AOPA "The Election" (merged)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Censorship
Axiom:
Chris McKeown's censorship of the Magazine and now the wilful interference of the Company Secretary's election notice is beyond contempt and it will be interesting to see what your B Team man has to say about it. Gratifying is your and other posts that indicate the non-condoning of this bizzare behaviour.
The acting President has no authority to alter or censor the Secretary's notice/s without a resolution of the board.
Moreover, he is a caretaker president with absolutely NO mandate from the membership or the board to censor the Magazine. The May edition of the Magazine is about to go to press and the AOPA membership will be oblivious as to what other material has been removed or altered, what articles or letters to the editor have been "lost" or excluded.
I should add that I have the utmost respect for the integrity and competence of the editor who is a professional journalist that must be experiencing difficult times having a censor now approving all his material.
Proxies:
Because of recent developments I think that there is reason for grave concern about the processing of proxy votes for the AGM. AOPA is required to have a responsible entity to receive and register the proxies. I have sent an email to the caretaker President asking what arrangements have been made to ensure the integrity of the proxies and to advise who is currently the Company Secretary and Treasurer. I will post the reply.
Russell
Chris McKeown's censorship of the Magazine and now the wilful interference of the Company Secretary's election notice is beyond contempt and it will be interesting to see what your B Team man has to say about it. Gratifying is your and other posts that indicate the non-condoning of this bizzare behaviour.
The acting President has no authority to alter or censor the Secretary's notice/s without a resolution of the board.
Moreover, he is a caretaker president with absolutely NO mandate from the membership or the board to censor the Magazine. The May edition of the Magazine is about to go to press and the AOPA membership will be oblivious as to what other material has been removed or altered, what articles or letters to the editor have been "lost" or excluded.
I should add that I have the utmost respect for the integrity and competence of the editor who is a professional journalist that must be experiencing difficult times having a censor now approving all his material.
Proxies:
Because of recent developments I think that there is reason for grave concern about the processing of proxy votes for the AGM. AOPA is required to have a responsible entity to receive and register the proxies. I have sent an email to the caretaker President asking what arrangements have been made to ensure the integrity of the proxies and to advise who is currently the Company Secretary and Treasurer. I will post the reply.
Russell
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There is nothing stopping someone attending the AGM after having given a proxy, but I think AOPA will be better served at the AGM if we do not encourage this." (McKeown 29/4/03).
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Git???
Axiom
I checked, found out that who I thought you were was correct and was about to let everyone know, so they could put a (candidate's) name to your insulting ravings.
Then I was asked not to. I really don't understand why this person asked that, given the attacks you have made on him here, but I accept now that it is not done.
I am surprised that, given the 'rules' for posting here, you haven't been banned.
I look forward to a new AOPA, one without the style epitomised by yourself, Hamilton and McKeown. An AOPA focussed on us, pilots, rather than your egos.
Good-day to you.
Pat.
I checked, found out that who I thought you were was correct and was about to let everyone know, so they could put a (candidate's) name to your insulting ravings.
Then I was asked not to. I really don't understand why this person asked that, given the attacks you have made on him here, but I accept now that it is not done.
I am surprised that, given the 'rules' for posting here, you haven't been banned.
I look forward to a new AOPA, one without the style epitomised by yourself, Hamilton and McKeown. An AOPA focussed on us, pilots, rather than your egos.
Good-day to you.
Pat.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proxies:
Mr Keown advises that a safe has been provided to house the proxies when received and directors do not have access
to the safe. The Company Secretary will adjudicate the proxies and keep a register. Mr Keown also advises that the Company Secretary until the AGM is Ms Julie Mahlberg (AOPA's bookkeeper) and that the Treasurer is himself. I can vouch for Julie's integrity.
My guess is that most of the proxies will be directed to the Chairman (ie Chris McKeown) so it is of academic interest only. So the voting at the AGM is all over Rover, the Chairman will use his wad of proxies, as he is entitled to do. This is symptomatic of the bulk of the AOPA membership having no idea about the matters raised on pprune. All the members have is a censored Magazine.
Mr Lyon - where are you?
Many posts back you had someone ghost write a little contribution under your name. You were subsequently asked some fairly pointed questions but you did a scarper and haven't been seen since. Things too hot for you in the jungle? You more than anyone should come out of your den and give some explanations to the members. You lacked the guts to spill and you have never been voted in. Not a roaring success are you, eh?
Russell
Mr Keown advises that a safe has been provided to house the proxies when received and directors do not have access
to the safe. The Company Secretary will adjudicate the proxies and keep a register. Mr Keown also advises that the Company Secretary until the AGM is Ms Julie Mahlberg (AOPA's bookkeeper) and that the Treasurer is himself. I can vouch for Julie's integrity.
