RAAUS shares aircraft owner details with airport operators

[Squawk7700]

It has been a long time coming and will cop them a lot of flak, but better for everyone in the end you'd have to think.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/711x545/raaus_8d69662b3ae1c34ccab3843a90d7b084d5d0c30d.jpg

[mullokintyre]

Can I ask where you got this info??
Been searching on RAAUS site and can't seem to find any mention of it.
Mick

[Capn Bloggs]

Shot himself in the foot with the last paragraph!

[YPJT]

Cant remember their names but two gentlemen from RAAUS gave a presentation at the AAA national convention in Brisbane two weeks ago. It was announced there that this would be occurring. They did ask that airport operators treat RAAUS fairly in applying their charges. I guess it will be a mixed bag in that regard to how that goes.

[mullokintyre]

Well, that would seem to fly in the face of the statements made in the Magazine last year.
RAAUS MAGAZINE (https://issuu.com/raaus/docs/67_sport_pilot_mar_2017/17)

Mick

[Horatio Leafblower]

I like the little mutual back scratch clause.... Only available to those airports which join up with AAA. Nice work Linke.
Some people would call that collusion... or is it just coercion?

[YPJT]

Some people would call that collusion... or is it just coercion?
I was having similar thoughts on that point

[KRviator]

Interesting tosee how this new annoucement doesn't comply with their own RAAus Privacy Policy (https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/pol-2017-20-privacy-policy.pdf).

RAAus only collects personal information that is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to the functions or activities of the RAAus (APP 3.1). The types of personal information that we generally collect and hold will include:
• Personal contact details
• Personnel/employee records including educational or professional qualifications
• Credit card application records
• Information in delegations
• Staff conflict of interest declarations
• Information in ministerial correspondence
• Freedom of Information applications
• Details of persons who attended RAAus training courses
• Mailing and subscription lists
• Contract, tender and submission documents
• Financial payment records
• Records for legal proceedings
• Complaint and feedback information
• Investigation records including witness statements, flight crew licences, training and qualification details, investigator’s notes and interview reports
• Records of notifications of accidents and incidents
• Next of kin contact details, and
• Age, health status and medical records supply by the memberThey then say why they are collecting our data:
4.2. Why RAAus collects and holds personal information
4.2.1. Aircraft and Membership Personal information is collected by RAAus for the primary purpose of Membership requirements, services and benefits to Members relating to their Aircraft and Membership needs. We also collect personal information to assist in identifying ways in which we can serve you better, such as providing our products and services to you more effectively, and to assist our internal administration and operations including accounting, risk management, record keeping, archiving, systems development and testing, and staff training. Some of the information we collect is for the purpose of improving our interaction with Members and their involvement with RAAus. We collect personal information about third parties, including family members, for purposes of contacting in the case of an emergency for the purposes set out in this Privacy Policy. Failure to provide the information sought by RAAus for the purposes detailed may not enable the company to complete the membership process or any specific service requested.Then you go to Section 5 about their disclosure of this information:

5.3. Use and disclosure of personal information
RAAus will only use and/or disclose personal information for the purposes for which it was collected (the primary purpose), unless an individual has consented to another use [APP 6]. There are certain limited circumstances in which RAAus may use or disclose information for a different purpose (a secondary purpose) without consent, such as where the secondary purpose is:
• directly related to the primary purpose for which the information was collected
• required or authorised under an Australian law or has been ordered by a court or tribunal
• necessary to lessen or prevent an immediate and serious threat to the life, safety of air navigation, health or safety of any individual, or public health or safety
• to facilitate the investigation of an occurrence involving an RAAus registered aircraft and the death or serious injury of one or more persons
• a permitted general situation or health situation, as defined by the Privacy Act; or
• an enforcement related activity and the use or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary.

If RAAus uses or discloses personal information for a purpose other than what it was originally collected for, RAAus will keep a written notice of that use or disclosure as required by the APPs

I do not mind paying my fair share of landing fees - but when you look at the local airport charging $275.00 for an hour of circuits (No, I didn't misplace the decimal point) for my <600Kg RAAus-registered RV, then I'm going to have an issue with RAAus passing on my details. I note the entry for Warnervale Airport on AvData's page does not align to what Council says they will charge, either...AvData says $7.50 exc-GST (per landing, so still $82.50/hour), but Council says $27.50 (https://search.s.centralcoast.nsw.gov.au/documents/00/21/34/75/0021347586.pdf) and the local aero club (https://www.ccac.com.au/aerodrome/) (who operate the field for Council) say it is $15.50 per landing...:ugh: :ugh:

[Squawk7700]

Interesting tosee how this new annoucement doesn't comply with their own RAAus Privacy Policy (https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/pol-2017-20-privacy-policy.pdf).


