Re: Resignation as Chairman
Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:09 am
Hello,
I see that the moderators of Microlighters have made this matter the number one item. It ranks above the welcome to the blog. I agree the matters at hand are important and urge you to consider and comment on my point of view. I have not entered this debate, until now, as I felt that some of the comments were made at a personal level rather than by addressing the principles at stake. In these circumstances, I felt that it was best to allow matters to settle so that we can dig much deeper into the heart of these matters. At the core is the question of who is MISASA and what should we stand for?
To start, I am not fully briefed on all the specific allegations but believe that I understand the concerns of some. I have been told that four e-mails objecting to my last "Editor Unplugged" review have been received from the about 1,400 sent out to current and past members. I have received two of these and have responded to them and have shared my response with the full committee. Others have offered their points of view on this forum that is officially recognised by MISASA as the preferred microlighting blog. I proposed this matter some years back when we stepped in to assist Microlighters with a financial contribution.
It was asserted that I adopted the "Editor Unplugged" banner for the newsletter and that I have no right to be critical of the services that you, the membership receive from our service providers.
Firstly, let me address the "Editor Unplugged" matter. It is not new it is the fundamental basis upon which I accepted to be the Editor of your magazine. Some fifteen years ago I accepted the post of the Editor of Microflight Africa on the understanding that I would have the right to the freedom of speech. At the outset, I established the desk of the "Editor Unplugged". In tandem, I established the "Feather" and "Wally" awards. I have made a few dozen Feather Awards and two Wally Awards. These have been issued by me, and it is me, not the committee, that is accountable for telling it, as I see it. It was only, as a compromise, demanded by a previous Chairman, as a condition of him accepting my nomination as Chairman of MISASA that I agreed to stand for appointment to the committee. Please scroll down on the MISASA website Home Page to the headings Communications and Awards to read more on these matters. I urge you to read the home page, and I ask that you note that these awards are constructive and are designed to improve services to the membership. Note also that I have not issued a "Lovable Wally" award for some time.
If MISASA removes my editorial right to a freedom of speech to defend the rights and interests of the membership, as I see fit, then the current committee will not share the values held dear by the MISASA committees that have been in office for, at least, the past fifteen years.
Those holding office in MISASA for the past decade and a half have upheld my editorial policy. The full policy is printed on page 27 of the last magazine. Please read it. If you do not have a copy it is a flipbook on the MISASA website in the blog.
Certainly, we need to sort this matter out. Alex Rudd, a previous Chairman of MISASA, has been calling for clarity on the fundamental principles for which MISASA stands. Until recently Alex held office as your Safety Officer. Over this matter, Alex has resigned, and the position of Safety Officer is vacant. Please consider volunteering your services to fill these very big shoes. Alex is a mature doyen of microlighting and his wisdom will surely be missed when it comes to representing you at the CAA.
The next matter that I seek to clarify for you is my position on the stakeholders that should service our needs. In other words, who do I believe should do what? I am loyal to MISASA, RAASA, CAA and the Aero Club but do not confuse loyalty with my editorial obligations to our members. I persuaded JB and DH to join the Committee, I proposed RK for her appointment to the Aero Club board and I support every individual on the committee but there is a pressing matter that Alex Rudd felt strongly, as do I, about. We need affirmation and consensus on our vision and the strategy to achieve it.
The CAA and RAASA are public entities charged to regulate but also to serve your interests. In a democracy, it is the people who are in charge, and they vote for representatives to represent their interests. As a collective of some 1,000 pilots we have a right to service delivery, and as a representative body, it is a fundamental duty of ours to guard the rights and interests of microlight pilots. One of my editorial aims is: Offering constructive appraisal of the status of our quest for the "Freedom of Flight" within South Africa.
In a post on 22 September, the following was quoted, and it would seem that clarity on my position is sought.
"Further to the above, MISASA is committed to an outcome that sees pilot peer pressure as the driving force to compliance. It hopes that RAASA and the CAA will cross the floor and work with us to build a future where there is mutual respect and a joint drive to earn the support of pilots in exerting the peer pressure needed to command safe skies."
I stand by the above comment and affirm that there is only one of me... even though my bathroom scale may disagree! I believe that the CAA, RAASA and MISASA should speak with one voice and that there should be clarity about the roles that each should play.
The nub of this matter is that I believe that our skies should be free. I believe that as a solo pilot we should follow the lead of other nations and not even require a solo microlight pilot to have a licence. I have written about this in past magazines. We keep generating rules instead of guidelines. We should educate not police. MISASA should offer services and not be an enforcement authority. Pilots should self-regulate and fellow pilots should ensure that they follow and are educated on what will keep them alive in the sky. Peer pressure at an airfield level on what's right must be the supported. We keep moving to more rules and the latest being threats of ramp inspections. Have the ramp inspections but educate - why not offer a lecture on why the ramp inspection list is important. I believe that pilots are an intelligent bunch and if there is an appeal, their intellect will respond positively. Threaten to ground them, fine them, etc. and they will just stay away - it's what they did.
