguments.
I would ask that members take the time to find out what has been going on, and then to commence making some direct contributions.
If you have some ideas and concerns, then now is the time to speak, and perhaps recommend some changes for the improvement of this organisation. We need to be constructive and work together to inform our Board of the wishes of their members.
We are fortunate to have this forum, that allows for comments and recomendations, via a medium that has access to most of our members, and very little cost. So please use it constructively.

[d_concord]

Been away flying and come home to this... Interesting,


Now let me get this correct.

Bertram apologises to Pagani publicly and confirms that the board did not sanction Gaunts actions, that what he said in his statement on PPRUNE is a lie and then she gets the bucketing!!!

The sad part of this is that it would seem that he had to be threatened in th first place. I would have thought for someone in the position he holds that people dealing with him would expect that he tells the truth. Is it the case now that CASA or others have to sit there and second guess whether this is the case. Triadic you seem to endorse this?

I'm sure most people, irrespective of whether they were a lawyer, would be seeking to get the wrong put right. Surely what AOPA needs is people that place the principle before their ego's and personal likes and dislikes. Surely it's only correct that the President be advised of a development and all the board members have ownership of a decision and put their two cents worth in. Surely there should be a mechanism in place to prevent someone ringing around a faction to get enough members of the board to support their personal view (although there is no evidence that even this took place.)

I should also remind everyone that Bertram also claims to be a lawyer and would have made the apology understanding the ramifications for and against. He's a big boy and has done the right thing!!

It would seem that almost everyone here including AOPA board members is suggesting that a blind eye should be turned to their actions and anything they say or do can be justified as them being board members and puting in. It's a seige mentality. The fact of the matter is that not only does the AOPA board have to do the right thing it must be seen to the right thing. The suggestion that they should be secretive is absurd.

Bertram has stood up and admitted the problem and I don't for one minute suggest that he in fact had anything to do with the original issue of a member, on the face of it, acting unilateraly and to the detriment of the board position on this issue and maybe general aviation in the wider text. Lets hope that this doesn't turn out to be the case.

I applaud the fact that these people are giving of their time and effort to AOPA, but I don't applaud the actions and consequences or excuse them out of hand just because to do so is dismissed by them as being almost unpatriotic. I could also add you get the representaion you deserve.

I for one won't stop criticising AOPA if I think what they are doing is incorrect. Convince me and others otherwise. To be honest, AOPA manage to do enough damage all by themselves and the little criticism they get here palls into insignificance. The occurance of this saga and all the goings on after just confirm it.

The other reality is that a lot members are only members because they subscribe to the magazine like I do although I did renew it last year after some 15 years as the indications from this forum was that things would change. If it takes unsubscribing to stop AOPA saying they represent me as a member then that is how it is.

The issue at hand here which hasn't been answered directly is did Gaunt send a letter to CASA reversing or changing AOPA's position at that time. The indirect answer would be appear to yes and the next component of that is that those actions appear to have been endorsed by the present board. This is not an issue of whether the present position on th issue is a correct one. The issue here is whether AOPA has an effective board and let's consider that AOPA claims to represent the interests of General Aviation.

In terms of how it was handled, it would have been better for Bertram to admit it happened, it was regretable, that they understand Pangani's position and apologise, have moved to prevent the manner in how it happened from happening again while informing the masses that while the process wasn't correct, the outcome as far as the issue is concerned has the majority support of the board and AOPA believes it to be correct and explain why.

The sad thing from my point of view is that it seemed as though AOPA had got the mix right and had set down the path of a consultative and considered path rather than appearing to fight with CASA and others for the sake of it, where the major issues were lost in the mire of all the minor issues and fights.