My guess is that most of the proxies will be directed to the Chairman (ie Chris McKeown) so it is of academic interest only. So the voting at the AGM is all over Rover, the Chairman will use his wad of proxies, as he is entitled to do. This is symptomatic of the bulk of the AOPA membership having no idea about the matters raised on pprune. All the members have is a censored Magazine.
Mr Lyon - where are you?
Many posts back you had someone ghost write a little contribution under your name. You were subsequently asked some fairly pointed questions but you did a scarper and haven't been seen since. Things too hot for you in the jungle? You more than anyone should come out of your den and give some explanations to the members. You lacked the guts to spill and you have never been voted in. Not a roaring success are you, eh?
Russell
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DIGNITY
Paddopat
No matter how surprised you are at being asked to keep the confidentiality, be proud that you did. We, the rank and file, have to maintain some dignity in AOPA for the benefit of the silent majority and as a demonstration to the Board.
Cheers
No matter how surprised you are at being asked to keep the confidentiality, be proud that you did. We, the rank and file, have to maintain some dignity in AOPA for the benefit of the silent majority and as a demonstration to the Board.
Cheers
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The plot is getting very thick
Postscript to my earlier post:
Boy this is getting complicated. Since my last post it has been alleged that more skulduggery has being going on in the AOPA caretaker President's bunker.
Chris McKeown advised me earlier today that he had been appointed the Treasurer and Julie Mahlberg the Company Secretary.
It is now claimed that the board has at no time had a meeting or passed a resolution regarding the appointments. The appointments were made by the caretaker President unilaterally according to my information.
I asked Chris for his explanation and he claims that directors were emailed about his decision ("and there was no objection") and the appointments will need to be ratified at the next board meeting. This seems to confirm that legally there is no Treasurer or Company Secretary.
Perhaps a director would care to enlighten we peasants?
Russell
Boy this is getting complicated. Since my last post it has been alleged that more skulduggery has being going on in the AOPA caretaker President's bunker.
Chris McKeown advised me earlier today that he had been appointed the Treasurer and Julie Mahlberg the Company Secretary.
It is now claimed that the board has at no time had a meeting or passed a resolution regarding the appointments. The appointments were made by the caretaker President unilaterally according to my information.
I asked Chris for his explanation and he claims that directors were emailed about his decision ("and there was no objection") and the appointments will need to be ratified at the next board meeting. This seems to confirm that legally there is no Treasurer or Company Secretary.
Perhaps a director would care to enlighten we peasants?
Russell
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Antechnius, Axiom or somebody -
Please tell me that this is all just a bad dream!
How can AOPA ever tackle the CASA isssues when the simple board machinery is incapable of working?
Mr McKeown seems to be running out of control. Marjorie Pagani, would like to hear what you have to say about this.
I too asked Mr Lyon some questions but he is somehow missing in action. Maybe I should leave these to the AGM. Received an interesting email today that claims that Mr Lyon's ghost writer is a Mr Mitchell in Perth. I have no idea who he might be and why Mr Lyon doesn't write his own pieces, perhaps someone could fill me in?
Must admit that I have become addicted to reading these posts. Never before have I found out so much about what has been going on behind the AOPA scenes. Much of it is alarming but I feel better informed as a result. Pity the other 4000 members (who doen't have a clue what some of their celebrated representatives have been up to) will remain in blissful ignorance.
What has amazed me is the length some people will go to for the sake of remaining in power. Seems that any dirty trick is OK. Maybe I am getting too old and naive but I would have hoped that AOPA was not the place for this kind of behaviour.
Please tell me that this is all just a bad dream!
How can AOPA ever tackle the CASA isssues when the simple board machinery is incapable of working?
Mr McKeown seems to be running out of control. Marjorie Pagani, would like to hear what you have to say about this.
I too asked Mr Lyon some questions but he is somehow missing in action. Maybe I should leave these to the AGM. Received an interesting email today that claims that Mr Lyon's ghost writer is a Mr Mitchell in Perth. I have no idea who he might be and why Mr Lyon doesn't write his own pieces, perhaps someone could fill me in?
Must admit that I have become addicted to reading these posts. Never before have I found out so much about what has been going on behind the AOPA scenes. Much of it is alarming but I feel better informed as a result. Pity the other 4000 members (who doen't have a clue what some of their celebrated representatives have been up to) will remain in blissful ignorance.