Thats easy... just change it!

They have already been giving it to the ATO in accordance with their policy supposedly. Stuffs up those pensioners that own an aircraft and wanted to keep it private. A friend once proudly said to me, “the form from Centrelink said, do you own other assets like a boat or caravan, so he ticked NO.” It didn’t ask if he owned an aircraft !

[Vag277]

This announcement is in the latest issue of Sport Pilot.
KRAviator: The final statement in your quote on the use of information provides for supply of data to AAA or any aerodrome operator.
I was interested to read of the charges for circuits. Many aerodromes treat circuits in one session as one landing .I would check to see if that is the case.
The AvData site shows: YWVAWarnervale AirportNSWLanding* <=700kg $7.50 flat, 701kg-2,000kg $14.09 per tonne, 2,001kg-3,000kg $16.50 per tonne, >3,000kg $21.00 per tonne. Parking $5.45 per day.while the aero club site shows the equivalent of $14.09 +GST/tonne

[KRviator]

This announcement is in the latest issue of Sport Pilot.
KRAviator: The final statement in your quote on the use of information provides for supply of data to AAA or any aerodrome operator.How do you get that? The primary purpose of collecting my personal info was to manage my membership of a RAAO and the aircraft registration as part of that RAAO.

They are permitted to disclose it to the ATO, or otherwise as permitted by law, for SAR purposes etc, not to a private company or local government entity. The only requirement of that last paragraph is that if they do disclose it for a purpose that is not the primary purpose, they must keep a written record of doing so.

I was interested to read of the charges for circuits. Many aerodromes treat circuits in one session as one landing .Warnervale do, if you are doing Dual training. If I am simply flying laps to keep current myself, they charge you per landing.

The AvData site shows: YWVAWarnervale AirportNSWLanding* <=700kg $7.50 flat, 701kg-2,000kg $14.09 per tonne, 2,001kg-3,000kg $16.50 per tonne, >3,000kg $21.00 per tonne. Parking $5.45 per day.while the aero club site shows the equivalent of $14.09 +GST/tonneI am well aware of what AvData say they charge. But then you look at the CCAC (airfield operator) website and it shows $15.50, and the Council (airfield owner) shows $27.50.

[aroa]

RAOz...are they learning from CAsA how to be take-over merchants and be top of the heap.?
...Regarding privacy issues of which statements appear very 'rubbery' are you aware that your ASIC/AVID picture is now in the CAsA system. ???
How come? Did you concur to that ? I did you sign a release note? Did they even ask ?
Are big flowery Privacy Statements even worth a rats rear end ??
Or is it that bureaucrazies just believe they can do what they like when it suits, regardless of the wording, or lack of it.

[YPJT]

are you aware that your ASIC/AVID picture is now in the CAsA system. ???
CASA administer the AVID system, in whatever form that still exists, so no surprises there.
As for photos being on the CASA system. If RAAUS handed over their ASIC records to CASA when they pulled the pin from being an issuing body, every affected individual would have been contacted to seek approval. If not, I'd be asking some questions as to why.

[Squawk7700]

... and the private company that printed the cards has all of our photos (unless of course RAaus did it themselves on a printer).

[Clare Prop]

Avdata charges are ex-GST hence the difference.

I understood that fees were sent to RA Aus so they could pass them on to the member, I guess this wasn't working?

It's always seemed unfair that the privacy of membership and issues of assets being hidden meant that GA and ratepayers had to subside these people so they could use aviation infrastructure for free.

[Squawk7700]

I understood that fees were sent to RA Aus so they could pass them on to the member, I guess this wasn't working?

They were doing that a long time back but then publicly advised they were stopping due to the cost of the work involved to pass on the invoices and postage etc., so it has been a while and as you say, they have been getting off scott-free.

[KRviator]

It's always seemed unfair that the privacy of membership and issues of assets being hidden meant that GA and ratepayers had to subside these people so they could use aviation infrastructure for free.No more unfair than the Central Coast Council not charging boaties to use any of the 50-something boat ramps across the LGA, for example. Imagine the outcry if they said "Wanna launch your 4m tinny? No worries, that'll be $25, thank you". :mad:

Maybe I should run for Mayor....:}

[Clare Prop]

Yes good point, but in this case GA and airlines were being slugged and RAAus were getting free access so it was one rule for them and another for the rest of us.

[Squawk7700]

$22 to launch any length of boat at the Williamstown boat ramp in Melbourne.

It’s all about how broke the council is at the time.

