doug ronan removed as director from copa

[BGH]

When I bitch about something that bothers me -it's the director,or president tha tgets the first email;or phone call,just like this time - only the predidant replied & said he forwarded it to the directors for comment.I haven't heard a thing in over a week.

As for being anonymous - pretty sure copa can find me by my membership number under my name.

They did something rotten & need to answer for it.

Daryl
copa # 1500860

[Cat Driver]

76 members out of 20000 is "tons"? More like "less than half a percent of membership whining behind anonymous names on an internet forum."

Yeh, why would any flying organization pay any attention to a aviation forum where their members are upset over the way the top executives are running the organization?

After all it is only a flying forum read all over the world and so far it is just short of ten thousand hits.....hell that is nothing to worry about.

[AirFrame]

After all it is only a flying forum read all over the world and so far it is just short of ten thousand hits.....hell that is nothing to worry about.

You're still not getting it: 10000 hits, so if every one was a unique address (which it isn't) then half the members have read it, and only *76* want a meeting to change it!

[Cat Driver]

Oh I get it, many read it but few go to the bother of doing anything about it in an active manner.

However this has to be doing a lot of damage to the image of COPA and in time that organazation will fade into history from a lack of people willing to support a self serving group of managers.

By the way I quit being a member some years ago.

[Jungle Jim]

I got a reply from Kevin last night asking me to reconsider renewing my membership. He also stated that the Doug Ronan issue was explained on the COPA web page satisfactorily. For me it is a mute point at this point unless they make it right.

Jim

[AirFrame]

Kevin would love it if we all remained "mute" about it. But that's probably a moot point too.

[H Christensen]

The mute mutt is COPA.
For Mr. Psutka to tell a contributor to this forum that the letter from Mr. Hayes says it all is decidedly dodgy. Instead, it's the equivalent of a child's simple excuse of "Because" when challenged
It doesn't wash . . . but the silence seems to be working for them.
Psutka et al know that the firestorm is already beyond its 15-minutes, and if COPA just shuts up long enough the criticism will whither and die.
And they're probably right but -- GAWD -- I'd like to see that tactic, for once, backfire.
Make no mistake, COPA not engaging with AVCANADA posters is strategic.

[MrWings]

You are correct. This matter is closed as far as COPA exec is concerned. And, for most COPA members, if you don't read this forum you have no clue what is going on as it doesn't affect you.

GA is facing some serious threats and there is strength in numbers. COPA needs to be building bridges instead of burning them. I think the decision comes down to each individual come renewal time. Like an election, where you choose to support the government or not, your COPA membership is your ballot form.

[5x5]

The problem with any petition is trying to get it worded so that people will agree with all of it. If not, then they may well support the cause but not sign the petition because they don't agree with all of it. Not saying that is happening here, but it could be. And I agree that by not being more forthcoming COPA National is doing a real disservice to its members, but even more so to the local flights.

Most flights operate more or less independent from National on a day-to-day basis. And as such, National doesn't have a lot of impact on their vibrancy and local involvement. However, this issue calls into a lot of member's mind the value of continuing membership. Supporting a local flight does more or less indicate that you also support the national organization. So as members become more and more disenchanted by the lack of any meaningful messages from National, their displeasure is likely to surface as withdrawing from the local activities. That means the local flight - in no way associated with any of the funny business - suffers directly as a result of National's mismanagement of this issue. And that is truly a crying shame.

They may not not cancel their current membership as that money is already spent. However with the detachment that grows from less involvement locally, it's likely they will not renew membership when it comes due.

[Cat Driver]

Psutka et al know that the firestorm is already beyond its 15-minutes, and if COPA just shuts up long enough the criticism will whither and die.
And they're probably right but -- GAWD -- I'd like to see that tactic, for once, backfire.
Make no mistake, COPA not engaging with AVCANADA posters is strategic.

Just like in government politics these drones know that the vast majority of the people who keep them in power just do not have the time to be bothered with doing anything about changing the top management....

.......BUT....

If you Avcanada people want to really give Psutka and his flunky's a real headache you should make up a pile of posters and keep pinning them up on every bulletin board in every airport in Canada....all the poster needs to say is all COPA members should read this thread on Avcanada.

That just may gain some traction in removing these people from their power base in COPA.

[bmc]

Or use Avcanada as a launching platform for a new association to represent pilots and owners. You have a fair number of people here, both posting and lurking. You have a number of forums that touch on all topics in aviation that affect pilots and owners, private and professional.

Grass roots start up with a common vision and purpose, recognition of issues facing owners and pilots. And a real determination to have a legitimate association.

That, could get COPA's attention.

[Cat Driver]

Hell of an idea bmc, aand for sure there a few determined posters here.

[Whiplash]

I'm just a 25 year old student pilot. I must say this topic has provided me a lot of information and insight on the matter of Pilot's associations, for which I thank all of you. While I am sure an organisation like COPA has a worthy history to be proud of, I am more interested in what value my membership dollar will provide for me and fellow aviators's future, today.

Being misrepresented and paying for the obnoxious salary of a president who even refuses to address core issues with long standing members (as shown on previous pages) has zero value to me.

Personally, I agree with BMC's views. When I was inquiring to flight schools about the Ifs and Hows, I was directed to this forum by more than one flight instructor as "a great place to find information or jobs". The community here seems to be bound by Aviation and because of that has its member's best interest at heart. For me, at the stage I am at, AVCANADA is the better option as a Pilot's Association right now

[CFR]

Or use Avcanada as a launching platform for a new association to represent pilots and owners. You have a fair number of people here, both posting and lurking. You have a number of forums that touch on all topics in aviation that affect pilots and owners, private and professional.

