Helicopter Association of Australasia
Thread Starter
Helicopter Association of Australasia
President Rosemarie McRae recently announced the Helicopter Association of Australasia had collapsed on 19th November 2008 due to lack of volunteers to replace retiring board members at AGM held 4 October AGM, which was poorly attended.
One recent notice indicated they had run out of funds and were asking members to support the executive financially so that the HAA could continue.
Unfortunately, the support requested was not forthcoming.
Some observers indicate the association decided to have a paid executive from around 2006, using funds from the settlement from the Sydney CBD compensation deal with the NSW government.
Previously the HAA was run by volunteers.
Sad news for those who have done their bit over the past 40 years. All of them worked with industry and the regulator on those things which were topical at the time of their involvement.
RIP
One recent notice indicated they had run out of funds and were asking members to support the executive financially so that the HAA could continue.
Unfortunately, the support requested was not forthcoming.
Some observers indicate the association decided to have a paid executive from around 2006, using funds from the settlement from the Sydney CBD compensation deal with the NSW government.
Previously the HAA was run by volunteers.
Sad news for those who have done their bit over the past 40 years. All of them worked with industry and the regulator on those things which were topical at the time of their involvement.
RIP
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad news for those who have done their bit over the past 40 years. All of them worked with industry and the regulator on those things which were topical at the time of their involvement.
Being committed to other industries I was never in a position to commit to this one is such fashion. I'd certainly like to pay my respects to those in the past who did mightily for us. Ticehurst and Tyler are two names that spring to my immediate attention.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are times when it is better to let something die that is in ill health and has no chance of recovery. That is in my view what just happened.
What has plagued the HAA for almost its entire history has been the perception that it is not representative of all of us. It is not easy to be all things to all people. For decades many saw it as the media club. Then many saw it as the GA end; single engine charter/mustering/schools;then the Sydney CBD club. It seemed almost impossible to have one group of officers who were not ignored and/or strongly criticised by other sizeable segments of the industry. Any shortcomings were not from lack of real desire to see the HAA as a successful representative body.
The latest leadership showed good intentions but unfortunately did not comand enough respect or credibility in the wider industry to engender confidence, which was refelected in the recent AGM and response to the appeal.
What may be needed now is a rethink of what the best vehicle is to speak with one voice to government regulators and the public. It may be we need a corporate funded lobby group representing the majors. In effect, something like that has happened with the NVG working group. Much of the activity was well outside the recent HAA leadership's expertise, even if the group was ostensibly working on behalf of the HAA.
A funded majors group may exist separate from other volunteer groups representing separate slices of the industry. Much of what an HAA should be about is promoting the industry and encouraging participation from entry level to the top layers. A corporate lobby group would be there for the majors immediate commercial interests and would likely not fulfil the broader needs of industry envigoration.
How about opening this up to constructive discussion? Let's leave out the past and float ideas of how to best address the future and speak with one voice.
Is it possible or are we too divided? Too apathetic? The Government is normally not interested in talking with several groups from the same industry all pushing for different outcomes in legislation so it is in the wider interests of all of us to develop a strategy for the future.
What has plagued the HAA for almost its entire history has been the perception that it is not representative of all of us. It is not easy to be all things to all people. For decades many saw it as the media club. Then many saw it as the GA end; single engine charter/mustering/schools;then the Sydney CBD club. It seemed almost impossible to have one group of officers who were not ignored and/or strongly criticised by other sizeable segments of the industry. Any shortcomings were not from lack of real desire to see the HAA as a successful representative body.
The latest leadership showed good intentions but unfortunately did not comand enough respect or credibility in the wider industry to engender confidence, which was refelected in the recent AGM and response to the appeal.
What may be needed now is a rethink of what the best vehicle is to speak with one voice to government regulators and the public. It may be we need a corporate funded lobby group representing the majors. In effect, something like that has happened with the NVG working group. Much of the activity was well outside the recent HAA leadership's expertise, even if the group was ostensibly working on behalf of the HAA.
A funded majors group may exist separate from other volunteer groups representing separate slices of the industry. Much of what an HAA should be about is promoting the industry and encouraging participation from entry level to the top layers. A corporate lobby group would be there for the majors immediate commercial interests and would likely not fulfil the broader needs of industry envigoration.