The fact of the matter, as I have said before, is that AOPA is irrelevant because of the way it acts and is seen to act. CASA must just laugh their heads off. AOPA is gridlocked in its' own politics including having some board members whose best defence is to call people who comment or criticise as D@ckheads or scum (although I note that that last reference has been removed from the AOPA website forum recently - a very wise move too I would have thought.) or say, as they have in this forum, that you should only ask reasonable questions if you expect a reply.

signed,

A soon to be ex member of AOPA ( January I think!) and one of those D@ckheads and now it would seem scum. (Ron, you need to put a gag on that man!!)

[Poox]

Concord,

you need to go and swat up on defamation law in Australia. if you ask a real lawyer, they'll tell you that defamation law has nothing to do with the truth, just whether the alleged defamed person believes that their reputation has been damaged.

Hmmm - I stick with the theory in my first posting.

[d_concord]

Poox,

Pray tell,

Just where was did I say she was defamed? I'm not sure she even was. I would suggest that she had proof that what she said was correct.

If the issue here is the truth - Pagani told it, Bertram didn't

[pesawat_terbang]

Seems the pundits were wrong.

Post the resignation of Marjorie Pagani, things at AOPA seem to be running along quite smoothly.

I like being asked how I feel about NAS, I like the way NAS is being cautiously supported. I like the fact that the face on TV now represents AOPA and me, not just their own personal agenda.

I like the new AOPA. :ok:

PT

[Piper Arrow]

I have heard things are still not fixed on the home turf. It appears the situation with the AOPA forum is still not fixed........

Quite a few members voice there concerns for an EGM.

From the AOPA forum..........
I HAVE JUST ACTIVATED ON THIS fORUM. Some will remember me as the former Editor of AOPA magazine. As such I saw Directors come and go.. I saw infighting and selfless work on behalf of the organisation. I was not allowed to comment politically while editor but now I am unfettered!


BUT

The Board MUST speak not with forked tongue but with one voice.

I am for a new election of officers...

And the sooner the better!

The present Board will be tainted with what people imagine not what they did or did not do.

Give us a break and start afresh! It wouldn't be the first time and it wouldn't be the last.

I back Ron Hayward in this.

I expect members are rattled somewhat by this dissention in the leadership and it behooves the leadership to clear the air promptly.

A new broom sweeps clean? This is what we were expecting from the last Board, but personal interests often come into play too. Hard to rid of them!

The Board also needs to answer emails and respond to concerns in a timely fashion. Communication between Directors and with members is essential.

I believe the Board has tried to do a good job and it is unfortunate that this incident has blown up...


BEACH BOY

[gaunty]

Like P_T says the pundits were wrong.

Piper Arrow,
Pray tell, please let's not be coy, what is the problem on the AOPA Forum and home turf that needs fixing.?

Innuendo and the "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions really don't help us fix whatever it is you may think is the problem.

Ring Ron Bertram, Ron Lawford, Andrew Kerans, Adrienne Williams or Mick Kennedy and they will take it on board or give you the facts, there is a very great deal of misinformation being peddled out there.

[C182 Drover]

The AOPA members will not be happy until there is an AOPA EGM to clear the slat and start again.

[bonez]

c182d

if you looked at the big picture you would realise that an egm is not the way to go now

it would make things worse not better

the agm is not that far away and best to give this board a fair go

after all they are doing a good job

let them get on with it

[snarek]

Piper

You are suggesting one of two things, we (the current Board) resign and let a very small vocal group, who I personally think would destroy GA, take charge. (without any flow on policy, or treasury in house memory!!!).

That's it??? We just give in and hand it over to the lunatic fringe???

OR, we go to an election (I suppose you are suggesting the whole Board, again) and yet again, as we have this time, we get two or three 'destroyers' who white ant our efforts with continued requests for stuff that technically they are entitled to, but realistically, as a volunteer organisation, we don't have the time to respond to AND get on with the business.

The people on this Board were elected with a big majority of votes. There is an election coming up, half the Board (6 positions) will be vacant. Lets see if we can get it right.

My phone is 0429 667117 and I answer all e-mails.