Allow me two examples. A little while ago there was a fuss on AVCOM about a matter. Pierre Laubser, from RAASA responded and went into some detail to explain and educate the bloggers on the matter. I take my hat off to him it was done well, it earned my respect and I am sure that of others. At the end of last year, I went to see a senior executive at RAASA about the requirements for the event at Kitty Hawk that was postponed to Tedderfield. I had taken a German microlight pilot and world champion base jumper there to sort out an ATF as he had bought a microlight from me and needed the ATF to cross the border the next day to Botswana where it was to be reregistered. I was sent packing. Literally, I was dressed down without literally being allowed the opportunity to utter one word. Incidentally, on the microlight matter the German pilot was required to join and pay full Aero Club and MISASA fees for 2015 and for 2016 before the ATF that he needed for one day was issued. The upshot of it was that I did not return to RAASA for clarity on the requirements for a fly-in.
Next, I need to address the "Editor Unplugged" e-mail that offended some.
I contrasted the service delivery of a lady from the council, who not only offered us the SASREA Certificate form but pulled up a chair, in our meeting, and filled in the form for us. The next morning she took it to the SAPS Colonel, who went with her to see other service providers on our behalf. Between the Tedderfield Committee, TAF, SAPS and the Council they ensured that all were compliant, and we went the extra mile to make sure that we met with each and every request.
I never named the CAA nor RAASA in the e-mail. This is no accident. I was not in a position to verify the source of the SMS's but some committee members confirmed their authenticity. I received a stream of SMS's days before the event about all the requirements that were needed and what was going to happen to the pilots that attended. In the end, we even had to pay R2,000 for the Marquee pegs to be inspected, but in a display of effective teamwork, we met with every one, of a huge list of requirements ( at great cost in time and money to us, TAF and Tedderfield) to hold a fly-in and static display of aircraft. I have organised (with the committee) four highly successful, well-attended events like this in past years and given the new rules I am of the opinion that MISASA, the CAA and RAASA were shown up by the local council and the SAPS. I found out, days before the event, that members of the MISASA Committee were briefed by a lawyer at RAASA about all the new requirements and that the necessary procedure was followed for another event. I believe that the oversight of not sharing this knowledge with me a month before the event is a matter that the committee needs to explain.
In summary, I believe that the CAA and RAASA must regulate and be held accountable for service delivery. I believe that MISASA should stand to uphold the rights and interests of its members and I believe that the Editor of your magazine should have the freedom of speech to have an "Editor Unplugged" newsletter which at the moment, has been suspended pending clarity on what the vision and strategy of MISASA is.
Fly safe and enjoy every airbourne moment,
Nemo
aka The Editor
I see that the moderators of Microlighters have made this matter the number one item. It ranks above the welcome to the blog. I agree the matters at hand are important and urge you to consider and comment on my point of view. I have not entered this debate, until now, as I felt that some of the comments were made at a personal level rather than by addressing the principles at stake. In these circumstances, I felt that it was best to allow matters to settle so that we can dig much deeper into the heart of these matters. At the core is the question of who is MISASA and what should we stand for?
To start, I am not fully briefed on all the specific allegations but believe that I understand the concerns of some. I have been told that four e-mails objecting to my last "Editor Unplugged" review have been received from the about 1,400 sent out to current and past members. I have received two of these and have responded to them and have shared my response with the full committee. Others have offered their points of view on this forum that is officially recognised by MISASA as the preferred microlighting blog. I proposed this matter some years back when we stepped in to assist Microlighters with a financial contribution.
It was asserted that I adopted the "Editor Unplugged" banner for the newsletter and that I have no right to be critical of the services that you, the membership receive from our service providers.
Firstly, let me address the "Editor Unplugged" matter. It is not new it is the fundamental basis upon which I accepted to be the Editor of your magazine. Some fifteen years ago I accepted the post of the Editor of Microflight Africa on the understanding that I would have the right to the freedom of speech. At the outset, I established the desk of the "Editor Unplugged". In tandem, I established the "Feather" and "Wally" awards. I have made a few dozen Feather Awards and two Wally Awards. These have been issued by me, and it is me, not the committee, that is accountable for telling it, as I see it. It was only, as a compromise, demanded by a previous Chairman, as a condition of him accepting my nomination as Chairman of MISASA that I agreed to stand for appointment to the committee. Please scroll down on the MISASA website Home Page to the headings Communications and Awards to read more on these matters. I urge you to read the home page, and I ask that you note that these awards are constructive and are designed to improve services to the membership. Note also that I have not issued a "Lovable Wally" award for some time.
If MISASA removes my editorial right to a freedom of speech to defend the rights and interests of the membership, as I see fit, then the current committee will not share the values held dear by the MISASA committees that have been in office for, at least, the past fifteen years.
Those holding office in MISASA for the past decade and a half have upheld my editorial policy. The full policy is printed on page 27 of the last magazine. Please read it. If you do not have a copy it is a flipbook on the MISASA website in the blog.