How about opening this up to constructive discussion? Let's leave out the past and float ideas of how to best address the future and speak with one voice.
Is it possible or are we too divided? Too apathetic? The Government is normally not interested in talking with several groups from the same industry all pushing for different outcomes in legislation so it is in the wider interests of all of us to develop a strategy for the future.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just won a bet that I made three years ago that the HAA was only only going to last as long as the bank account, what a disgrace.
Where will you go now Rosemarie. shame.
Where will you go now Rosemarie. shame.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oz. Mahgni
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if they'd even be interested but the AAAA's (Agricultural Aviation Association of Australia) are a very successful organization with the offices and professional expertise in Canberra to lobby on behalf of the HAA (for a fee of course). I imagine that the time their people could put into it would be commensurate with the amount of financial support coming from the helicopter industry. But their CEO, Phil Hurst is certainly very effective for the AAAA's in Canberra. My thoughts are that if the Helicopter industry were able to pay a staff member to work in the AAAA Canberra office, that might be all that was needed initially, I'm fairly sure they have the space for a desk.
I proposed this as a solution to Rosemarie over a year ago, I think she followed up on it but it never happened so perhaps it's a no-go from the AAAA side.
Ag in Australia is sort of in decline at the moment so I see this as being beneficial to both sides.
Just my two-bobs worth.
I proposed this as a solution to Rosemarie over a year ago, I think she followed up on it but it never happened so perhaps it's a no-go from the AAAA side.
Ag in Australia is sort of in decline at the moment so I see this as being beneficial to both sides.
Just my two-bobs worth.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the move...
Age: 58
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What so we need?
One conversation that I was part of recently was that aviation businesses need one representative within the industry and pilots need a second, seperate representative.
One would cover pay and conditions, safety concerns, etc.
The other would cover industry led changes and regulation (Air crew competencies, NVG as example).
Just a thought.
One would cover pay and conditions, safety concerns, etc.
The other would cover industry led changes and regulation (Air crew competencies, NVG as example).
Just a thought.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been encouraging Rob to get the Asia Pacific Heli Assn back up and running as there is a void to fill and better to strike now while the irons hot.
Back in the old days each state had its own committe and they had their monthly meetings to discuss whatever was happening in their respective states. If it was something that needed help with then it was taken up to the national level. Maybe thats something that could be done again. I am sure there would be plenty of people out there who would be keen for the industry to have a decent respresentative voice in the halls of Canberra.
Someone who comes to mind, and I know the CHC guys might hang me here, is Ian Badham. Love him or hate him he is a media and political guru and saved Careflight on a number of occasions with his lobbying. He is the type of person who could benefit the APHA.
Topendtorque seems to have a lot of spare time these days, judging by the amount of time he is online so he could be a rep for the mustering segment, and knowing him personally I doubt we would find anyone more experienced. John Eacott is in semi retirement and would be a great Victorian chairman as he was in the old days.
I got off the phone this morning with a couple of manufactrurers in the USA and floated the APHA idea to them and them becoming corporate sponsors and they were all for it, so there is still a lot of potential there. So these are my thoughts on who could do what - Just food for thought.
NSW - Greg Ohlson
QLD - Rob Rich
WA -
TAS -
NT - Topendtorque
VIC - John Eacott
NZ - Qwilton Biel
Political Liaison - Ian Badham
Mustering - Topendtorque
So what are the views from the floor
Back in the old days each state had its own committe and they had their monthly meetings to discuss whatever was happening in their respective states. If it was something that needed help with then it was taken up to the national level. Maybe thats something that could be done again. I am sure there would be plenty of people out there who would be keen for the industry to have a decent respresentative voice in the halls of Canberra.
Someone who comes to mind, and I know the CHC guys might hang me here, is Ian Badham. Love him or hate him he is a media and political guru and saved Careflight on a number of occasions with his lobbying. He is the type of person who could benefit the APHA.
Topendtorque seems to have a lot of spare time these days, judging by the amount of time he is online so he could be a rep for the mustering segment, and knowing him personally I doubt we would find anyone more experienced. John Eacott is in semi retirement and would be a great Victorian chairman as he was in the old days.
I got off the phone this morning with a couple of manufactrurers in the USA and floated the APHA idea to them and them becoming corporate sponsors and they were all for it, so there is still a lot of potential there. So these are my thoughts on who could do what - Just food for thought.
