AOPA election results
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FREE ADVICE SO IGNORE IT, BILL
Bill P
I am semi-retired. I have Company Director and Business Management PostGrad qualifications - to which you will say "big deal".
But, they did me well in knowing my responsibilities. If the excreta ever hits the whirling blades at AOPA, I suggest you backtrack any comment such as "I am not about to be diverted from my work by accounting procedures. I am ignorant of them and have no interest in being otherwise." and delete it from wherever it is written. The Regulator will lock you up for life otherwise, and I would hate to be deprived of your company.
As a Board Member of AOPA I believe you will be a Director. As a Director you have certain Statutory Obligations. The newspapers in the past year or so have been full of what happens to people who do not meet those obligations. Ignorance, while bliss, is not a legal escape (remember the poor uninvolved Director from the NSC).
Perhaps a chat to Marjorie as to why she would not sign the accounts would be valuable?
Cheers
I am semi-retired. I have Company Director and Business Management PostGrad qualifications - to which you will say "big deal".
But, they did me well in knowing my responsibilities. If the excreta ever hits the whirling blades at AOPA, I suggest you backtrack any comment such as "I am not about to be diverted from my work by accounting procedures. I am ignorant of them and have no interest in being otherwise." and delete it from wherever it is written. The Regulator will lock you up for life otherwise, and I would hate to be deprived of your company.
As a Board Member of AOPA I believe you will be a Director. As a Director you have certain Statutory Obligations. The newspapers in the past year or so have been full of what happens to people who do not meet those obligations. Ignorance, while bliss, is not a legal escape (remember the poor uninvolved Director from the NSC).
Perhaps a chat to Marjorie as to why she would not sign the accounts would be valuable?
Cheers
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia, NSW
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snark,
It would be much better to give your proxy to a non-board member who you know personally, just in case a board member who you do not know, uses it for their own cause and not for the betterment of the member’s request.
It would be much better to give your proxy to a non-board member who you know personally, just in case a board member who you do not know, uses it for their own cause and not for the betterment of the member’s request.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fact or Fiction ?
Snarek & all who voted...
There is a rumour going around that the meeting called by the acting president (who was coincidentally soundly defeated) is to have the old board declare the election null and void.
Can someone confirm this please?
Russell
There is a rumour going around that the meeting called by the acting president (who was coincidentally soundly defeated) is to have the old board declare the election null and void.
Can someone confirm this please?
Russell
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who knows.
Russell
I can't confirm what that meeting of the now extinct Board will try to do.
What I can confirm is an emotional phone call from Chris to me which, in my view, blamed me for his defeat. (That was never intended by the way, all I wanted was Marjories victory, his loss, to me, was collateral).
I can also confirm an 'emergency' Board meeting for the Thursday BEFORE the AGM. I am suspicious because anything 'decided' at that meeting, if controvercial, illegal or whatever, could then not be trabsmitted to the members so they ould show how they felt at the AGM
I can think of no VALID reason why an outgoing caretaker President would feel the need to hold an emergency meeting.
I am suspicious.
AK
I can't confirm what that meeting of the now extinct Board will try to do.
What I can confirm is an emotional phone call from Chris to me which, in my view, blamed me for his defeat. (That was never intended by the way, all I wanted was Marjories victory, his loss, to me, was collateral).
I can also confirm an 'emergency' Board meeting for the Thursday BEFORE the AGM. I am suspicious because anything 'decided' at that meeting, if controvercial, illegal or whatever, could then not be trabsmitted to the members so they ould show how they felt at the AGM
I can think of no VALID reason why an outgoing caretaker President would feel the need to hold an emergency meeting.
I am suspicious.
AK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was speaking to an ex GM the other day
Was speaking to a long gone GM from AOPA the other day, and when I mentioned this accounting issue, he said...
"WHAT!?!?, we asked the members what they wanted and they told us they wanted it as an asset, not a liability......"
in a very surprised tone.
Have the current (recently resigned) board actually tried to do some research into what the members want from this crap, or just what the current treasurer feels is the right thing.
OK... now here comes the statement of the century regarding AOPA.....<drum roll>
THE MEMBERS REFLECTED THE APATHY IN THEIR VOTE THAT IS SHOWN TO THEM BY THE DIRECTORS IN THEIR ACTIONS.
Carry on.
Dog
"WHAT!?!?, we asked the members what they wanted and they told us they wanted it as an asset, not a liability......"
in a very surprised tone.
Have the current (recently resigned) board actually tried to do some research into what the members want from this crap, or just what the current treasurer feels is the right thing.
OK... now here comes the statement of the century regarding AOPA.....<drum roll>
THE MEMBERS REFLECTED THE APATHY IN THEIR VOTE THAT IS SHOWN TO THEM BY THE DIRECTORS IN THEIR ACTIONS.