Certainly, we need to sort this matter out. Alex Rudd, a previous Chairman of MISASA, has been calling for clarity on the fundamental principles for which MISASA stands. Until recently Alex held office as your Safety Officer. Over this matter, Alex has resigned, and the position of Safety Officer is vacant. Please consider volunteering your services to fill these very big shoes. Alex is a mature doyen of microlighting and his wisdom will surely be missed when it comes to representing you at the CAA.
The next matter that I seek to clarify for you is my position on the stakeholders that should service our needs. In other words, who do I believe should do what? I am loyal to MISASA, RAASA, CAA and the Aero Club but do not confuse loyalty with my editorial obligations to our members. I persuaded JB and DH to join the Committee, I proposed RK for her appointment to the Aero Club board and I support every individual on the committee but there is a pressing matter that Alex Rudd felt strongly, as do I, about. We need affirmation and consensus on our vision and the strategy to achieve it.
The CAA and RAASA are public entities charged to regulate but also to serve your interests. In a democracy, it is the people who are in charge, and they vote for representatives to represent their interests. As a collective of some 1,000 pilots we have a right to service delivery, and as a representative body, it is a fundamental duty of ours to guard the rights and interests of microlight pilots. One of my editorial aims is: Offering constructive appraisal of the status of our quest for the "Freedom of Flight" within South Africa.
In a post on 22 September, the following was quoted, and it would seem that clarity on my position is sought.
"Further to the above, MISASA is committed to an outcome that sees pilot peer pressure as the driving force to compliance. It hopes that RAASA and the CAA will cross the floor and work with us to build a future where there is mutual respect and a joint drive to earn the support of pilots in exerting the peer pressure needed to command safe skies."
I stand by the above comment and affirm that there is only one of me... even though my bathroom scale may disagree! I believe that the CAA, RAASA and MISASA should speak with one voice and that there should be clarity about the roles that each should play.
The nub of this matter is that I believe that our skies should be free. I believe that as a solo pilot we should follow the lead of other nations and not even require a solo microlight pilot to have a licence. I have written about this in past magazines. We keep generating rules instead of guidelines. We should educate not police. MISASA should offer services and not be an enforcement authority. Pilots should self-regulate and fellow pilots should ensure that they follow and are educated on what will keep them alive in the sky. Peer pressure at an airfield level on what's right must be the supported. We keep moving to more rules and the latest being threats of ramp inspections. Have the ramp inspections but educate - why not offer a lecture on why the ramp inspection list is important. I believe that pilots are an intelligent bunch and if there is an appeal, their intellect will respond positively. Threaten to ground them, fine them, etc. and they will just stay away - it's what they did.
Allow me two examples. A little while ago there was a fuss on AVCOM about a matter. Pierre Laubser, from RAASA responded and went into some detail to explain and educate the bloggers on the matter. I take my hat off to him it was done well, it earned my respect and I am sure that of others. At the end of last year, I went to see a senior executive at RAASA about the requirements for the event at Kitty Hawk that was postponed to Tedderfield. I had taken a German microlight pilot and world champion base jumper there to sort out an ATF as he had bought a microlight from me and needed the ATF to cross the border the next day to Botswana where it was to be reregistered. I was sent packing. Literally, I was dressed down without literally being allowed the opportunity to utter one word. Incidentally, on the microlight matter the German pilot was required to join and pay full Aero Club and MISASA fees for 2015 and for 2016 before the ATF that he needed for one day was issued. The upshot of it was that I did not return to RAASA for clarity on the requirements for a fly-in.
Next, I need to address the "Editor Unplugged" e-mail that offended some.
I contrasted the service delivery of a lady from the council, who not only offered us the SASREA Certificate form but pulled up a chair, in our meeting, and filled in the form for us. The next morning she took it to the SAPS Colonel, who went with her to see other service providers on our behalf. Between the Tedderfield Committee, TAF, SAPS and the Council they ensured that all were compliant, and we went the extra mile to make sure that we met with each and every request.
I never named the CAA nor RAASA in the e-mail. This is no accident. I was not in a position to verify the source of the SMS's but some committee members confirmed their authenticity. I received a stream of SMS's days before the event about all the requirements that were needed and what was going to happen to the pilots that attended. In the end, we even had to pay R2,000 for the Marquee pegs to be inspected, but in a display of effective teamwork, we met with every one, of a huge list of requirements ( at great cost in time and money to us, TAF and Tedderfield) to hold a fly-in and static display of aircraft. I have organised (with the committee) four highly successful, well-attended events like this in past years and given the new rules I am of the opinion that MISASA, the CAA and RAASA were shown up by the local council and the SAPS. I found out, days before the event, that members of the MISASA Committee were briefed by a lawyer at RAASA about all the new requirements and that the necessary procedure was followed for another event. I believe that the oversight of not sharing this knowledge with me a month before the event is a matter that the committee needs to explain.
In summary, I believe that the CAA and RAASA must regulate and be held accountable for service delivery. I believe that MISASA should stand to uphold the rights and interests of its members and I believe that the Editor of your magazine should have the freedom of speech to have an "Editor Unplugged" newsletter which at the moment, has been suspended pending clarity on what the vision and strategy of MISASA is.
Fly safe and enjoy every airbourne moment,
Nemo
aka The Editor