[Vag277]

KRAviator
Check the details
03.10008 Local Warnervale Based Aircraft NOT being used as part of a business - Resident rate (1 airport usage charge per 20 minute block for circuit operations, otherwise per landing)
03.10009 Up to 700 kgs (certified maximum take-off weight) MTOW Per 20 minute block for circuits otherwise per landing 5 $7.50 - $0.75 $8.25

See https://cdn.centralcoast.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/annual-reports/2018-2019/financials/feesandcharges2018-19.pdf

Do your circuits in 20 minute blocks

[MagnumPI]

I do not mind paying my fair share of landing fees - but when you look at the local airport charging $275.00 for an hour of circuits (No, I didn't misplace the decimal point) for my <600Kg RAAus-registered RV, then I'm going to have an issue with RAAus passing on my details. I note the entry for Warnervale Airport on AvData's page does not align to what Council says they will charge, either...AvData says $7.50 exc-GST (per landing, so still $82.50/hour), but Council says $27.50 (https://search.s.centralcoast.nsw.gov.au/documents/00/21/34/75/0021347586.pdf) and the local aero club (https://www.ccac.com.au/aerodrome/) (who operate the field for Council) say it is $15.50 per landing...:ugh: :ugh:

I just wanted to correct you on a few important points.

The Central Coast Aero Club does not operate/manage the Central Coast Airport. Per ERSA, the AD OPR is Central Coast Council.
The Central Coast Aero Club continues to strongly oppose the current landing fee structure imposed by Central Coast Council and has done so ever since it was introduced.
The landing fees charged by Central Coast Council for local non-Aero Club aircraft is charged per 20 minute block, and per landing for itinerant aircraft.

It wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment any further but I don't think it is fair to suggest that the Central Coast Aero Club has done anything other than try to promote aviation through safe flight training and community events, unfortunately our hands are tied when it comes to certain Council matters...

[Jetjr]

(Regional councils will love this idea, some recently increased runway lengths for one RPT carrier, gave land to build a community funded emergency helo base, this justified raising land rents at airport by 100% and they can do this rise annually if they like
They DO charge per circuit landing too.
"please treat RAA fairly" is the best they ask for when sharing data!!!!!!
Surely administering these charges at sub 100x movement/day airports would out weight much of the benefit.

[KRviator]

Thats easy... just change it!
They have already been giving it to the ATO in accordance with their policy supposedly. Stuffs up those pensioners that own an aircraft and wanted to keep it private. A friend once proudly said to me, “the form from Centrelink said, do you own other assets like a boat or caravan, so he ticked NO.” It didn’t ask if he owned an aircraft !Ain't it strange....:confused:

When you email the CEO asking under what authority they are disclosing our information, they say "Oh, we updated the Privacy Policy in August. You must be looking at an old one!". UUhhhh, Nope. Nice try, though.

Now, I linked the most current version at 0730 yesterday morning, that was "Version 2.1" that was approved for use from May 2017. The new version is "Version 2.0" approved for use from 1st August 2018 that includes the following: 5.3. Use and disclosure of personal information
RAAus will only use and/or disclose personal information for the purposes for which it was collected (the primary purpose), unless an individual has consented to another use [APP 6]. There are certain limited circumstances in which RAAus may use or disclose information for a different purpose (a secondary purpose) without consent, such as where the secondary purpose is:
• directly related to the primary purpose for which the information was collected
• required or authorised under an Australian law or has been ordered by a court or tribunal
• necessary to lessen or prevent an immediate and serious threat to the life, safety of air navigation, health or safety of any individual, or public health or safety
• to facilitate the investigation of an occurrence involving an RAAus registered aircraft and the death or serious injury of one or more persons
•a permitted general situation or health situation, as defined by the Privacy Act
• an enforcement related activity and the use or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary or
• for the purposes of collecting fees associated with airport use and access.

If RAAus uses or discloses personal information for a purpose other than what it was originally collected for, RAAus will keep a written notice of that use or disclosure as required by the APPs.

Of course, this begs the question, for those members (Every existing member prior to 01 August 2018), so far as I can tell, they have not been notified about the change to the privacy policy, have no alternative to opt-out, and are presumably operating under the belief that they have provided information to RAAus that will be kept confidential, IAW the "V2.1" policy. So what happens when you give information to acompany in good faith, and in accordance with their extant privacy policy, but said company then says "We changed our policy, we're now going to sell your data!"?

[Vag277]

So what are you miffed about? Disclosure of your data, same as 15,000+ VH registered aircraft owners, or having to pay?

[Squawk7700]

Apple et al, update their T&C's on a very regular basis. It is what it is. If you don't like it, you unsubscribe, or in this case, register your aircraft under a company name or some other form of covert arrangement like, um, perhaps a PO Box!

[kaz3g]

... and the private company that printed the cards has all of our photos (unless of course RAaus did it themselves on a printer).