NSW - Greg Ohlson
QLD - Rob Rich
WA -
TAS -
NT - Topendtorque
VIC - John Eacott
NZ - Qwilton Biel
Political Liaison - Ian Badham
Mustering - Topendtorque
So what are the views from the floor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would need to check with Rob but I dont see why they couldnt as they dont have their own helo assns, and in PNG most of the operators have links to either Australia or NZ anyway.
One person cant keep the momentum going, its all about people joining in and creating something. The industry has been good to me and if I can give something back to it in the form of helping the APHA grow then am happy to do so.
I told Rob I will include a page in the mag with membership info so people can join.
How about you jumping onboard and helping this thing grow, you said you couldnt before, well here is an op for you to help create something that will last past our lifetime - hopefully.
Ned
One person cant keep the momentum going, its all about people joining in and creating something. The industry has been good to me and if I can give something back to it in the form of helping the APHA grow then am happy to do so.
I told Rob I will include a page in the mag with membership info so people can join.
How about you jumping onboard and helping this thing grow, you said you couldnt before, well here is an op for you to help create something that will last past our lifetime - hopefully.
Ned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankyou Ned,
I think that we are all a bit shell shocked at the moment re Mark etc..
With the fullness of time we will consider your suggestions, There are many derivatives of the problems that you hint at which need to be fleshed out.
The discussion on the Hems think tank thread for example typify your concerns greatly. What does go on in the field? and, can it be represented, by a quorum at ministerial level without perjury?
I think that this is the dilemma that agencies have when representation presents itself and that industries have yet to address. (not just ours)
No doubt the example given, AAAA is erstwhile, its rep (Phil Hurst) is recognisable as, as good a CEO's that you will get on OZ industry rep matters, (regardless of the industry) but? do they address matters to the honesty of the lobbied position??
Is this the problem with the HEMS debate at the moment?
I'll leave that one there, but once again thankyou for your kind words and as you know, anything that you suggest I shall give strong consideration to.
Regartding Rosemarie, I am indeed sorry that the agreed direction did not work out for the better, I know and respect her talent as a driver, (I really couldn't say otherwise for reasons that I'll keep to myself for now) but I am sorry that HHA has drowned. Perhaps your suggestion of a broader repesented group may be a much better. idea. I would be keen to hear more endorsement of it.
BTW, I realy enjoyed the Rugby League tonight. Great Stuff.
Perhaps the Rugby Union guys had better shape up or be out moded by the RL. It was really great to see Wayne Bennett bring our the best in your guys. I think the poms had better watch out, no more club finals at Twickenham??
cheers tet
I think that we are all a bit shell shocked at the moment re Mark etc..
With the fullness of time we will consider your suggestions, There are many derivatives of the problems that you hint at which need to be fleshed out.
The discussion on the Hems think tank thread for example typify your concerns greatly. What does go on in the field? and, can it be represented, by a quorum at ministerial level without perjury?
I think that this is the dilemma that agencies have when representation presents itself and that industries have yet to address. (not just ours)
No doubt the example given, AAAA is erstwhile, its rep (Phil Hurst) is recognisable as, as good a CEO's that you will get on OZ industry rep matters, (regardless of the industry) but? do they address matters to the honesty of the lobbied position??
Is this the problem with the HEMS debate at the moment?
I'll leave that one there, but once again thankyou for your kind words and as you know, anything that you suggest I shall give strong consideration to.
Regartding Rosemarie, I am indeed sorry that the agreed direction did not work out for the better, I know and respect her talent as a driver, (I really couldn't say otherwise for reasons that I'll keep to myself for now) but I am sorry that HHA has drowned. Perhaps your suggestion of a broader repesented group may be a much better. idea. I would be keen to hear more endorsement of it.
BTW, I realy enjoyed the Rugby League tonight. Great Stuff.
