ALL MEMBERS ! Please fill out those proxy forms..!!

[Alan Kilbride]

Whichever way this ends, it won't be great for the LAA. Damned if they do and damned if they don't is an old cliché that is going to apply here.
I do hope the instigator(s) of this motion look in a mirror and realise just what damage this devisive motion is going to do to OUR association.
I for one am blooming angry that this motion has been put forward. Not because of Ms Curtis Taylor's exploits, but because the votes were cast in 2016 and some blighter (s) refuse to accept it.
Actually I aren't blooming angry.......I'm bloody raving.

[Paul Catanach]

You and many others Alan.

My most charitable take on this is that TCT, her lawyer and PR company have probably been hounding our Board since 2016. The latter may have taken the view that the one way to settle this once and for all is another vote and I can sort of see why they might think this (despite the matter having been settled in 2016).

What I still don’t get is why our VP submitted the proposal. I asked before (above) and answer came there none. Miss Curtis-Taylor has the right, as a member, to propose so why not?

I think we (membership) also deserve some clarification what has been going on, if only to dispel rumours. Stories abound of legal threats and demands of compensation, high profile sponsors and supporters. It might all be tosh but either way it would be nice to know the truth, a rare commodity in this whole shambles.

[dmcnicholl]

What I still don’t get is why our VP submitted the proposal. I asked before (above) and answer came there none. Miss Curtis-Taylor has the right, as a member, to propose so why not?

I don't get that either Paul which makes me think Stewart Jackson is perhaps a chum of Miss Curtis-Taylor and either moves or wishes to move in her circle. Nothing wrong with that in itself but in this matter is he really acting in the best interests of an association of which he is a VP?

In an earlier post on this thread I asked how does a person become a VP of the LAA? Presumably such a person on being elected, appointed, whatever, agrees to some sort of code of conduct in matters pertinent to the LAA to act in a way beneficial to the LAA. Is this motion beneficial to the LAA and its membership or is it a needless distraction?

As to any suggestion of legal threats or compensation, how could that be? A motion was tabled in 2016, voted upon and the outcome declared. That Team T C-T didn't like the Proxy vote is irrelevant, that's how the system worked and, hopefully, will work again. This time round I'm sure the LAA will be keen to conduct things with scruple for the avoidance of any future legal pitfalls and if the vote this year echoes 2016, as I hope it will, I also hope that it is made clear that no future revisit of this matter will ever be entertained.

[ChampChump]

I'm sure the board would have been much happier without any of this and are doing its best to deal with the situation. I know much time has been spent on it already, time that would have been used differently.

Personally, I'm disappointed that a member who has much to say hasn't been seen, as far as I know, at any LAA events, in order to talk to other members. I'd have been proud to have made any of those flights and been pretty keen to explain any apparent discrepancies between what was publicised and what was done.
As it is, I'm finding it hard to understand the rather remote stance and lack of engagement.

[Chris Martyr]

This is a squabble over a trophy,.

Oh no it's not ! For absolutely no reason at all , a matter which was dealt with correctly and quite conclusively 2yrs ago has been dragged out for another unnecessary bashing . Just to suit the whims of one very manipulative individual.

To refer to it as , " a squabble over a trophy " is somewhat dismissive and a tad disingenuous . A more accurate description would be that it is the result of a bit of cultivating in the right places : Cronyism !

And not the first time that word has been used in connection with the LAA 'top drawer' either'. I seem to remember hearing similar utterances a few years ago after a succession of different CEO's passed through.
The LAA is a wonderful organisation . We are privileged to have people of excellent specialist knowledge doing good sterling work in the areas where it really counts .

But as you absolutely correctly say Brian , the LAA is a members organisation. The CAA were run through with a scythe a few years back , to rid them from the gold-plating and empire building .

Maybe "the boys from the M.C.C." need to be looked at a little closer.

[Trevor Harvey]

This debacle is certainly not just a "squabble over a trophy".
This is a disgraceful attempt to manipulate the LAA board of directors and the membership in order to gain undeserved recognition and approval, by a woman who apparently will stop at nothing to get her way.
The sad thing is that many members are going to be disillusioned by this and possibly resign their membership if this goes ahead.
Those of us who are required to maintain our membership in order to operate a permit aircraft do not have the luxury of expressing our displeasure in that manner.
Probably the vast majority of the membership will not be able to attend the AGM in person, and possibly many of them will decide not to bother to use their proxy vote out of disinterest in the subject matter.
Hence the vote may well go the other way.
This is my opinion of the reason why this has been dragged up again after two years.
If this motion is tabled at the AGM and if the original result is overturned by a new vote because of a lack of interest by the membership, then the LAA are going to be seen as a bunch of gutless old men who can be easily manipulated by anyone.
We will probably also be required to apologise publicly for the humiliation caused two years ago etc etc etc.
This particular thread, although attracting more interest than most on this forum has only received ~3000 views and some 50 replies. Many probably from the same few interested people.
Not, in my opinion, an example of outrage by the majority of the membership. Most of whom would far rather discuss flying their aircraft than getting involved in this garbage.