What has amazed me is the length some people will go to for the sake of remaining in power. Seems that any dirty trick is OK. Maybe I am getting too old and naive but I would have hoped that AOPA was not the place for this kind of behaviour.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Antechinas;
I have had 3 improper shutdown this afternoon while trying to post to this forum as promised.
(Who is in charge of communications in Australia today snarek?).
It appears Russell, that you have had more success with speaking to directors, dissimilating the information and posting your interprepations than I, and I cannot see any reason to give my findings or advices which go contrary to yours. We do have a Committee you know, and they are there to talk to, even if it means a breach of an unratified code of conduct.
By way of sniping back I must say that I admire the duplicity of some, when they accuse Hamilton of taking unilateral action with CASA on NPRM's and some others (who I won't name for fear of being sued), take it upon themselves to do likewise . Did the committee OK this ?
On matters of being sued, Paddy, tread carefully and take note of your Minder and proceed at your peril. (get a new phone book also). I know who you are thanks to your team's leaks and you may end up with egg on your face.
I think if you ask Woomera to check his "insultometer" he would agree that axiom's insults are in direct proportion to the incoming.
line edited out as being innappropriate
Axiom has never tried to "out" anyone.
And axiom has never posted an insult unless in response to a prior post.
Be this as it may and given my prior advice that I would not support any censorship of any political nature, I must say the following.
The AOPA Web site should not and never have a forum where people can get up and abuse the elected authority. This is an insult to the members who voted them in.
I would advocate that the Web site be totally pro AOPA and the insults of the disaffected left to another Web site. If this is Pprune, so be it, and I would also support AOPA advertise on same.
There is so much negative AOPA feeling on this site that it is counterproductive to the our future, and some should take note at least, of Snareks attempt top bring meaningful discussion to the forum in his other post.
I wonder how long it will take for this to be Hijacked as well.
Anyway, like I said, Antechinus, edited to correct pejorative spelling you are quoting McKeown, so you don't need to shoot axiom as the messenger any more.
good evening ladies.
Fair go emeus.
Be very careful you have my insultometer, trending in entirely the wrong direction and I would not like to hit the wrong target in this hall of mirrors here.
I have had 3 improper shutdown this afternoon while trying to post to this forum as promised.
(Who is in charge of communications in Australia today snarek?).
It appears Russell, that you have had more success with speaking to directors, dissimilating the information and posting your interprepations than I, and I cannot see any reason to give my findings or advices which go contrary to yours. We do have a Committee you know, and they are there to talk to, even if it means a breach of an unratified code of conduct.
By way of sniping back I must say that I admire the duplicity of some, when they accuse Hamilton of taking unilateral action with CASA on NPRM's and some others (who I won't name for fear of being sued), take it upon themselves to do likewise . Did the committee OK this ?
On matters of being sued, Paddy, tread carefully and take note of your Minder and proceed at your peril. (get a new phone book also). I know who you are thanks to your team's leaks and you may end up with egg on your face.
I think if you ask Woomera to check his "insultometer" he would agree that axiom's insults are in direct proportion to the incoming.
line edited out as being innappropriate
Axiom has never tried to "out" anyone.
And axiom has never posted an insult unless in response to a prior post.
Be this as it may and given my prior advice that I would not support any censorship of any political nature, I must say the following.
The AOPA Web site should not and never have a forum where people can get up and abuse the elected authority. This is an insult to the members who voted them in.
I would advocate that the Web site be totally pro AOPA and the insults of the disaffected left to another Web site. If this is Pprune, so be it, and I would also support AOPA advertise on same.
There is so much negative AOPA feeling on this site that it is counterproductive to the our future, and some should take note at least, of Snareks attempt top bring meaningful discussion to the forum in his other post.
I wonder how long it will take for this to be Hijacked as well.
Anyway, like I said, Antechinus, edited to correct pejorative spelling you are quoting McKeown, so you don't need to shoot axiom as the messenger any more.
good evening ladies.
Fair go emeus.
Be very careful you have my insultometer, trending in entirely the wrong direction and I would not like to hit the wrong target in this hall of mirrors here.
Last edited by Woomera; 30th Apr 2003 at 20:52.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tammany Hall
The penny is starting to drop for this old bloke -
1. Several emails from those said to be in the know, have told me that a Mr Mitchell ( ex WA AOPA board member) is the power broker for the B Team. It seems that Bill Hamilton and John Lyon worship the very ground or edited as innapropriate he stands on. The other B members (McKeown, Rudd and Murphie) also defer to his advice.
2. Axiom(s) is a murky conglomerate of these personalities. Now all this is OK, that's how pprune works but I now understand the dynamics and the motives.
