LAA CEO Good Value?
 

The CEO of the Light Aircraft Association is currently at the European Gliding Championships, on full pay, not on holiday. He says he can run the association by email in his spare time? Do the members know about this (or care?). Seems to me that this isn't a great thing at a time when we all need to tighten our belts! With around a million pound turnover, one wonders whether we need an expensive and absent CEO! What do we think? And NO, I won't give my name as he has also shown a very vindictive streak, feeling he can expel a member for making adverse comments!

I think you should stand up or shut up.

It is very easy to snipe from an internet forum when you can't be seen.

Are you a man or a mouse?

I think anonymity in this case is entirely reasonable.

If you are an owner of a Permit aircraft required to be a member of the LAA, does that mean, by being expelled as a member, you can no longer operate your aircraft?

What is his salary?

Ah, but if you post under your own name, you would have a thousand strong following you, equally happy to be crucified (inverted) along the road to Turweston, all proclaiming "I'm WincoWobblicus"

Or maybe, probably, not.

Personally, I assume the CEO of our sport aviation organisation is out there, networking with the good and great of other European sport aviation organisations, trying to stop sport aviation being ground into the dust by the heel of some random, uninformed, European legislative jackboot.

So, what's your problem?

Another question, in the spirit (but not in agreement) with the original post.

Who would you rather have as CEO of a popular aviation body - an active pilot at the top level of his game (and other related activities) and who has also built up a successful business to the point he can afford to give it up in the interests of furthering aviation, or a politicking blazer and tie wearing chap who enjoys a good jolly to foreign conferences?

I have met both types in the furtherance of aviation, and I know which I prefer.

PPRuNe has always allowed people to post anonymously and almost everyone does so. There is no reason why Winco should reveal his ID.


Surely it's not unreasonable for a member of an association to query how much its CEO is paid, and how the income from membership fees is spent, especially in these harsh economic times?

Not that harsh economic times affect everyone.
Earlier this year the (previous) government appointed a new Chairman of the CAA on an initial salary of £130,000 for a 2-day week. That's the equivalent of £325,000 per annum - about double the Prime Minister's salary. She has no previous experience whatsoever of aviation.

.

“If you are an owner of a Permit aircraft required to be a member of the LAA, does that mean, by being expelled as a member, you can no longer operate your aircraft?”

In most cases yes. But the LAA has never done this (yet?:}).

Rod1

I can't imagine that the CAA would defer the issuing of Permits To Fly *exclusively* to a private organization that has no formal public oversight but has the ability to expel their members for being, well, critical of the organization.

So if you do end up with a disagreement with the LAA that leads to your termination of membership, there has to be an alternative. And that alternative is probably the CAA itself. Less convenient and more costly, but you'd still be able to fly the aircraft.

Heck, even in communist countries you had the option of not becoming a party member.

I think that little piece deserves a little more publicity....

It is totally unbelievable.

I got booted out of the Socata owners group (a website owned by one man who tightly controls it) primarily for repeatedly speaking out on certain avionics manufacturers' design defects which could have serious safety aspects. Luckily this had no consequence whatsoever. But if they had the power to stop me flying I would not have touched them with a 20ft bargepole in the first place.

A & C (isn't that anonymous too?) - I'm definitely a man, but as one involved with LAA stuff I have very valid reason to keep under the radar.

This post was intended to raise awareness of a situation that I and almost anyone else aware of it find unacceptable. As for suggesting our CEO had built up a successful business but had given it up for this flying oriented job, evidence doesn't suggest this is entirely true. Not the issue here really.

We have a senior officer of a small company, who feels it's fine to bugger off for three weeks on full pay to take part in the gliding championships. Gliding does not come in the LAA remit, it's his HOBBY! He fails to respond to inquiries or emails as naturally his attention is totally focussed on his gliding - you can't run a business from your hotel room in an evening!