[Paul Lowry]

I suspect (well at least hope) that many others like me haven't posted previously but have read with great interest the postings on this thread. It has stirred up a lot of emotion and I have nothing further to add. Rest assured everyone I will be casting my proxy vote as I did previously, anticipating the very same result. I would also expect that anyone who has read transcripts of interviews with said person feels insulted by the comments and will use their vote to demonstrate as "polite" members how we feel about this. As I understand the subject is of great interest on (perhaps?) more widely used forums, there maybe a groundswell not represented on this forum.
That's my pennyworth.

[BobD]

I agree with the sentiment behind the change of title to this thread.

As someone who is out of the country until after the AGM, and therefore not able to collect the proxy form from the magazine, is there any other way of receiving a copy (i.e. from the LAA website ?), and can it be submitted by email ?

I definitely want to vote on the issue in question, and confirm my vote of two years ago.

[Trevor Harvey]

Thank you Paul, and I hope you are right.

[Paul Catanach]

I agree wholeheartedly with the last few posts, this should not be allowed to succeed simply because the majority of the membership have not heard the ‘No’ side of the story and seen the evidence.

Mind you, if the proposal were to wobble through on this basis what would there be to prevent a proposal next year to rescind the award again? And the year after that. And the year after that (ad nauseum).

Two can play at this game.

[Chris Martyr]

Two can play at this game.

Well , as Barry Tempest's seconder in 2016 , I most certainly WON'T be lowering myself to that level !

I have this great hobby y'know. There's a clue in the top right of the page wot it is ... You can see me flying solo . It's very satisfying and I thoroughly recommend it !

Funnily enough though , I was chatting with a fellow Deanland resident and long-standing LAA'er this morning and mentioned that all this had kicked off again. He told me that he is interested in neither forums nor Tracey Curtis-Taylor . Which probably mirrors quite a few others . But his last remark was the most poignant by far : "There will be no winner in this - Other than the lawyers".

And so,,@ Mr Stewart Jackson , pray what is your motivation in bringing this up ? If it is for the furtherance and betterment of the Light Aircraft Association , I think the members may be able to help you here. The more astute among us seem to have cottoned on to the notion this is something of a suicide pact !
Whichever way it goes , you'll could either be leaping out of the aircraft from the LH door , or the RH door !

There will be no winners . Other than the lawyers !

[jangiolini]

I am seriously fed up with this whole debacle| My vote is by proxy because I am too far away from the AGM so does this make my vote any less valued! I think not! I am a reasonably long standing member and promote the LAA of which I am proud to be a associated with. I do feel however that a certain Mr Jackson does not have the LAA best interests at heart and if this turns out to be the case, then I suspect his position may become untenable, I would like to hear his version of events! if I am wrong I will apologise! When a motion is voted on it becomes final and written into the minutes unless new information comes to light is this the case?
Looking forwards to reading the motions being put forwards!
John.

[Paul Catanach]

I have this great hobby y'know. There's a clue in the top right of the page wot it is ... You can see me flying solo . It's very satisfying and I thoroughly recommend it !

Y’know what though? Whatever the outcome of the vote we’ll still be able to bimble around somewhere near the bottom of the aviation tree safe in the knowledge that we’re there on our own merit. In fact I enjoy that, I’m an inverted snob. I dress down in my raggiest clothes to go flying, as a demonstration to others that even with the rrse hanging out of your strides you can be an aviator.

I’d rather do that and meet up at airfields and fly-ins where for a tenner you get a landing fee, cuppa builder’s tea and a sossige inna bun. Among people who pay for their own flying, however simple or basic it and their aircraft might be. Sure, there’ll be the odd flash bugger in an RV or similar ( ) but many will have ‘proper’ aircraft with genuine basic controls and just the one knock-off tablet instead of a pimped-up crop duster groaning beneath the weight of half a dozen GPS’s and whatnot.

And I’ll gaze across the grass, look at the assorted ragtag bunch of misfits and think “I like flying with these people”.

Even Chris Martyr.

[Ian Hoolahan]

A lot of people unhappy with this going to vote with talk of leaving the LAA, perhaps a more effective protest would be to propose a vote of no confidence in the VP!

[Chris Martyr]

And I’ll gaze across the grass, look at the assorted ragtag bunch of misfits and think “I like flying with these people”.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and not a blazer or a cravat in sight !!....

How on earth do we do it ???.....