AK

[AOPA_members]

Pesawat_terbang. You would like "acid rain" if your puppetmaster told you to like it.

Gaunty. YOU are peddling the misinformation and the problem on the AOPA website is YOU.

Snarek. The "lunatic fringe" are saying "Gaunt's Gotta Go" Remember it takes 100 lunatics to get an EGM not just a few that refuse to condone your the Board's antics. How did your "flow on policy or treasury go? Not too good it appears? Regarding troubling these overworked volunteers, you took the job on and
told us you knew what you were doing. Now we can't even get the correct paperwork to frame a resolution at the next AGM that were denied us last year by your A Team. We can't even get it from ASIC who should have a copy of the amended Articles, because you haven't given it to them.

Think about another Board member who got a substantial amount of votes. You and your lot decided to have a "preferential poll" (which is highly illegal) and left out 3 of the Board you knew would oppose you to get a majority.

Brilliant "girl guide stuff", now we have to put up with a wad of extra strict liability offences because someone took it in his head to make a big fellow of himself with the Minister.

We can hear the hissing of deflating ego's already. Can you hear the 100 lunatics? :ok:

[snarek]

There are only 4 lunatics, but they like most lunatics are loud :}

I don't understand much of what you say below, 'flow on treasury???'

Put it in a question and I will try to answer it.

As for the 'A team' well I wasn't on the Board at the last election. Why doesn't matter. I too tried to get a motion up about democratically back filling vacant positions, it too was defeated (ironically with the vote of someone who would have been offered a position now if it were won).

The 'Board member who got a substatial amount of votes' was actually the last elected. That alone says a lot!!!

What's this about a preferential poll, got me beat what you mean by that. If you mean the 'last elected' should be the first to go this time around, sounds fair to me and (I think) means I will be one of them (I will have to go back over the results to know for sure).

Oh, and if Gaunt is the problem, call on him to volutarilly stand aside. If he gets re-elected, accept the will of the members and shut up (mind you, you have found a whole bunch of nit-picking reasons to not accept the will of the members this time around, so I have little faith you will be able to next time).

I personally think Gaunt has a (deserved) big following and will get up again. So I don't think such a challenge will worry him too much.

AK

[bonez]

"AOPA_members"

your handle does zip to give you any credibility whatsoever and the cr@p that you carry on with shows that you neither represent the members of aopa nor i suggest do you have the greater good of the association foremost in your mind.


put up or shut up i say


and to the moderator of this forum, the user name for this person is a blatent lie and should be removed so as not to give the wrong impression to those that might believe such dribble

:*

[Woomera]

bonez

Thank you we happen to agree and have been thinking about it for some time, of he will be thread banned and his user name banned.

If he/she cares to email us we will make arrangements for another 'nic of his choosing as long as it does not purport to represent part of a group or organisation.


In the meantime cries of censorship, free speech and all the other drivel that goes with it, will go unheeded.

Further "links" directly to "other" forums in the "cause of so called free speech" will no longer be tolerated.

[Piper Arrow]

Ron Lawford
AOPA President


Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 3
Location: Darwin
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:45 am Post subject: AOPA Board News

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gary Gaunt today offered his resignation as Secretary of the AOPA Board.

The President Ron Lawford accepted his resignation as being in the interests of the members of AOPA.

Ron said that while a number of accusations of misconduct had been levelled at Gary Gaunt no evidence had been produced by anyone to substantiate these allegations.

Mr. Lawford said he hoped that the resignation from the executive would remove the ill feeling that has become evident in the last few months and expressed the hope that the Board can now move forward united in improving the well being of General Aviation in Australian.

Mr. Lawford said that the resignation should not be construed as any admission of the allegations made against Mr. Gaunt, which still remain allegations only.
_________________
Ron Lawford
AOPA President

[snarek]

How does that song go.

"Oh so your back, from outer space"

And I get accused of having a pseudonym :E

Anyway, what will please you pair.