3. The AGM is a fait accompli because the Chairman will have a large number of proxies that will be used to support the B team. I wonder if those defaulting their proxy to the Chairman understand this?
4. It is obvious that I have come around to giving support in this forum to the A Team. This was only after lurking for some time and reading, then re-reading the posts from the various contributors. At least they are not hiding behind non de plumes.
5. Mr Lyon won't answer the questions put to him, do we assume guilt or has he been directed by Mr Mitchell to remain silent?
1. Several emails from those said to be in the know, have told me that a Mr Mitchell ( ex WA AOPA board member) is the power broker for the B Team. It seems that Bill Hamilton and John Lyon worship the very ground or edited as innapropriate he stands on. The other B members (McKeown, Rudd and Murphie) also defer to his advice.
2. Axiom(s) is a murky conglomerate of these personalities. Now all this is OK, that's how pprune works but I now understand the dynamics and the motives.
3. The AGM is a fait accompli because the Chairman will have a large number of proxies that will be used to support the B team. I wonder if those defaulting their proxy to the Chairman understand this?
4. It is obvious that I have come around to giving support in this forum to the A Team. This was only after lurking for some time and reading, then re-reading the posts from the various contributors. At least they are not hiding behind non de plumes.
5. Mr Lyon won't answer the questions put to him, do we assume guilt or has he been directed by Mr Mitchell to remain silent?
Last edited by Woomera; 1st May 2003 at 16:17.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emeus
What you correctly describe as the use of Tammany Hall politics by this ¡§B¡¨ team is a disgrace and the real tragedy of this election.
Your point (1) is not proven, but neither is the Big Bang Theory
We do not have the services of the people, who analysed the TV broadcasts alleged to be Saddam, but we do know that if it walks, talks and quacks like a duck, then it most probably is a duck. I can hear the frantic scribbling of writs as the only means of ducking
or diverting real and civilised debate even as we speak.
It does them no service and by definition disenfranchises the very membership that they profess to be saving from us ¡§innocent incompetents¡¨.
If they really believed that the membership they profess to represent is sentient and capable of carrying out the simplest of decision making processes, they, the membership, are pilots after all, then they would be trusting them to look at the candidates profiles, assess what they have to say, make their own enquiries and then vote according to their conscience.
It appears from their actions subsequent to the close of nominations they found that their worst nightmare was at hand.
Most of the present Board were elected unopposed, I don¡¦t know who or which, maybe even Marjorie. Maybe even the current interim President who has assumed powers that even the Board does not have.
True Tammany Hall. "There are seats coming up, the membership won¡¦t notice we want you to nominate and you'll be right.¨ Mostly, by their lights, they get the 'nod' right, but occasionally make a mistake, usually as a result of hubris and suddenly have someone on the Board who won¡¦t play the game. In the old Tammany Hall days suchlike were usually made to disappear, in a manner that was a salutary lesson to others. Happily, nowadays they can only resort to marginalising them
I digress.
I don't need to review their activities again and their use of two "mouthpieces¨ here to spread their dubious propaganda, pervert the dissemination of important information in the AOPA that would be to their disadvantage and destabilise the discussion with the membership but it is entirely in the character of the mindermast, but sadly reflects unfavourably on Hamilton, whom, it is possible is an unwitting innocent.
Oh and on the subject of "mouthpieces¨. The "real" owner of the most garrulous of them is, if I am any judge, probably a beaut bloke and is probably an innocent too.
The perversion of the content of AOPA, the ONLY direct means of communication to the membership is immoral and unethical if not illegal.
Excluding "dissenting" = aren't on our side, members of the Board from the policy and editorial process even to the extent of denying them access to their own proofing, in order that unauthorised changes are not revealed until too late is NOT in the interests of the membership.
To the extent that a group of us have had to resort to considerable personal expense by placing advertisements addressing the membership via last and now this Fridays Aviation Section in The Australian in order to advise members, completely, of their rights and the other side of the argument censored from them.
The time wasted on their puerile and self serving antics has further disenfranchised the membership and wasted the memberships and our precious time just trying to keep the election process, legal and on the straight and level and NOT on debating the important policy differences and pressing issues, necessary for the membership to vote their conscience.
I am going to be self serving and suggest to those that are not already committed that they should vote against the team that so abuses their rights. Why would they expect them to listen to their concerns, when they so far appear to only be only interested in their own personal survival? Women and children first?
The President has acted to twice delete from the mag a formal statement by the Company Secretary, that the delivering of a proxy does NOT prevent the attendance of the member at the AGM.
One wonders at the motivation.
If they have delivered them to the President by default, then perhaps they should reconsider that delivery in the light of recent revelations.