Carry on.
Dog
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey yungun
Ho ho Dog.
The members have always been this apathetic, but I would suggest it is a lot less apathetic than members of organisations entrusted with far more power.
For example, did you know that less that 62 (but greater than 60
) Australian Democrat members voted on the GST. Did you know that, as I undertsand it, Meg Lees cut short the deliberations with the Liberals because she wanted to go bushwalking.
And you think our members/Board are apathetic
(Mind you, we currently have more members than the Democrats).
Nah, that level is actually pretty good, at least this time we had a properly contested election and the members showed a couple of people where they stood!!!!
Viva democracy
AK
The members have always been this apathetic, but I would suggest it is a lot less apathetic than members of organisations entrusted with far more power.
For example, did you know that less that 62 (but greater than 60
) Australian Democrat members voted on the GST. Did you know that, as I undertsand it, Meg Lees cut short the deliberations with the Liberals because she wanted to go bushwalking. And you think our members/Board are apathetic
(Mind you, we currently have more members than the Democrats).
Nah, that level is actually pretty good, at least this time we had a properly contested election and the members showed a couple of people where they stood!!!!
Viva democracy
AK
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
antechinus
Not being privy to the current Board actions, all I can say is that I sincerely hope that the "Emergency" meeting is to gracefully resign and hand the Chair for the AGM over to another party.
Any other action could only bring the most acute embarrassment on McKeowns head and further serious damage to AOPA.
Unless there is something about the AOPA memberships voting intentions and the recent election that he doesn't understand.
I understand he was the one who agitated to change the Board numbers AFTER the nominations closed.:bah:
He was the one who in the opinion of most breached the election rules regarding the maximum 250 word "profile" and authorised Hamilton to do
likewise, with their "electioneering" stunt in the April magazine.
He was the one who twice censored the Company Secretarys "important information" to the members from the April and May magazine, re proxy and attendance.
The correction of which entailed some considerable cost to us in advertising in the Australian Aviation section.
This was done, I understand on the premise of not wanting to encourage attendance at the AGM.
The above as far as I know could be the only grounds for declaring an invalid election and to do so in the face of the results would make Machiavello look like an absolute rank amateur.
Unless of course someone inserted a self destruct mechanism, to be used if necessary, in there somewhere.
If the returning officer had any issues in regard to the conduct of the election then surely LAST WEEK was the time to bring them to light NOT the night before the AGM.
The returning officer reports to the Board as representatives of the Company, not the President personally, although I understand that the people directly involved were given strict instructions NOT to divulge the results to ANY person but the President.
Sure Thurs night is not the night before but it may as well be as most of the membership will be enroute and therefore incommuncado on Fri.
Maybe we are all jumping at shadows, the simple resolution of which would be to advise the current Board, as he is required to, what the Agenda item that is so urgent, may be.
If it is benign, what is so hard and why the secrecy, they do after all still represent the members until the AGM.
But then the members have already unequivocally voted their feelings on the matters at hand.
We are not the Vandals nor the Huns, just candidates that the membership decided could do the job for them next year.
And whose organisation is this anyway?
Bill Clintons men would have said,
"It's the members stupid."
to have the old board declare the election null and void.
Any other action could only bring the most acute embarrassment on McKeowns head and further serious damage to AOPA.
Unless there is something about the AOPA memberships voting intentions and the recent election that he doesn't understand.
I understand he was the one who agitated to change the Board numbers AFTER the nominations closed.:bah:
He was the one who in the opinion of most breached the election rules regarding the maximum 250 word "profile" and authorised Hamilton to do
likewise, with their "electioneering" stunt in the April magazine.
He was the one who twice censored the Company Secretarys "important information" to the members from the April and May magazine, re proxy and attendance.
The correction of which entailed some considerable cost to us in advertising in the Australian Aviation section.
This was done, I understand on the premise of not wanting to encourage attendance at the AGM.
The above as far as I know could be the only grounds for declaring an invalid election and to do so in the face of the results would make Machiavello look like an absolute rank amateur.
Unless of course someone inserted a self destruct mechanism, to be used if necessary, in there somewhere.
If the returning officer had any issues in regard to the conduct of the election then surely LAST WEEK was the time to bring them to light NOT the night before the AGM.
The returning officer reports to the Board as representatives of the Company, not the President personally, although I understand that the people directly involved were given strict instructions NOT to divulge the results to ANY person but the President.
Sure Thurs night is not the night before but it may as well be as most of the membership will be enroute and therefore incommuncado on Fri.
Maybe we are all jumping at shadows, the simple resolution of which would be to advise the current Board, as he is required to, what the Agenda item that is so urgent, may be.
If it is benign, what is so hard and why the secrecy, they do after all still represent the members until the AGM.