You threaten an EGM if Gaunt won't resign. You have no proof or basis for your threat other than the ramblings of a couple of AOPA has-beens.

Gaunt analyses the situation, he decides that if an EGM is called it will destroy AOPA, and so, despite the fact that your allegations are baseless vomit, he resigns to appease you and to save AOPA.

That in my view is selfless courage. What you are doing, in my view, is cowardly terrorism.

If we were dealing with honourable sane people, that would be the end of it. But it won't be, will it???? :yuk:

AK

[C182 Drover]

If your a member go check out the AOPA forum development! Very Juicy.

[C182 Drover]

“NEW Interesting Developments now emerging on the AOPA forum.” If you’re a member go and check it out.

[d_concord]

Bonez,

By what criteria are they doing a good job? It looks more like a dissaster.

[pesawat_terbang]

AOPA is doing just fine.

here are always idiots in the wings (no pun intended) intent on destroying anything or refusing to accept that their time is over.

The people to whom I refer, who in my view are the true cause of discontent are

1. Bill Hamilton. Thanks for your contribution in the past, but you are past your use-by date. Please retire gracefully.

2. John Lyon. Hmmmm, no comment!!!

3. Tony Mitchell. He seems to me to be just plain anti-everything. Very destructive.

Oh and AGAF, one of the moderators, an ex AOPA employee Rob Loane. Sure you just don't have an axe to grind Rob??? Mitchell is another 'moderator' what a joke!!!

As for the others, guys, you started with good intent, but your forum is now little more than a soapbox for anti-GA activities. It has become a joke!

Sampai Jumpa Lagi

PT

[paddopat]

I didn't like what went on at the AGM, from either side.

The Chair wouldn't hear a motion from the floor, and then the new President seemed to be determined to sieze control.

Very confusing.

But the members elected this Board, so to the trouble makers named above, and others, shaddup and let the members decision stand!!!

Bill Hamilton, you have been around since the decline of AOPA, I actually hold you personally responsible for much of that decline, please Sir, go away!!

As for AGACF, can only get in every now and then, but from what I've seen I'd never bother joining the 'Tony Mitchell Memorial Whinge Forum'

Pat

[Bone_Aparte]

You fools!!!

How can a GA Association run without a QANTAS Capatain at the helm!!!

My god man, have you see the resumes, the resumes, and trillions of hours, oh and such negotiation skills.

You Idiots Idiots Idiots, you got it wrong, we must have an EGM to get back control, the stupid members, they got it wrong, they just weren't listening...

THEY DIDNT READ THE RESUMES!!!!!!!

ME, ME ITS ALL ABOUT ME, LOOK AT ME, LOOK YOU FOOL

Non, down here you putant!!!!

Nappy

[Bart Ifonly]

There are none so blind as those that cannot see.

This warning says it all about this forum

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions.,

The truth from Majorie paints a slightly different picture, definately not a pretty one..........

[ugly]

The truth from Majorie paints a slightly different picture, definately not a pretty one.......... There are always two sides to a story

The story I hear is of lack of communication, directors who can't work together, dummy spits, threats and intimidation. Read all the carefully worded retractions on here and AOPA forums - certainly seem to have been posted under duress..

In the words of my 9 year old son 'Build a bridge and get over it already!'

The behaviour that has been shown has been appalling - I wonder sometimes why I bothered forking over the bucks to rejoin.

I have been trying to convince some young Air League student pilots to join AOPA, get some young blood into aviation, but I'm now too ashamed to recommend it.

Actually, they would probably make a better board - at least they have self discipline, a positive attitude and would know there's no 'I' in team.

[snarek]

Ugly

There are certainly two sides to every story, and yes there were quite a few 'if you don't do/vote/act in accordance with my wishes I will resign' from more than one member of the then executive.

As for Marjorie's post, I don't intend to revisit it, it was twenty or so bridges ago, but it does not fully accord with my recollection, and I was there!!!