Does he not want the members who have done so, to see which way he actually applies their precious vote ?
Perhaps he could explain the reasoning behind his alleged;
"There is nothing stopping someone attending the AGM after having given a proxy, but I think AOPA will be better served at the AGM if we do not encourage this." (McKeown 29/4/03).
Do the givers of proxy, understand that they can revoke them at any time prior to their use and redirect them to wherever they feel safest.
Or at the very least, check which way your proxyholder intends to vote their individual proxy on which matter.
The agenda will be in the May mag go figure.
If they are comfortable, that is their democratic right and they must accept the consequences.
We should be encouraging everyone who is able to attend either, to not give their proxy or if they have already done and will attend, revoke it.
However;
We do recognise that there are some amongst who would rather, as is their right, have someone else ¡§take the heat and stress¡¨ in what will undoubtedly be a "lively" AGM. If this is the case please ensure that your proxy is voted in the manner you intended.
Thank you. We respect support that has been hard won.
Maybe they understand that more people talk themselves into trouble than out of it.
What you correctly describe as the use of Tammany Hall politics by this ¡§B¡¨ team is a disgrace and the real tragedy of this election.
Your point (1) is not proven, but neither is the Big Bang Theory
We do not have the services of the people, who analysed the TV broadcasts alleged to be Saddam, but we do know that if it walks, talks and quacks like a duck, then it most probably is a duck. I can hear the frantic scribbling of writs as the only means of ducking
or diverting real and civilised debate even as we speak.It does them no service and by definition disenfranchises the very membership that they profess to be saving from us ¡§innocent incompetents¡¨.
If they really believed that the membership they profess to represent is sentient and capable of carrying out the simplest of decision making processes, they, the membership, are pilots after all, then they would be trusting them to look at the candidates profiles, assess what they have to say, make their own enquiries and then vote according to their conscience.
It appears from their actions subsequent to the close of nominations they found that their worst nightmare was at hand.
Most of the present Board were elected unopposed, I don¡¦t know who or which, maybe even Marjorie. Maybe even the current interim President who has assumed powers that even the Board does not have.
True Tammany Hall. "There are seats coming up, the membership won¡¦t notice we want you to nominate and you'll be right.¨ Mostly, by their lights, they get the 'nod' right, but occasionally make a mistake, usually as a result of hubris and suddenly have someone on the Board who won¡¦t play the game. In the old Tammany Hall days suchlike were usually made to disappear, in a manner that was a salutary lesson to others. Happily, nowadays they can only resort to marginalising them
I digress.
I don't need to review their activities again and their use of two "mouthpieces¨ here to spread their dubious propaganda, pervert the dissemination of important information in the AOPA that would be to their disadvantage and destabilise the discussion with the membership but it is entirely in the character of the mindermast,
but sadly reflects unfavourably on Hamilton, whom, it is possible is an unwitting innocent. Oh and on the subject of "mouthpieces¨. The "real" owner of the most garrulous of them is, if I am any judge, probably a beaut bloke and is probably an innocent too.
The perversion of the content of AOPA, the ONLY direct means of communication to the membership is immoral and unethical if not illegal.
Excluding "dissenting" = aren't on our side, members of the Board from the policy and editorial process even to the extent of denying them access to their own proofing, in order that unauthorised changes are not revealed until too late is NOT in the interests of the membership.
To the extent that a group of us have had to resort to considerable personal expense by placing advertisements addressing the membership via last and now this Fridays Aviation Section in The Australian in order to advise members, completely, of their rights and the other side of the argument censored from them.
The time wasted on their puerile and self serving antics has further disenfranchised the membership and wasted the memberships and our precious time just trying to keep the election process, legal and on the straight and level and NOT on debating the important policy differences and pressing issues, necessary for the membership to vote their conscience.
I am going to be self serving and suggest to those that are not already committed that they should vote against the team that so abuses their rights. Why would they expect them to listen to their concerns, when they so far appear to only be only interested in their own personal survival? Women and children first?
3. The AGM is a fait accompli because the Chairman will have a large number of proxies that will be used to support the B team. I wonder if those defaulting their proxy to the Chairman understand this?
One wonders at the motivation.
If they have delivered them to the President by default, then perhaps they should reconsider that delivery in the light of recent revelations.
Does he not want the members who have done so, to see which way he actually applies their precious vote ?
Perhaps he could explain the reasoning behind his alleged;
"There is nothing stopping someone attending the AGM after having given a proxy, but I think AOPA will be better served at the AGM if we do not encourage this." (McKeown 29/4/03).