I thought all those photos were stolen when AvID was hacked by the Russians.

never did hear an apology from them or an explanation.

kaz

[YPJT]

never did hear an apology from them or an explanation.
What do you expect from an outfit that still refers to DOTARS on the home page of their website.

It is the other issuing bodies they really should be apologising to. Thanks to their ineptness cyber security compliance bills of between $20K and $30K are common. Guess who will be paying for that. Say goodbye to your $220 - $240 ASICs folks.

[Kranz]

Apple et al, update their T&C's on a very regular basis. It is what it is. If you don't like it, you unsubscribe, or in this case, register your aircraft under a company name or some other form of covert arrangement like, um, perhaps a PO Box!

The issue under discussion doesn't really concern me, but to your point Squawk, at least when Apple update their T&C's you are required to acknowledge that it has occurred every single time it happens. I certainly do not agree with an organisation amending their T&C's on a whim and providing NO notification of such - very unprofessional and unethical.

[ContactMeNow]

Don't stress, it's the airport operators that will be given the data, not 'commercial' entities (AVDATA). So unless the airport bills directly, there would be no way that AVDATA can have your information under the agreement.

[KRviator]

Don't stress, it's the airport operators that will be given the data, not 'commercial' entities (AVDATA). So unless the airport bills directly, there would be no way that AVDATA can have your information under the agreement.As I asked the RAAus CEO: "What protection is there for member data once it is passed on to third parties, given they are obviously not subject to the RAAus privacy policy?"

<Deafening silence>

[nonsense]

No more unfair than the Central Coast Council not charging boaties to use any of the 50-something boat ramps across the LGA, for example. Imagine the outcry if they said "Wanna launch your 4m tinny? No worries, that'll be $25, thank you". :mad:

Maybe I should run for Mayor....:}
Charging to use and to park boat trailers near launching ramps is normal in Melbourne and as far east as Port Welshpool (north of Wilson's Prom.
The ramp at Port Albert, 20km further east, is free, as are all ramps on the Gippsland Lakes.

I would think the misuse of personal details (privacy) ought to have killed this deal stone dead.

[mullokintyre]

Because I was bored, I decided to look at the constitution of the the company that controls RAAUS.
Its a limited liability company limited by $1 per member.
There is nothing I could find in the constitution about advancing the benefits to members.
However, the Charter of membership states that one of its purposes and aims is " To defend vigorously, and lobby for the best interests of the membership."
One of the interesting articles is this one about the register of members, and what info on each member must be kept
v. Such information as the Directors shall require of each Member concerning his or her interest in any aircraft, any licence, certificate or entitlement of whatsoever description and kind to do with any matter regarding aviation, whether the same is or may be required by any Australian aviation authority with power to require such information or otherwise as the Directors shall decide.
Note that it says ANY aircraft or license. So they could demand that GA pilots, ATPL pilots, helo pilots , even military pilots provide them information of they also are a member of RAAUS.

Mick

[poteroo]

Evading landing fees via a contrivance in an organisations' internal rules just doesn't pass the 'pub' test on fairness. If RAAus aircraft owners don't want to pay their way - the solution is simple: just don't land anywhere that charges landing fees. Many airports have an 'annual' fee which covers unlimited operations, eg, in our case it is around $190 pa, or, you cough up $11/day. My RAAus flying school aircraft attracts an annual fee of about $700, which hurts a bit, but in the scheme of things, seems fair. As an organisation, RAAus will enter the grown-up ranks with this decision: arguing about constitutions and rules is mere semantics. And if you think the deal with AAA is all 'one-way' then standby. happy days,

[Ng5]

Correct. RAAus pilots will never be taken seriously whilever we skulk around the place not paying our way and appearing to bludge on GA . Running an airport is a very expensive business and the good old days of DCA picking up the tab are gone forever. And before you ask I did start flying in 1969 and remember DCA fondly.

[cowl flaps]

For sure. If RAAus aircraft operators don't want to pay landing fees,- make the aerodrome VH rego aircraft only.

Let the RAAus people go and pick a suitable paddock to land, and hope the owner doesn't pepper their buzzbox with a 12 gauge.

[Ng5]

RAAaus really started this problem about three years ago when they decided to stop providing owner details to Avdata etc. This was justified as a cost saving measure at the time. Since then there have been regular platitudes and admonishments in Sport Pilot advising owners to provide their details to Avdata voluntarily. But seriously???

[Jetjr]

They. never provided details to avdata, Avdat were sending invoices to them which they were printing amd mailing to members. Costing money, iAvdata got paid and made profit.
if landing fees were being collected for services related to small aircrafts interests would be less of an issue than extending runways, security and carparks. RAA members maybe less resistant
casa sharing details is also a breach or privacy.

[Ng5]

Well that may be so but until about 3 years ago I was being billed by email and snail mail with invoices which purported to come from Avdata.