The majority of the Board have had enough of this and are just getting on with it.

AK

[slice]

snarek - can you tell me what the former VPs agenda is and why he has become so vicious towards yourself (well towards everybody actually - it is just that because you post on AGACF you cop it). If you went to that site for the first time you would think you were dealing with a 13 year old. It is hard to believe that he was once an AOPA VP but that might explain the downhill slide AOPA suffered in years gone by. Does he have a following or is he just an online lunatic ?

[snarek]

Slice

I don't wish to get into the personalities, just say I am proud to be one of about 20 million Australians he doesn't seem to get on with.

Why me in particular, well many moons ago CASA wrote to all aircraft owners telling us that under the new, and AOPA approved, Part 47 we could now hand our C of Rs over to our nominated LAME along with a signed book of cheques.

Said person was part of the Board at that time, I was not (never been on a Board with him).

As aircraft owners, Jane and I said FARKTHIS loudly and so, via Democrat Senator Brian Griegg, and amongst howls of protest (well insults actually) from said person and one other still on Board, we had it disallowed in the Senate.

So the reason, because I am obviously a fool who fails to recognise the enormity of their collective wisdom I suppose :E

AK

[poison_dwarf]

Bart Ifonly

The only person blind my son is you if you really think your hearing the truth shoot yourself now.

You would be better of on the AGACF forum where In my view they advertise bringing down AOPA, their administrator has been sending out emails to organizations with an address to give out damaging information, of course that would probably the information they want you to hear not the truth. AGACF the forum where most people visit once and never return, at least most people are constructive on pprune.

[Poox]

I see Ms ExPres is on the AOPA forum threatening litigation again. WELL - THAT'S A SURPRISE.

GET a life, love.....

[Bart Ifonly]

Poison dwarf, what a fitting name. Yes i would be much better off on AGACF than here in cowards castle.

[poison_dwarf]

Poox

I noticed that litigation lils post has appeared on the AGACF forum, well now how does that work? An ex-pres attempts to bring down the board because it does not do what it’s told and jump through the hoops when told to do so, joins forces with the same forum that in my view has attempted to bring down AOPA since it started.

Now how does this jigsaw fit together? What is the common denominator? Well in my view AOPA boards have had internal fighting for a number of years now, at least 4 or 5 that I can remember. One director has been on the board all that time. Rumors have it that the same director was passing out AGACF leaflets at an AOPA function.

Call me sinister but what is the real agenda here?

Perhaps when they whittle AOPA's membership down to nothing we will have a new organization. I wonder what the website would be (AGACF home page) perhaps? Or maybe after its founder the person that brought down AOPA.

Bart Ifonly

Go back to using you real name on AGACF or perhaps moderate the truth, as it seems to be the case on that forum. In my view that forum is a joke it cannot even stick to a policy, maybe that’s because the moderator only moderates the truth?

[poison_dwarf]

d_concord

Just realised who you were. Must be so hard for you, who actually wears the trousers?

[MaxyB]

Fom what I hear, the AOPA board are doing fine. I hear they are working on new strategic direction. I reckon we should all contact them and let them know what where we want GA to go. (And I don't mean crap about the past). All the phone numbers and email addresses are in the mag.

I'm going to, because I want a viable aviation lobby group in this country, one that I have a say in, not one that is run by rich men with ther own agenda.

Happy Chrissie flyers!;)

[d_concord]

Hi Poison Drawf,

If you knew who I was you certianly wouldn't have written what you did. Wrong again!

However, note that you have just registered and all you have done is spew vitriol on all and sundry in this topic and others on the same subject without any constructive debate or logical defense of AOPA's position. So what is your other nick? I doubt that a new forum member would act the way you have.

The reality is that I suspected Gaunt had done what it turn's out he did and alluded to it in my first postings on this topic. I however without proof didn't expouse it.