Do the givers of proxy, understand that they can revoke them at any time prior to their use and redirect them to wherever they feel safest.
Or at the very least, check which way your proxyholder intends to vote their individual proxy on which matter.
The agenda will be in the May mag go figure.
If they are comfortable, that is their democratic right and they must accept the consequences.
We should be encouraging everyone who is able to attend either, to not give their proxy or if they have already done and will attend, revoke it.
However;
We do recognise that there are some amongst who would rather, as is their right, have someone else ¡§take the heat and stress¡¨ in what will undoubtedly be a "lively" AGM. If this is the case please ensure that your proxy is voted in the manner you intended.
4. It is obvious that I have come around to giving support in this forum to the A Team. This was only after lurking for some time and reading, then re-reading the posts from the various contributors. At least they are not hiding behind non de plumes.
5. Mr Lyon won't answer the questions put to him, do we assume guilt or has he been directed by Mr Mitchell to remain silent?
Last edited by Woomera; 1st May 2003 at 17:35.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tammany Hall
Emeus –
I reckon you are fairly close to the mark but your analysis needs a little more fine tuning.
You have no need though to be so despondent about the Chairman exercising a heap of proxies to his team’s advantage, all is not lost:
There is no reason why proxy givers cannot give specific instructions on the Proxy form on how the holder should vote on specific issues. Whilst the form doesn’t provide for this, an altered form would be valid. You should also authorise the holder to demand a poll if required (the proxy holder normally does not have this power).
The law requires the proxy holder to exercise the proxy as per the directions.
Better still, DO NOT cite the Chairman as the proxy but nominate someone you know and/or trust who will be attending the meeting to vote according to your wishes. The proxy can be revoked at any time and more importantly, if you provide a proxy you can still attend the meeting and vote. For some reason the AOPA caretaker President (who will be chairing the meeting) apparently censored the Notice to exclude this right.
The AGM is very important and members should ensure that they either attend in person or grant a proxy.
Russell
I reckon you are fairly close to the mark but your analysis needs a little more fine tuning.
You have no need though to be so despondent about the Chairman exercising a heap of proxies to his team’s advantage, all is not lost:
There is no reason why proxy givers cannot give specific instructions on the Proxy form on how the holder should vote on specific issues. Whilst the form doesn’t provide for this, an altered form would be valid. You should also authorise the holder to demand a poll if required (the proxy holder normally does not have this power).
The law requires the proxy holder to exercise the proxy as per the directions.
Better still, DO NOT cite the Chairman as the proxy but nominate someone you know and/or trust who will be attending the meeting to vote according to your wishes. The proxy can be revoked at any time and more importantly, if you provide a proxy you can still attend the meeting and vote. For some reason the AOPA caretaker President (who will be chairing the meeting) apparently censored the Notice to exclude this right.
The AGM is very important and members should ensure that they either attend in person or grant a proxy.
Russell
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If you provide a proxy you can still attend the meeting and vote, two votes, ?????
Words, Prior Posts, "CENSORSHIP".
Inane ramblings.
Axiom retires at this post. Sorry people, you will have to put up with just preaching to the already converted from now on and trust that the majority get it right at the election.
I will, WILL YOU ???
Last olive branch, drinks still on with or without you and someone will get p!ssed either way.
Get over Mitchell, you are just wrong.
Have fun people.
Words, Prior Posts, "CENSORSHIP".
Inane ramblings.
Axiom retires at this post. Sorry people, you will have to put up with just preaching to the already converted from now on and trust that the majority get it right at the election.
I will, WILL YOU ???
Last olive branch, drinks still on with or without you and someone will get p!ssed either way.
Get over Mitchell, you are just wrong.
Have fun people.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEER
Axiom
Yes, drinks are still on, with the real you at least.
I could even drink with Hamilton and Lyon, even (at a pinch) McKeown, even if he is a lawyer
We have convered a lot of grievances over the past weeks, but there is one thing common to ALL people on this thread, A team or B team, a genuine commitment to aviation. One can disagree with their methods (and I do), one can doubt their motivation (and I have), but at the end of the day they have all shown a dedication to voluntary service that is above and beyond any call to duty.
Your shout ax
AK
Yes, drinks are still on, with the real you at least.
I could even drink with Hamilton and Lyon, even (at a pinch) McKeown, even if he is a lawyer
We have convered a lot of grievances over the past weeks, but there is one thing common to ALL people on this thread, A team or B team, a genuine commitment to aviation. One can disagree with their methods (and I do), one can doubt their motivation (and I have), but at the end of the day they have all shown a dedication to voluntary service that is above and beyond any call to duty.
