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................

Nothing snide about my comments Fitter2, they are straight questions, asked on here because I reckon we might get some sensible answers. It may be my first post as Winco W, but there's a reason for that as I already stated. Snide would be telling you to spell matter correctly!(not mattor), I'm sure that was a typo and I wouldn't actually stoop to that sort of sniping other than as an example.

I have no doubt that Peter Harvey is a good glider pilot, never questioned it. THAT has no bearing on his ability to run a company. BTW an interesting comment came from a member of the Lasham Gliding Club on his appointment to the PFA (as it was then). That was "Never saw him as a team player, he's always been a loner chasing records" - interesting in the light of his performance in the office ;-)

In any case, there are enough LAA members on here to read this, which was my intention. I do post on here in another guise but don't bother asking who! This has one purpose; to raise a debate which won't be censored on the LAA site (which by the way requires real names to be used)

I've worked in a similar environment, and right now I run an autonomous organisation rather bigger than LAA HQ in Turweston. I also fly. I also have studied quite a lot of management topics.

If you look at the truly successful organisations, very rarely are they successfully run by:

(1) People who work stupidly long hours.
(2) People who don't maintain a good understanding of what their organisation is really about - the classic parachuted in CEOs (such as CAA's !) in other words.

So, we've got a chap here who is running a recreational aviation organisation, and is getting out of the office to go and engage with recreational aviation. Okay, a slightly different sort of flying, but that would worry me much less than to hear that he was a golf obsessive.

If he's doing this on work time rather than leave, then as an LAA member I do feel that's inappropriate. If he's spending every other day out there networking with other European GA organisations however, then I'd not be so worried. Ultimately however, if the LAA is running well, and does appear to be, then that is what really matters, not anybody else's idea of how he should spend his time whilst he's in charge.

Plus it keeps him out of the hair of the man who really runs the LAA, and has done for a couple of decades. :}

G

The original post seems to assume quite a lot, none of which is established:

• Has the CEO taken this as extra paid holiday
• Has he already taken his holiday entitlement, whatever that is?
• Has this trip been authorised by the board of directors (or whatever they are called)
• Is there any power in the LAA's Articles or rules of membership to expell somone for asking awkward questions?
• Has this ever in fact happened
• What is to stop our poster from raising this at the AGM as you normally would when the performance of an executive director or chief exec is an issue

whether the LAA needs a CEO is a matter for the directors and ultimately the members as a whole. The fact is that the LAA decided to have one. This is a different issue from whether the incumbent should have gone off gliding for three weeks. I would guess though that having a CEO who is still active in aviation sports may be seen as an advantage and may enable him to speak with more authority that otherwise would be the case.

Winco Wobbly wrote
I am sure I could get an unattributable derogatory 'quote' on anybody, including yourself.

The 'anonymous Lasham member' obviously never attended, or was part of the organisation of any of the BGA conferences Pete organised.

As a matter of interest, can you list any of the recoirds he 'chased'? I always got the impression that between competitions he was too busy building up a successful company.

(Note to self, stop feeding the troll).

Winco Wobbly
 

I some one has been expelled from the LAA this is a matter to be raised first with the people who run the LAA and if the answer is not satisfactory then it should be put to the membership in an open way with ALL the facts in public view.

It should not be the subject of cheap shots at the CEO (as said above the post will require a lot of "out of hours" work) on an unrelated issue.

Perhaps you would like to tell us why this guy was expelled from the LAA as you see so keen on this forum as a tool for comment on the LAA's policys.

I think it is acceptible for a member of an organisation to question the CEO's salary when their fees are going to pay it.

It does seem that sometimes when people get into senior positions like this that they can abuse their positions (MPs and expenses for example) for their own personal gain.

But saying that, I understand that in a typical CEO position you don't work 9-5. You work whenever is required and the thing that matters at the end of the day is whether the CEO generates or saves more money than they cost.

It's not clear from the responses to my post how many of you are actually LAA Members? My purpose was simply to provide information on a known scenario, sadly anonymously (but with good reasons). I wanted to see how people felt about this and if it was unacceptable then no doubt appropriate action would follow.

It's a little sad, but not unexpected that certain of you went for a personal approach in defence of the CEO instead of remaining objective. Others did provide objective criticism which is fine but from my perspective was a little off target in these circumstances.

Winco Wobble will remain anonymous, is totally weatherproof! and will return when there is something to air. Understand though, that WW isn't just a whinger, he actually treads the corridors of the LAA and his information will never be without foundation.

So Fitter2, better start turning over stones for that Troll , he's always hungry :ugh:

One assumes that the CEO of the LAA is a saleried post so he doesn't get paid overtime.
That being the case whenever he atends a NC meeting or other meetings at weekends then it is part of the job.
So I doubt it would take very many months to rack up enough time off in lou to cover a couple of weeks gliding.
Personally as an LAA member I don't really care if only works alternate Thursdays when the moon is full as long as the LAA is doing OK.
Oh and judging from your totally negative attitude you are Welshman AICMP.

"you are Welshman"

That might be a good guess.

Rod1

Hey, would you please stop insulting Welshmen!
Twll tŷn ayb... os gwelwch yn dda.

Rod did you get PM?

As an LAA member I'm at least interested in this topic.