I don't even suggest that the conflict was thought of, or that the intention was to favour himself with the selectors for the esteemed position for which he applied as I don't know. It really doesn't matter, you not only have to do the right thing, you have to be seen to do the right thing. (However I do admit that CASA have chosen the right person though!). It also doesn't matter whether the conflict was intentional or a mistake, the same outcome results and let's hope that this isn't a big error for the industry as a whole. The decision to withdraw with working with the democrates is tainted either way and in question.

The current board only diminish themselves by not being able to acknowledge that this was all wrong, that a board member acted while having a conflict. Instead of facing the issue they instead go on the attack with the one person who acknowledged the issue and felt strongly enough to put herself on the line in an effort to defend the correct position. Some lied and now have had to confirm the truth which has further cast their individual integrity into doubt and this is a shame where Bertram is concerned because I personally felt that he was a quite a capable advocate (and to some extent still do).

The issue here is not if the legislation is correct, it's whether the AOPA board goings on are appropriate.

The result of all this is that AOPA is now gridlocked in it's own politics, it's representation is in question by those organisations with which it is supposedly negotiating as GA's self appointed representative, and also with those people it supposedly represents. "I" feel AOPA is badly wounded as a representative organisation. In fact I think it's irrelevant now. It has given power to AUSAC in a way that money couldn't buy. Time will tell.

If this is about going forward, looking to the future etc as so many say, then surely AOPA needs to acknowledge the mistake of the past so the industry can be sure they are not likley to make it again. But they don't, they just lie, defend the indefensible and insult members or people with a differing opinion. Very representative!!!

Anyway, enough of this, the truth is out and it's up to AOPA to go forward, Fix the problems which they won't do by denial, however as can be seen, they are their own worst enemy so let's not hold our breath.

[bonez]

d_concord



By what criteria are they doing a good job? It looks more like a dissaster.

first time in many years i have seen the pres on tv... thats a start.. whats more it is good to see the egos going out the back door


The result of all this is that AOPA is now gridlocked in it's own politics, it's representation is in question by those organisations with which it is supposedly negotiating as GA's self appointed representative, and also with those people it supposedly represents. "I" feel AOPA is badly wounded as a representative organisation. In fact I think it's irrelevant now. It has given power to AUSAC in a way that money couldn't buy. Time will tell.

d-c please explain?


my feeling now is that the management is the best it has been since patroni

now lets get on with it

[gaunty]

d_concord

Anyway, enough of this, the truth is out and it's up to AOPA to go forward, Fix the problems which they won't do by denial, however as can be seen, they are their own worst enemy so let's not hold our breath.

May I suggest that your version of the truth is not even close and your sources disingenuous.

You may if you care to read it, find the Dec AOPA in a mailbox near you this week, instructive.

Coupla simple things you need some instruction on.

There was not then or at any time a so called "conflict of interest".

I did not apply for the position, it was not advertised.

It was the subject of an executive search by a world class executive search firm.

I was invited to interview and both the Pres and other VP were advised as a matter of principle before I accepted.

The list was supposed to be and has since remained highly confidential except for my name which was made public here within 48 hours????

In the end they found exactly the right man.

I was advised that the search was concluded the preferred candidate identified and final negotiations were taking place in late August, some weeks before the "notice of motion to disallow" was gained and way before the Regs 1988 issue was brought to a head on the 27th October.
The appointment could not be made before the Civil Aviation Amendment Act 2003 was passed which also contained the new softer enforcement regime whose operation also required the Regs 19898 to be in effect.

Read the Ministers Letter in the AOPA mag, there are two serious wins for AOPA in it and a demonstration of why it was pivotal to the working of the new Act.

There are still a couple of Board members backed by a huge majority of about 3 or 4 other members who continue to try and destabilise AOPA and have been doing so since the last election, in the interests of "members rights". Well I guess the members, as they should, will decide at the next election whether they agree with them or not.