Your shout ax
AK
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad Indictment
Chris McKeown & his "B" Team:
It is a sad, sad indictment of the Tammany Society that candidates have been forced to place an advertisement in today's Australian to inform AOPA members of their rights regarding attendance at the coming AGM.
Those who have read the detailed earlier posts will know that this has been brought about because the caretaker president (Chris McKeown) censored the Company Secretary's Notice to members advising them of their legal rights.
The caretaker president has indicated that he wants to actively discourage members from attending the AGM. It doesn't take Einstein to work out why he and his Tammany mates would prefer an AGM with only a quorum and his bundle of proxies given by an unwiting and oblivious nembership.
Snarek correctly said that the election debate has been vigorous because all contributors are passionate about the aviation cause. There is however a big gap between passion and election rivalry (robust at times, often bitter but in the end will better our Association) and the cynical manipulation of the process to attain personal power.
My understanding is that none of the "B" candidates including John Lyon have objected to Chris McKeown's devious behaviour, but our caretaker president has certainly cracked the daily double: clumsy censorship + blatant disenfranchisement of the membership.
This election will be remembered as the most shonky in AOPA's 53 year history and has brought the organisation's credibility to the brink and like the Fall of Rome, the Barbarian mercenaries have clearly taken control.
I guess we all have our own ethical standards but I have found those of some of the candidates abhorent and for the sake of our Association I beg the membership to ensure that they do not manage to seize AOPA.
Russell
It is a sad, sad indictment of the Tammany Society that candidates have been forced to place an advertisement in today's Australian to inform AOPA members of their rights regarding attendance at the coming AGM.
Those who have read the detailed earlier posts will know that this has been brought about because the caretaker president (Chris McKeown) censored the Company Secretary's Notice to members advising them of their legal rights.
The caretaker president has indicated that he wants to actively discourage members from attending the AGM. It doesn't take Einstein to work out why he and his Tammany mates would prefer an AGM with only a quorum and his bundle of proxies given by an unwiting and oblivious nembership.
Snarek correctly said that the election debate has been vigorous because all contributors are passionate about the aviation cause. There is however a big gap between passion and election rivalry (robust at times, often bitter but in the end will better our Association) and the cynical manipulation of the process to attain personal power.
My understanding is that none of the "B" candidates including John Lyon have objected to Chris McKeown's devious behaviour, but our caretaker president has certainly cracked the daily double: clumsy censorship + blatant disenfranchisement of the membership.
This election will be remembered as the most shonky in AOPA's 53 year history and has brought the organisation's credibility to the brink and like the Fall of Rome, the Barbarian mercenaries have clearly taken control.
I guess we all have our own ethical standards but I have found those of some of the candidates abhorent and for the sake of our Association I beg the membership to ensure that they do not manage to seize AOPA.
Russell
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: sydney
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was reading the AOPA mag in the dunny this morning and this little snippett from Chris McKeown caught my eye
I wonder if he thought that before Loane and Lucas go shafted. Well, that helps with my voting decission.
Bart
The time we Directors currently spend doing domestic housekeeping type tasks is just awful, so the sooner we appoint a general manager to oversee the administration of our office, the better.
Bart
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only another Board had thought of that before they sacked another 'Bart'!!!!!!
We don't need an office manager, one Kris Lovell can do that. We need a researcher/lobbyist.
If McKeown wants a new office manager then McKeown is, in my view, on a different planet and not capable of undertsanding how a lobby group should work.
AK
We don't need an office manager, one Kris Lovell can do that. We need a researcher/lobbyist.
If McKeown wants a new office manager then McKeown is, in my view, on a different planet and not capable of undertsanding how a lobby group should work.
AK
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: sydney
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snarek, for once I find myself agreeing with you, I must be getting old.
How long will it be before Kris treads on a Directors fragile ego and gets the same treatment? This must not be allowed to happen.
Bart
Hmmm, maybe there is amessage in this...
How long will it be before Kris treads on a Directors fragile ego and gets the same treatment? This must not be allowed to happen.
Bart
If you put tomfoolery into a computer, nothing comes out but tomfoolery. But this tomfoolery, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow enobled and no one dares criticise it.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bart
Even if he is a mouthy little sh!t, i like him, he is efficient, dilligent and dedicated. if I'm there it will be a case of 'over my dead body'
Now lets stop in case it goes to his head
AK
Even if he is a mouthy little sh!t, i like him, he is efficient, dilligent and dedicated. if I'm there it will be a case of 'over my dead body'
Now lets stop in case it goes to his head
AK
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ME ALSO
Bart and Akkers
Re the GM versus researcher, I agree although I would value a comment from Kris on this.