But then the members have already unequivocally voted their feelings on the matters at hand.
We are not the Vandals nor the Huns, just candidates that the membership decided could do the job for them next year.
And whose organisation is this anyway?
Bill Clintons men would have said,
"It's the members stupid."
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snarek
The members have always been this apathetic, but I would suggest it is a lot less apathetic than members of organisations entrusted with far more power.
For example, did you know that less that 62 (but greater than 60 ) Australian Democrat members voted on the GST. Did you know that, as I undertsand it, Meg Lees cut short the deliberations with the Liberals because she wanted to go bushwalking.
Nah, that level is actually pretty good, at least this time we had a properly contested election and the members showed a couple of people where they stood!!!!
antechinus
There is a rumour going around that the meeting called by the acting president (who was coincidentally soundly defeated) is to have the old board declare the election null and void.
If he did that he is more fool than anyone gave him credit for. Not because of the embaressment, but because the members (me in particular) will go.." Right that's it... they can get f%$^ed" seeing as these guys seem to not get their sh!t in one sock and move forward. I waver on the balance beam.
ANYWAY
If I haven't offered my congratulations to all successful candidates then allow me to do so now.
I think that the outcome is very very good, it allows no-one to get comfortable and dictatorshiply. 
Dog
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all bad???
Dog
22% is about average (go look back). Contested elections, 15 for 11 vacancies (yes there were 11, the reduction was, in my view, at the worst illegal at the best highly immoral) was unusual.
So I don't read that as apathetic.
So the way I read your thread, the directors have ALWAYS been responsible for everything always including member apathy. That means it has never been any good, ever (except during the Smith, Munro campaign against Patroni).
Bit narrow minded don't you think???
AK
22% is about average (go look back). Contested elections, 15 for 11 vacancies (yes there were 11, the reduction was, in my view, at the worst illegal at the best highly immoral) was unusual.
So I don't read that as apathetic.
So the way I read your thread, the directors have ALWAYS been responsible for everything always including member apathy. That means it has never been any good, ever (except during the Smith, Munro campaign against Patroni).
Bit narrow minded don't you think???
AK
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SURELY YOU JEST
Akkers
After the way the AOPA Mag was mis-used by several to push their own barrow, I hope they are not the ones doing any pushing.
I cannot see how any reason could exist to disallow anyone but those who went over the 250 words by stealth.
I am also certain that the members who are watching have had enough of this sh1t at Board level and will not be fooled by any stealthy moves by those seeking their own agenda.
The AGM is next weekend - if anyone has any desires to question the election, that is the appropriate forum.
Please keep us informed.
Cheers
After the way the AOPA Mag was mis-used by several to push their own barrow, I hope they are not the ones doing any pushing.
I cannot see how any reason could exist to disallow anyone but those who went over the 250 words by stealth.
I am also certain that the members who are watching have had enough of this sh1t at Board level and will not be fooled by any stealthy moves by those seeking their own agenda.
The AGM is next weekend - if anyone has any desires to question the election, that is the appropriate forum.
Please keep us informed.
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AOPA has goarn quite since the election
Any major achievements since the election? There was not a whole lot in the latest mag.
It would have been nice to see AOPA on SBS last night standing by its member.
It would have been nice to see AOPA on SBS last night standing by its member.
ABC JUST-IN NEWS
Last Update: Wednesday, July 23, 2003. 7:39am (AEST)
Pilots welcome CASA restructure
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has welcomed restructure plans for the Civil Aviation and Safety Authority (CASA).
Federal Transport Minister John Anderson will abolish a special board of management which liases between CASA and the department.
Gary Gaunt from the pilots' association says the board was slowing the progress of regulatory reforms.
He says the next challenge is to address CASA's policing powers, which at the moment requires aircraft owners to prove their innocence when charges are brought.
"There has been some instances in the past and there still are where CASA have been the judge jury and executioner," he said.
"The Government have as part of their new structure between CASA and the Government putting in a whole series of checks and balances that'll remedy that but we still have a bit of work to do on all the individual regulations."
----------------------
Well done Gaunty
Last Update: Wednesday, July 23, 2003. 7:39am (AEST)
Pilots welcome CASA restructure
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has welcomed restructure plans for the Civil Aviation and Safety Authority (CASA).
Federal Transport Minister John Anderson will abolish a special board of management which liases between CASA and the department.
Gary Gaunt from the pilots' association says the board was slowing the progress of regulatory reforms.
He says the next challenge is to address CASA's policing powers, which at the moment requires aircraft owners to prove their innocence when charges are brought.
"There has been some instances in the past and there still are where CASA have been the judge jury and executioner," he said.
"The Government have as part of their new structure between CASA and the Government putting in a whole series of checks and balances that'll remedy that but we still have a bit of work to do on all the individual regulations."