There is a great deal made of the so called calamitous end of GA as we know it, as a result of AOPA's "rolling over" on "strict liability" by "allowing" the Regs 1988 amendment to pass, all of course as a result of my personal intervention.
The same sort of tabloid journalism and PR that we complain about here so often.
"Airliner death plunge" after there is a routine inflight shutdown.

Gets attention drives the troops onto the guns but does not want to go near the facts.
I am vaguely flattered that there are some who ascribe such powerful influence and personality to me, that I am able to singlehandedly deceive and manipulate AOPA, the Government, CASA and the Dems.

I can only refer you to Creampuffs post on this issue which gives the lie to some of the fatuous statements made around here on it.

There is another Director of AOPA who previously held a much more senior position than now, who had aspirations to employment as the Deputy Director of CASA, which was advertised, whom it appears did not have any issues of conflict at the time.

But then I've been around here long enough to understand that the truth is not important to the many who cover themselves in self righteousness for a cause for the same reason that the wolf wears a sheepskin.

There will always be some who play the old cowards castle game of asserting a certain thing then threatening to sue any one who says otherwise. There is an inevitable result of that.

You will not find me doing so, I do not need to, I am well enough know around these parts for a good many years for most to be able to work out whats what and what isn't.

I have had many a puzzled call from people who know me well, trying to reconcile the evil person being portrayed with the one that they actually know. They are not disappointed.

I hear tell that the residents of a loony bin near you are rioting, they have either stopped taking their medication or are finding that their peculiar version of "free speech" actually does carry responsibilities and has come back to bite them.

AOPA is NOT gridlocked and is going forward even more strongly and is doing just fine thank you.

[Poox]

MaxyB

Sounds like a good idea.

I'd like to see AOPA representing me - a private pilot who doesn't want to see the costs of flying go up anymore.

As far as direction goes, I'd like AOPA to pressure the transport minister to deliver a GA policy.

I believe the current board understands this and is working towards it.

Have a happy new year too!

[snarek]

D-Concorde.

I have a lot of time for Marjorie, but she has moved on.

AOPA is doing very well, the majority of Directors are working towards a better GA WITHOUT the personalities. The current Board will no longer tolerate personality above GA!!!

As for the problems, yes there are a few. I challenge you to find the common denominator on this Board and previous ones where disharmony has been a problem.

As for Gary gaunt, what if he were to stand again next year and was re-elected, would you repspect the members' confidence in him, or just keep sniping???

AK

[gaunty]

Like AK I'm proud to be one of the 19,999,999 likewise.

Maxy B points up a mystery to me.

My number along with all the other Directors is in the mag along with our emails.

Funny thing is, I have had many calls from members with constructive and proactive comments and yes even the odd "good onyer"

But I have not had ONE that has challenged me for the facts or rationale for my or the Boards decisions.

I think the others have had a similar experience.

As Prof. Sumner Miller would say "Why is this so?"

Is it because they are not interested in the facts or feel intimidated by me/us.

The former seems likely the latter unlikely.???:confused:

[d_concord]

Snarek,

If Gaunt is elected again next year, I'd say good on him, AOPA would have a good person and I would hope that he doesn't get involved in an apparent conflict of interest again. If he does he needs to choose and do the right thing.

I would hope that the board in general would be able to handle it a lot better and in particular not perpetuate the issue by not exactly telling the truth.

I've made my point, I don't think anyone has come up with a defensible position for what went on, I just say it should have been handled better after the event.

AOPA is not the first board to get caught up in these sorts of things and won't be the last, but there is plenty of evidence on how to handle these sorts of things.

I would also hope that processes be put in place to make sure that there is ownership through consensous on the board and that doesn't mean everyone's agreement. What is the use of having a president or chairman(person) if you don't keep them informed and people act unilaterily.

I read the directors reports in AOPA lat night adnd I see Bertram explanation and then I see another drectors reply to Murphy?. That other reply was the first time someone said it was wrong and came up with constructive ways to go forward. There might be hope for you yet.

