democracy and member involvement at work - not!

Alan George · Post by **Alan George** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 9:32 am

In the Bristol Strut the Club Charter was distributed before our last meeting so we could discuss it before the NC meeting on 24th September. I note:

1) "Struts and type clubs have until the 25th of September 2011 in which to sign the Club Charter and confirm their inclusion ...". That is NOT consultation but is demanding a decision one way or the other. There will be no time to bring back amendments to the Strut after the NC.

2) The Charter asks us to abide by "LAA Rules and Regulations at all times". Now I have a copy of the Rules but I see no Regulations so I am being asked to take something on trust.

Personally I am totally supportive of the LAA but is easy to see how people get rubbed up the wrong way by this issue.

Regards, Alan.

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:09 am

Hi Alan, as has been pointed out on earlier posts, the Charter was sent out eight weeks prior to the September 24th NC meeting so that it could be reviewed and discussed. If we were intent on ignoring ideas and comments from the Struts and Clubs, why would we bother to do that? If you have issues with the Charter content please let your NC rep know so that he/she can raise them at the NC, or write/email into the office about them.
I'm the first to say that we have to improve the board/NC relationship, it has not been as well ordered as it should have been over the past two or three years. This NC sees the opportunity to vote in a new NC Chair who wants to raise the influence and responsibilities of the NC so that it has a significant role to play in the governance of the Association. We will also see new CEO Rich Dunevein-Gordon taking over as the link between the HQ and the Struts/NC, so there is every opportunity to take a fresh look at what is broken, fix it and move ahead to a more creative and involved future for what should be the second tier of Association governance.

Tom Sheppard · Post by **Tom Sheppard** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 12:36 pm

A recognition that there are fences to mend and an expression of the will to do it is a good start. Thank you Brian for a constructive post which bodes well for the future.

Nick Long · Post by **Nick Long** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:49 pm

Alan George wrote: 2) The Charter asks us to abide by "LAA Rules and Regulations at all times". Now I have a copy of the Rules but I see no Regulations so I am being asked to take something on trust.

Alan has spotted the problem.

AFAIUI, the Rules say that Clubs must follow the Regulations. But the Regulations have not been written yet. So, I've been sitting back and saying our Strut will be able to decide on this business of being in or out when we can see what the benefits and costs are. Until then, we can't form a policy.

But now we have a Charter. The Charter also says the Clubs must follow the Regulations, but we still don't have the Regulations. What's new is that we're not allowed to continue our perfectly sensible policy of saying we'll make a decision when we know what's entailed.

Dare I ask the $64 question? What will the Regulations say about Third Party Passenger Flying?

Nick

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:35 am

Hi Nick, the Regulations do indeed exist, they exist within a number of LAA operating requirements but they have yet to be brought together into one single document. For example, in Technical Leaflet TL1.02 it states "Permission to deviate from the plans or standard kit must be sought from LAA Engineering." Such a comment is not included in the LAA Rules, but clearly it is an important instruction that builders must comply with - it is a regulation. There are numerous similar examples throughout LAA documentation but it will take a month of Sundays to sift them all out. Not surprisingly we have had rather more important things to spend our time on of late, better to meet DfT to minimise Olympic airspace restrictions, or organise a Rally I think than spend hours gathering Regulations into a single location, something which no doubt will be done at some point in the future. Fact is though that the Regulations do exist, and the Charter merely asks that Struts and Clubs agree to abide by them.

steveneale · Post by **steveneale** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:03 pm

Apparently we are paying two CEOs at the moment. You might wish to delegate the task to the spare one

Rod1 · Post by **Rod1** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:18 pm

Brian

I have read your post through several times and I would love to see you explain it to a room full of strut members! If this is low priority then give the struts until the job is done to make a decision.

Rod1

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:13 pm

Although this seems to have generated a lot of angst, nothing much has changed really. The 2004 rules of the PFA says in para 10a:

Rules and Regulations

The Committee shall have the power to make and vary such Regulations as it may think fit, provided that these do not conflict with the Rules. Changes to the Rules must be agreed by a General Meeting before implementation.

The rules of the LAA now contain an identical paragraph - even the para number is the same.

So the members (and now the shareholders) are responsible for approving rules and the committee for approving regulations which generally relate to the procedures that allow us to operate. It is sensible for such regulations to be embedded in the documents that they relate to and it would make no sense to produce a tome of regulations in isolation.

However, given that the old and new CEOs are busy doing important handover stuff, perhaps Steve would offer to compile this tome which we could call "The Completely Useless List of Regulations" and we could then put him up for a Nobel Peace Prize for his work. When he has done that could he come around and help me with some riveting?

John

steveneale · Post by **steveneale** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:57 pm

No problem:

A Competely Useless List of Regulations
============================

1) Do as the board tell you

2) Your a strut, not the board, see 1.

3) Don't fly without asking as it's dangerous and the board might get sued.

4) Don't do nuffink' else unless you ask the board first

5) The board is very overloaded for some reason so don't pester 'em.

Glad to help

Rod1 · Post by **Rod1** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:15 pm

macconnacher · Post by **macconnacher** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:01 am

Together with Harry Hopkins I have just produced a new draft set of regulations which we can discuss at the next NC - this task we took on at the last meeting but the Rally with all the trophies and judging activities + paid work and annual holidays it has been delayed. I expect to get it circulated to NC this week when I get back from Brussels. It is a little OTT at the moment but it is simpler to trim a document rather than add bits at large meeting such as the NC. I also expect some debate on the rules since they are part of this picture and the NC has not debated them and they reflect on the regulations.