Perhaps the Rugby Union guys had better shape up or be out moded by the RL. It was really great to see Wayne Bennett bring our the best in your guys. I think the poms had better watch out, no more club finals at Twickenham??
cheers tet
It's unfortunate that the paid office holder position in the HAA has received so much negative press. I know nothing about the recent office holder or the circumstances around the demise of the HAA, but moving forward whatever group is formed I still beleive a paid position is better for the industry. I remember vividly talking to Dan Tyler at the HAA meeting in Sydney in late 2000, a time when he & the HAA were struggling to increase membership, due in part because at the time the HAA was perceived as a "Sydney media pilot's" club. Dans' eloquent response to such criticism was "well join up & have your say & then it won't be!!". My point is that volunteers are more than likely employed in a particular section of the industry, & therefore will be current on the needs & failings of that section. It would be very difficult to hold down a full time job as well as keep up to date on goings on throughout the various sectors in order to provide balanced representation across the board, & everyone wants to feel that their dollar is helping them.
Like any business, who that person is will determine the success or failure. We are a fragmented industry & someone who can rally the key players & motivate change will make all the difference. Lowlevldevl's suggestion of cooperation with the AAAA gets full marks with me. I've done some time with a few Ag operators & an organisation that can stop that crowd from tearing each others throat out is worthy of an audience!!
Exciting times ahead, & I hope I can motivate myself to support the next organisation more than I did the last.
Like any business, who that person is will determine the success or failure. We are a fragmented industry & someone who can rally the key players & motivate change will make all the difference. Lowlevldevl's suggestion of cooperation with the AAAA gets full marks with me. I've done some time with a few Ag operators & an organisation that can stop that crowd from tearing each others throat out is worthy of an audience!!
Exciting times ahead, & I hope I can motivate myself to support the next organisation more than I did the last.
Thread Starter
Heliringer,
A good idea, which has been discussed over the years. AFAP does a great job for pilots, such as awards, conditions of service, pay, insurances, etc.It is basically a union representing pilots - an essential service for pilots.
An association on the other hand is called a "trade association" and represents all the industry including OEMs, owners, operators and pilots. In particular it has two negotiate with all the regulators from time. This may be to implement or overcome restrictions in new legislation, usually associated with new technology.
If an association becomes a union, then it tends to exclude owners, operators and regulators. At the same time if the union tries to become an association it has reversed limitations.
So I suppose there is no easy solution, except to say we have to support both.
Please keep you ideas coming, we can all learn!
A good idea, which has been discussed over the years. AFAP does a great job for pilots, such as awards, conditions of service, pay, insurances, etc.It is basically a union representing pilots - an essential service for pilots.
An association on the other hand is called a "trade association" and represents all the industry including OEMs, owners, operators and pilots. In particular it has two negotiate with all the regulators from time. This may be to implement or overcome restrictions in new legislation, usually associated with new technology.
If an association becomes a union, then it tends to exclude owners, operators and regulators. At the same time if the union tries to become an association it has reversed limitations.
So I suppose there is no easy solution, except to say we have to support both.
Please keep you ideas coming, we can all learn!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Downwind
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rob,
For an industry body to properly represent it's members, it needs to decide what it is.
As you correctly point out, the AFAP looks after pilots.
A resurgent industry body needs to look after OEM's, owners, operators & maintainers (ie the industrial elements) in dealing with the regulator.
Sometimes the industry body will be with the AFAP, sometimes against it, sometimes the argument will be between them. That's how it goes and so long as a progressive attitude is maintained (In this bunch? What am I thinking!) the future will appear brighter than it now does.
Trying to encompass everybody usually ends up leaving somebody out in the cold. Starting out knowing who you're fighting for gives you a better chance of success.
Finally, to have any input, it HAS to be in Canberra. By all means piggy back on the premises of a "cousin" body (AAAA?) but get down there. Nobody takes notice of you if you're anywhere else unless you have major voting pull (which aviation doesn't).
For an industry body to properly represent it's members, it needs to decide what it is.
As you correctly point out, the AFAP looks after pilots.
A resurgent industry body needs to look after OEM's, owners, operators & maintainers (ie the industrial elements) in dealing with the regulator.
Sometimes the industry body will be with the AFAP, sometimes against it, sometimes the argument will be between them. That's how it goes and so long as a progressive attitude is maintained (In this bunch? What am I thinking!) the future will appear brighter than it now does.
Trying to encompass everybody usually ends up leaving somebody out in the cold. Starting out knowing who you're fighting for gives you a better chance of success.
Finally, to have any input, it HAS to be in Canberra. By all means piggy back on the premises of a "cousin" body (AAAA?) but get down there. Nobody takes notice of you if you're anywhere else unless you have major voting pull (which aviation doesn't).