To answer some of the critics - there is no easy way for ordinary memebers to comunicate between themselves - the LAA forum is impossibly heavily moderated. Emailing or phoning gets a response, yes we have received your **** but usually nothing more.

With a potentially contentious issue like this then Pprune is probably the only obvious medium.


The LAA does some great stuff - but equally there have been some disgraceful episodes. As already displayed in this thread the politics of the organisation can make NuLabour look honourable.

I'll be interested to see a somewhat official explanation - but as with all these things it is extremely unlikely to happen.

Is there really anything to explain? The boss of an aviation association goes flying; not much of a headline if you ask me.

“The boss of an aviation association goes flying; not much of a headline if you ask me.”

I suppose that depends. If a significant number of members of the LAA think it is an issue, then it is an issue, as the LAA is a democratic organisation. For this to happen, the anonymous critics will have to stand up to be counted (or shot:E).

Rod1

The problem with the LAA forum is that it went members only to try and control the ****e and spam that infested it. It also insists on posters using there own names so the oh so brave anonimous warriors all left.
That and only a few members use it so the board an NC think it is irelevant.
Unfortunatly it will remain irelevent until the board and NC take it seriously as a medium. If they took it seriously so would the members and therein lies the problem.
Any way back to the more important issues, wibbly wobbly welshman were's my 5 quid?

The LAA forum is a window to the organisation. They should get a professional moderator/designer to kick some life into it and get it working as a forum that people go back to because it's informative, fun to use, and makes people feel part of a community. At the moment, it looks amateurish and has nothing to draw people back to it - making it sticky as web designers call it.

I'm an LAA member and used their coaching scheme to get my tailwheel rating - it does a lot of good work. But the forum design and operation lets it down.

Unfortunately one can't have it both ways.

If you insist on using real names then almost nothing of value will get written. It is an unfortunate characteristic of many human activities that a lot of stuff has political / commercial undertones and a lot of comment that is useful has to impinge on these, and this upsets the axe grinders. Aviation is thick with this stuff.

One can make it a members-only forum but anybody can join (of their own initiative, or by invitation from an existing member who wants to settle a score with another existing member) and read peoples' old (and controversial) postings; I have seen this happen (elsewhere) where somebody representing a business joined up and some existing people were threatened with legal action and all kinds of hassle.

In the long run, most of the regulars will get to know each other anyway but still you won't get anything really "cutting" written by somebody under his real name - unless he has absolutely nothing to lose (which applies to almost nobody).

IMHO the only solution is to allow anon posts but to moderate at a level where personal attacks are stopped. Very few forums get this right. It does require near-constant attendance by the mods, which takes effort. For H24 moderation you need 3-4 people, and while certain professions lend themselves better than others to this, it is damn hard to find 3-4 specimens with a sense of humour ;)

I am an LAA board member and just thought I'd make comment about the inferences made by several posters that the Association wields the big stick against members who choose to criticise it. Some evidence would be welcome.

I have been actively involved in the Association for over twenty years and know of only one person being excluded for two (maybe three I cannot recall exactly) months. He was an Executive Committee member who deliberately worked against an important, then PFA, initiative and threatened its viability. It is not unreasonable to expect EC, now board members to support board decisions.
The person in question did operate a PFA aircraft and action was taken to ensure that his right to do so was not jeopardised in any way, and he actually re-permitted the aircraft during the course of his suspension. Hardly an act of oppressive vindictiveness I'd suggest.
Regarding the LAA Forum, the view was taken that it does reflect on the Association and sniping posts, many by people who were not even members, did nothing to further the cause of the Association. This forum is somewhat different of course; it is not allied to a particular company of association so comments made on it do not 'attack' the provider of the forum. It can therefore be considered as independent.
Some of you may recall the AAIB comments, in a microlight accident report, about a minority of BMAA members working against the BMAA safety culture, resenting over regulation by CAA and giving the impression that it was OK to break the rules. That view was formed in the main by postings on the BMAA forum and whether or not you agree with the inclusion of those comments in the report (I do not), it is clear that what is written on these forums is read and interpreted by more than a few anonymous people who like the sound of their own voice. If you are independent, like PPrune it doesn't matter, if you are not, like the BMAA and LAA forums, it can have unwelcome consequences.
That is why LAA took the decision to limit the forum to members and to use only real names. The forum now tends to be used by members who seek info on aircraft parts, technical issues, fly-ins etc. It is in the main non controversial, which no doubt is why many on here consider it a waste of time. Personally I take the view that it serves the purpose I want it to serve, there are plenty of independent forums available where anarchy rules, though I put little store in posts made by people who are not prepared to come out from behind the shield of anonymity.
I have no intention of commenting on the original subject matter of this thread. Making a submission to the LAA board, or raising the matter at the LAA AGM is the correct procedure for dealing with such issues.
Brian Hope.

Brian Hope.

Good post!

Rod1

Hmm. IMHO a touch too safe and boring, but it's your site.

In the Board's shoes, on certain subjects I'd want to know the views of the membership and also, to some extent, the non-members.

If you really want the membership to tell you what they think of the organisation then confidential responses are essential - its what you do when you run a questionnaire, after all. And a confident Board would be able to ignore the sniping and look at the bigger picture.

I disagree. There is too much recent evidence of decisions being rushed by the Board and then being consulted upon