I believe it should be a minimalist document so that the clubs are given scope to organise their affairs to suit their size and circumstances.

Chris B · Post by **Chris B** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:47 pm

John Brady wrote:Although this seems to have generated a lot of angst, nothing much has changed really. The 2004 rules of the PFA says in para 10a:

Rules and Regulations

The Committee shall have the power to make and vary such Regulations as it may think fit, provided that these do not conflict with the Rules. Changes to the Rules must be agreed by a General Meeting before implementation.

The rules of the LAA now contain an identical paragraph - even the para number is the same.

So the members (and now the shareholders) are responsible for approving rules and the committee for approving regulations which generally relate to the procedures that allow us to operate. It is sensible for such regulations to be embedded in the documents that they relate to and it would make no sense to produce a tome of regulations in isolation.

John

John,

I can't find your references above in the LAA Rules 2011. In an earlier version, there was para 6a, but that's all gone. Para 3 is the only mention of Rules and Regulations and states:

3 AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD
Members shall comply with the Rules & Regulations of the LAA and the lawful instructions of the Board.
Refer to Article 27a and 27b regarding Rules covering Company governance and Regulations covering Company operations.

Articles 27a and 27b are in the Articles of Association:

27. a) Rules and Regulations
Rules are promulgated on matters of Company governance. Regulations are promulgated on operational and administrative matters. The Board shall have the power to make and vary such Rules and Regulations of the Company as it may think fit, provided that these do not conflict with the Articles. Changes to the Articles must be agreed by the Company in general meeting before implementation.
The beneficial shareholders of the Company may bring motions for changes to the Rules only to a general meeting of the Company when, if the motion is carried, the changes shall be binding on the Company and its Board of Directors provided that these do not conflict with the Articles. Such motions shall be subject to the provisions of Articles 12-20.

b) Interpretation of the Rules and Regulations
Except where otherwise provided in these Articles, the Board shall be the sole authority as to the interpretation of the Rules and Regulations and for settling any disputes relating to the affairs of the Company and the conduct of the beneficial shareholders in relation thereto.

So,

1. It would seem that there are two sets of Rules and Regulations: One entitled Rules and Regulations of the LAA (applicable to all members?) with which Struts and Clubs must comply. Then there’s a second set of Rules and Regulations for the Governance and Operation in the Articles of the company Light Aircraft Association Ltd., which broadly covers the CEO, Directors and Engineering activities.

2. How are the members (and now the shareholders) responsible for approving rules? I think that the superseded Rules version you were referring to stated "The Board shall have the power to make and vary such Rules and Regulations of the LAA as it may think fit..." NC is not the shareholders representative group although it may have delegated authority to represent the Board. I understood that the only way for members to change the Rules is via a resolution at an AGM i.e. effectively going against the Board.

3. Which committee were you referring to that has responsibility for approving regulations which generally relate to the procedures that allow us to operate?

4. Members can only comply if the R&Rs have been promulgated. If they are important then the work has to be done.

This thread has highlighted some confusion so please could you clarify what the R&Rs are and how they are made, approved and altered.

All the best,

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:19 pm

Hi Chris, I know John is rather busy at present so may I offer comment.
John was merely suggesting that there is really no difference to what is expected of the Struts by the Board post the restructuring than there was by the Executive Committee in the old (in his example 2004) structure.
The committee he refers to is the old EC, as he is quoting from the old rules.
The most important rules are today contained within the Articles of Association, and cannot be changed by the Board. Today's Rules cover the not so vital stuff and can be changed by the Board if it deems it necessary. Members can also propose motions to change the rules at an AGM or EGM, they are not necessarily going against the Board by doing so, it really depends on whether the Board agrees with the change or not.
As I said in an earlier post, the Regulations exist within all manner of LAA operational requirements. What seems to be an issue for some reason is that they have not been collected together into a single document. But they weren't pre restructure either and nobody seemed overly bothered then.

Nick Long · Post by **Nick Long** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:40 am

Gentlemen,

I see that yesterday afternoon an outline draft of Regulations were emailed out. So far I've only had a quick look through them but they look ok. So, that's another brick in place, thanks.

Several other documents came too. The NC procedures and code of conduct are worth a read between the lines. They are the sort of documents you write for an unruly class of children.

These things are huge improvements, but there is still a thread running through them: The NC is being organised for the Board's convenience.

Nick

PS. Brian, you do a good job on the forum here. But why are you having to be the Board spokesman?

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:18 pm

Hi Nick, the proposals that came with the list of Regulations have not come from the Board, they are an individual's suggestions to try and get a more ordered means of operation of NC. They seem a reasonable basis for discussion but it will ultimately be NC that decides whether they are worth pursuing. Unfortunately no name was attached to the proposal so I do not know from whom it came, and like you, this was the first time I or the Board had seen it.
I am absolutely not the Board spokesman. As I work on the computer very regularly on the magazine, I keep an eye on what's going on in the forum and respond when I have a personal view or feel that information I have about something the Board is doing will add to the debate.