One thing I do note from many of the past postings is that this has somehow appeared to become a two horse race. Almost a Collingwood footy club situation - only black or white, nothing in between (I think that for Collingwood it is deliberate to simplify confusion in their supporters, after all who in their right mind would barrack for them).
I do not agree with the two party concept, and I have not voted on any party lines - rather, on the individual merits of the respective candidates. Sorry "A" and "B" but it's MY choice.
Also, like AFL (and I have some experience as dad is a nominee at present for the Kangaroos Hall of Fame), I also note that when you're hot you're hot, when you're not you're not. Again, no in between - sort of like the John Elliott stand name being changed.
So the candidates for the Board, and past members of it, are either good or bad. No in between. This is sad because such labelling prevents us gaining valuable and experienced input if we shut out "the bad".
I noted some comment re Tony Mitchell. Now, he and I agreed to strongly disagree on some matters but I valued his thoughts from his perspective as I continue to value his positive inputs. Even his negative inputs where they highlight a gap in AOPA strategy.
I want a Board that maximises the input of all members and does not "shoot the messenger". I might add it is pleasing to see the odd olive branch surfacing in recent postings.
Cheers
Re the GM versus researcher, I agree although I would value a comment from Kris on this.
One thing I do note from many of the past postings is that this has somehow appeared to become a two horse race. Almost a Collingwood footy club situation - only black or white, nothing in between (I think that for Collingwood it is deliberate to simplify confusion in their supporters, after all who in their right mind would barrack for them).
I do not agree with the two party concept, and I have not voted on any party lines - rather, on the individual merits of the respective candidates. Sorry "A" and "B" but it's MY choice.
Also, like AFL (and I have some experience as dad is a nominee at present for the Kangaroos Hall of Fame), I also note that when you're hot you're hot, when you're not you're not. Again, no in between - sort of like the John Elliott stand name being changed.
So the candidates for the Board, and past members of it, are either good or bad. No in between. This is sad because such labelling prevents us gaining valuable and experienced input if we shut out "the bad".
I noted some comment re Tony Mitchell. Now, he and I agreed to strongly disagree on some matters but I valued his thoughts from his perspective as I continue to value his positive inputs. Even his negative inputs where they highlight a gap in AOPA strategy.
I want a Board that maximises the input of all members and does not "shoot the messenger". I might add it is pleasing to see the odd olive branch surfacing in recent postings.
Cheers
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the good 'ol days (pre 1998) when AOPA had assets of $0.75m, the excellent staff included GM Bart Beech. Bart was a well-qualified professional, able to deal with politicians & bureaucrats at all levels, capable of undertaking excellent research and his submissions were first class. When AOPA lost this resource and the funds were squandered, the work finished up being done by well-meaning directors, in particular Bill Hamilton.
It is a big ask to expect the individual board members to carry out this work and ultimately AOPA needs to have someone of similar prowess to Bart Beech.
The short-term problem is that AOPA doesn't have the funds to hire someone of this calibre so it will be left to the directors.
The danger in the past is that Bill Hamilton has done almost 100% of the submissions to CASA, AirServices and the Government. No-one else was allowed to contribute, there was no succession to Bill and he gained knowledge and exposure at the expense of the remaining directors. For good or bad, that is how AOPA has blundered on since 1998.
I believe that the concocted position of "Technical Director" should be abolished. Working groups of Directors need to be formed to generate intellectually honest submissions. There is no reason why some excellent people from the membership could not be co-opted to the working groups to provide their input.
Then exposure drafts should be published on the web site to give members the chance to comment.
Bill Hamilton should be involved with the working groups but not lead them. His knowledge, experience and corporate memory needs to be harnessed.
Russell
It is a big ask to expect the individual board members to carry out this work and ultimately AOPA needs to have someone of similar prowess to Bart Beech.
The short-term problem is that AOPA doesn't have the funds to hire someone of this calibre so it will be left to the directors.
The danger in the past is that Bill Hamilton has done almost 100% of the submissions to CASA, AirServices and the Government. No-one else was allowed to contribute, there was no succession to Bill and he gained knowledge and exposure at the expense of the remaining directors. For good or bad, that is how AOPA has blundered on since 1998.
I believe that the concocted position of "Technical Director" should be abolished. Working groups of Directors need to be formed to generate intellectually honest submissions. There is no reason why some excellent people from the membership could not be co-opted to the working groups to provide their input.
Then exposure drafts should be published on the web site to give members the chance to comment.
Bill Hamilton should be involved with the working groups but not lead them. His knowledge, experience and corporate memory needs to be harnessed.
Russell