He should at least accept unpaid leave, or indeed take his paid leave to indulge in his hobby. The LAA is a business of around ten staff members who all have to pull their weight, not some corporate conglomerate.

I think it's time we as members were shown plainly what our CEO actually does, and that some measure of his performance now he's been in the saddle for two years or so be put in place.

I can tell you that if this post was made on the LAA website it would have been censored by now!

Why??

Not seen any "sniping". Seem like reasonable questions and fair comment. If WW is a LAA member, he is entitled to an opinion and is also entitled to express it. Wonder where WW's information came from?

Planemike

Actually if you have a legitimate reason to question some policy within the LAA, and you're not using rude language or anything, I can't see how they could censor it without getting in some very muddy water.

And if they would censor it, that's something I would definitely bring up at the earliest all-member meeting. In fact, there should be a procedure for calling an all-member meeting if you have X members' signatures, without needing the approval or help from the board of directors.

On the other hand - A typical CEO of a typical company is paid a fixed amount per year (plus possibly a bonus) to get a job done. He's not on the clock where his yearly job is automatically and magically done after spending 47 weeks of 40 hours (mo-fr 9-5). In that respect the whole concept of "vacation days" becomes a bit blurred and in fact I know a few companies who stopped using that concept altogether for their upper management. The company simply does not care how many (or few) vacation days you take, as long as the job is being done. And that has never stopped these execs from being away from the company for three weeks - as long as they make sure that arrangements are in place to let the business continue. (Being reachable by e-mail/SMS/phone for urgent matters could be one of those arrangements.)

Quick question: How often does this CEO work evenings and weekends, attending seminars, presentations, meetings, trade shows and whatnot, in his function as CEO of the LAA?

And Winco Wobble could at least get his facts right, Peter Harvey is flying in the Open Class WORLD Gliding Championships, not the Europeans.

I know of a number of organisations that give free time off to represent ones country, even when the business is completely unrelated to the activity.

Questioning the salary and value for money of the organistion is, of course, completely legitimate. That is normally what AGMs are for....

LAA forum rules
 

Actually if you have a legitimate reason to question some policy within the LAA, and you're not using rude language or anything, I can't see how they could censor it without getting in some very muddy water.
They own it their rules simples
You are not allowed to post on the LAA website without being a member of the LAA and signing your full name to every post you make. One reason I suspect that it is pretty much dead. If you look, most posts receive no replies.
Also what about internet safety/security, I wouldn't dream of posting my full real name on an open forum (or facebook for that matter)

Fitter2 - your posts suggest a bias, based presumably on your relationship with the CEO. Frankly I don't care whether it's the Isle of Wight gliding championship, the facts remain the same; the LAA is a SMALL outfit, turning over just over £1m a year. It has an efficient office manager and a fairly autonomously run Engineering Department which is the heart of the LAA as far as pilot owners/builders are concerned. A fair argument would be "Does the LAA actually NEED a CEO?".

Historically, the PFA had a General Manager, controlled by the Executive Committee. When the last one was fired, Graham Newby was taken on as CEO, but on a low salary (for a CEO) and with little spending powers without approval. That changed of course and Graham (whilst being contentious) did a great deal of good, particularly with regard to the NPPL. Two years down the road in our current incumbent's reign and just WHAT can we attribute to him apart from a bunch of risk averse actions which have devalued our organisation? I'd like to know!

As for asking at the AGM, yes, I think you can be sure a number of very pointed questions will be asked!

Hello Winco

I have a bias, and respect for an extremely good glider pilot (and World Class hang-glider before that). No other personal relationship, sorry.

I have, however, no respect for any anonymous poster whose first post on the forum is nasty snide comments, when there are many legitimate avenues to discuss the mattor.

I don't know about forum rules at the LAA, but their forum is pretty dead. Is it over moderated?

Edit - Oh, I see Mr Pinks has already made this comment. Shows it's an issue. Flying should be exiting, not like some failed allotment society.

My flying is often exciting (deliberately), but my wife would prefer it not to be exiting................