----------------------
Well done Gaunty
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting post on the AOPA forum http://www.aopa.com.au/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=75
for their members.
for their members.
I wonder whether the poster could provide more details as to why and how accounting standard AASB 1044 imposes a requirement upon AOPA to put subscriptions in advance "in the credit column".
In particular:
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a present obligation that probably will require a future sacrifice of economic benefits and its amount can be measured reliably?
OR
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a possible obligation or a present obligation for which the probability of a future sacrifice of economic benefits is higher than remote but less than probable?
OR
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a possible obligation or a present obligation for which the probability of a future sacrifice of economic benefits is remote?
In any case, what exactly is the present or possible obligation that the poster believes AOPA owes in respect of subscriptions paid in advance?
In particular:
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a present obligation that probably will require a future sacrifice of economic benefits and its amount can be measured reliably?
OR
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a possible obligation or a present obligation for which the probability of a future sacrifice of economic benefits is higher than remote but less than probable?
OR
Does the payment of subscriptions in advance to AOPA give rise to a possible obligation or a present obligation for which the probability of a future sacrifice of economic benefits is remote?
In any case, what exactly is the present or possible obligation that the poster believes AOPA owes in respect of subscriptions paid in advance?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff;
The post, as I understood it was directed to AOPA members on the AOPA website and not open for discussion on an anonomous forum for all and sundry to ridicule, pick fault with or otherwise.
One would therefor suggest your attention should be directed to the relevant website for comment.
However, as I understand things, you have to be a member to look or contribute. obviously I am wrong if this forum can redirect it's anonomous contributors to a website forum reserved for AOPA members.
If you appear to be able to look (when the site clearly says "for AOPA members only", then you can post your reply/ query there.
If you are still as confused about the post which is written in plain (not legal gobbledgook), language, you can always pm this postee and I will onforward the request.
I doubt very much if the author will ever post anything on Pprune.
Cheers Ax.
The post, as I understood it was directed to AOPA members on the AOPA website and not open for discussion on an anonomous forum for all and sundry to ridicule, pick fault with or otherwise.
One would therefor suggest your attention should be directed to the relevant website for comment.
However, as I understand things, you have to be a member to look or contribute. obviously I am wrong if this forum can redirect it's anonomous contributors to a website forum reserved for AOPA members.
If you appear to be able to look (when the site clearly says "for AOPA members only", then you can post your reply/ query there.
If you are still as confused about the post which is written in plain (not legal gobbledgook), language, you can always pm this postee and I will onforward the request.
I doubt very much if the author will ever post anything on Pprune.
Cheers Ax.
Ax
Anyone can view the AOPA forum and the relevant post. Outback pilot has given us a direct link to it above!
I’m not ridiculing the poster.
I don’t know anything about accounting. The questions I asked above are the questions that AASB 1024 [I meant 1044, per my earlier post] requires be asked in order to properly characterise and account for contingent liabilities and provisions. I don’t know the answers.
However, the author of the relevant post clearly considers they at least know what AASB 1024 [ditto - 1044] means and how it applies to AOPA subscriptions paid in advance. The author must therefore know the answers to the questions. I’d be interested to know as well.
Anyone can view the AOPA forum and the relevant post. Outback pilot has given us a direct link to it above!
I’m not ridiculing the poster.
I don’t know anything about accounting. The questions I asked above are the questions that AASB 1024 [I meant 1044, per my earlier post] requires be asked in order to properly characterise and account for contingent liabilities and provisions. I don’t know the answers.
However, the author of the relevant post clearly considers they at least know what AASB 1024 [ditto - 1044] means and how it applies to AOPA subscriptions paid in advance. The author must therefore know the answers to the questions. I’d be interested to know as well.
Last edited by Creampuff; 14th Sep 2003 at 08:32.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff;
It wasn't you I was accusing of ridiculing the matter, I was simply getting in first before some of the closet rabble take note of what is going on.
I passed your advice and query on to the author who is "battening down the hatches" also in anticipation.
He is as surprised as I that AOPA is an open forum. It does say, "for members only". Whenever I go in, I assume I am there because I didn't log off last time.
Anyway, the matter should be kept on the AOPA forum for the members to read and not dissemilated by others.
As you attended the "meeting", one would assume you concur with the balance of the text?
Ax.
It wasn't you I was accusing of ridiculing the matter, I was simply getting in first before some of the closet rabble take note of what is going on.
I passed your advice and query on to the author who is "battening down the hatches" also in anticipation.
He is as surprised as I that AOPA is an open forum. It does say, "for members only". Whenever I go in, I assume I am there because I didn't log off last time.
Anyway, the matter should be kept on the AOPA forum for the members to read and not dissemilated by others.
As you attended the "meeting", one would assume you concur with the balance of the text?
Ax.