And as for sniping!. Except for Dwarf I don't think i have taken a personal swipe at anyone.

[pesawat_terbang]

Seems Mr Kerans has called their bluff over on the Gerriatric Q-Captain anti-GA Whinge Forum.

Heh heh, he did an insult count after being threatened with censorship, seems it was Mitchell 86 him 12 and he gets threatened.

Just shows there must be a hidden agenda over there.

Jangan Gidu Dong!!!!!

PT

[d_concord]

Gaunty,

I didn't see your post this morning so apologise for just reponding to snarek. It does deserve a considered reply however I am having to do things aviation (and Crissy things) until early next week and will respond then.

I will make the point between now and then that at no stage have I suggested I thought you evil( or any lesser adjective for that matter.) It's not the issue. As I keep saying the perception is as important as the reality sometimes. The issue also hasn't been the conflict or apparent conflict, it's been how the Pagani issue has been handled, the statements, the withdawal and correction of statements etc.

I actually rejoined AOPA after watching your considered posts, the principles your faction put forward and hoped that the mire that AOPA has got itself into since the Patroni days may be over. What do we get but more of the same.

The shame here is that now AOPA though it's own internal goings on have lost the effort of two capable, good people and damaged it's reputation in the process.

You being one of the two and Pagani being the other, however if I read anything into Snareks post you may be up for a comeback. Not knowing Pagani, I can only assume she won't so that is a loss to Aopa and an aviation industry in decline.

[Snarek007]

This months AOPA Mag look's quite good too. AOPA is starting to look up and get back on track with things.

[C182 Drover]

http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec/fact_sheet6.aspx

Transport Security
General Aviation


Aircraft theft measures
General aviation aircraft including private/corporate non-jet aircraft that are not required to have a security program will be required to put measures in place to reduce the risk of theft. :mad:

Practical measures to mitigate against the risk of theft would be determined by the aircraft operators as appropriate and might include fitting auxiliary locks (for example to propellers or prop controls), securing aircraft in hangers or fitting door locks.

DOTARS Transport Security Investigators will be auditing compliance and undertaking random compliance checking in relation to aircraft anti-theft measures.

Background checking and licensing of pilots
All pilots and trainee pilots will be required to undertake background checking prior to being issued with new photographic licences by 1 July 2004.

Ensuring that pilots and trainee pilots are subject to background checking will reduce the likelihood of persons who might pose a threat to aviation gaining access to aircraft through legitimate means.

The cost of background checking and the photographic licence will be borne by individual pilots. Licences will be valid for two years and will cost around $200. :mad:

Please note: Sport aircraft are not included in the category of aircraft required to be secured from theft. Background checking will not be carried out on pilots of sport aircraft and they will not be required to have a photographic licence.

[gaunty]

AOPA have attended the DOTARS briefing with the airlines and peak industry body and will be formulating our response over the break.

There are a number of proactive alternatives being considered that can deliver a win win solution for us all.

I, personally, don't believe it will be necessary to man the barricades and roll out the tumbrils.

And whilst I am on the subject, when I were a lad, getting an pilot license issued was a similar process to getting a passport. That is positive identification, birth certificate, signed passport photo, the whole schlemeil.

The issue of a license then allowed you to operate as a crew member or exercise the privilege of your license internationally using the license without necessarily the benefit of a Passport .

Why should it now be any different?


In the meantime if you have any ideas we would be grateful to hear them.

Andrew Kerans is running with this for the moment

[email protected]

[Snarek007]

Let's hope AOPA & ASA can see this defeated;

The cost of background checking and the photographic licence will be borne by individual pilots. Licences will be valid for two years and will cost around $200.

Practical measures to mitigate against the risk of theft would be determined by the aircraft operators as appropriate and might include fitting auxiliary locks (for example to propellers or prop controls), securing aircraft in hangers or fitting door locks.

I see on couple of other major forums there has been some real heated debate.