Grass roots start up with a common vision and purpose, recognition of issues facing owners and pilots. And a real determination to have a legitimate association.

That, could get COPA's attention.

It should be easy to get a BOD of like minded people able to work together progressively and respectfully from the site membership. And once established they would be supported by all who would only put forward constructive and well reasoned positions.

[bmc]

Now that I've had five hours sleep....

In my view, a good pilot/owner association should offer its members the following:

1. Well organized advocacy, representing pilots concerns about:
a) restrictive govt policies
b) airport, navigation, licensing fees
c) proposed airport closures or restrictions
d) proposed changes to regulations

2. Work with TC as it moves forward, not simply responding to change.

3. Provide input and encourage Canadian made aviation products to grow a sustainable aviation manufacturing industry.

4. Organize safety seminars, both as webinars and face to face.

5. Encourage aerobatic training, not only for sport, but to make future pilots better rounded pilots.

6. Play an active role in the community to show the benefits of aviation.

7. Provide members with discounts on insurance, hotels, restaurants, etc.


Can I ask you to add to this list? I'm sure you all have ideas. Refine the ones I have written. It could be interesting, once we have a comprehensive list, to see how Avcanada discussion forums could be tweaked to reflect the list above. Each of the forums here are packed with current relevant concerns and discussions. They provide a lot of input that an executive committee could work with as an ongoing agenda. The forum could provide feedback to an executive and an ongoing discussion. Much more effective and engaging than a newsletter.

[PilotDAR]

BMC, five hours of sleep seems to be just the right amount for you to make up a well thought out post! I certainly agree with the points you have raised, other than one, I'll come back to.

Any organization which represents a communal group really owes it to that group to effectively represent the interests of that group, not their own higher order agenda, which might be airy fairy to the members. I'm not completely slamming COPA, but as I have stated, I was a first hand witness to some issues of real importance to owners getting a pass by COPA, where the members had a need for representation, and now, 15 years later, are paying the price for it - and I am seeing that. My opinion is that COPA just got too self important, and chose to steer itself, rather than listening to the members, who knew what they needed, steer it.

I somewhat disagree with BMC's point 7. Though this could be an element of an association, I do not believe that it should be an objective, or consume any association effort. In a lean aviation association (as it should be) the effort of the association staff should be focused on the aviation goals of the members, and this one is really a sideline. If well paid staff are not doing aviation things which need to be done, because they are seeking and negotiating little deals, their time was mis spent in my opinion. If the source of the proposed discount approaches with the idea, perhaps, but only if it involves a minimum effort for substantial gain. Let's have the aviation skilled staff focus on the aviation needs of the members. If my AME knows a hotel down the road when I need one, fine, but I want him working on my plane, rather that out looking for hotel deals for me, 'cause that's what I hired him to do!

[photofly]

Any organization which represents a communal group really owes it to that group to effectively represent the interests of that group

Despite what you think, this is absolutely and completely 100% wrong.

COPA is a non-profit corporation. The directors have a duty in law to act in the best interests of the organisation, as written down in the Articles of Association. The Articles (to which we don't have access) will say something like "COPA is an organisation whose aim is to promote aviation in Canada". The members could all be coal-miners or celebrity chefs. Their interests are totally irrelevant.

It's a common and big mistake for members of organisations to think that by joining an non-profit like COPA, they get "represented" or "supported". They absolutely don't. When they join an organisation they support the aims or the organisation as stated in the Articles, and it's to further the aims as stated in the Articles that the Directors are required, by law, to act.

Fatuous example: Twenty seven thousand red-headed people join COPA and pass a resolution that COPA is to campaign to end discrimination against people with ginger hair. "We demand that the board of COPA represent our interests! Our Board must represent our wishes!" But the Articles don't include anything about discrimination, or red hair, and the Directors have no power and would be wrong in law to follow their members demands.

[PilotDAR]

Yes, I have been known to be 100% wrong - just a part of doing things in life, I suppose.

Happily, my relationship with COPA, and tens of thousands of other organizations works perfectly for me, as I am not a member of any of them, thus I have no expectations of them, nor them of me.

In my utopian world of how a group of people should work together toward promoting a common interest, I don't have to feel 100% wrong - just in the minority apparently!

[Docav8or]

To COPA Flight Captains
From COPA Chair Paul Hayes
Further to the recent announcement concerning the removal of Doug Ronan as a Director, the Board has received a number of enquires as to further details of his behavior that led to the Board’s decision to ask for his resignation. As explained in the message from the Chair posted on the COPA website, it involved Mr. Ronan’s continued attacks on Board decisions, which he was expressly required to accept and uphold once passed by a majority of the Board. Mr. Ronan did not uphold the decisions, but attacked them, and has admitted subsequently in various public forums on the Internet that he did so. In addition, there may be some confusion about the relationship between the Board and Staff.
I ask you to read the Chair’s message concerning the Board’s decision, which is also contained on page A6 of the August newspaper, and also the Chair’s article on page A4 of the same edition of the newspaper concerning the Board and Staff relationship and then disseminate this to your Flight members if they ask you for more information on the matter.
There is a balance between conveying sufficient information to members so that they can understand decisions taken by the Board and keeping the details of such information confidential lest it easily go beyond the confines of COPA membership. It has been decided to elaborate on one such incident to give the members further information and because, as will be seen, Mr. Ronan’s actions have already undermined the confidentiality that Board unanimity (following a Board vote) is intended to protect.
COPA and the Freedom to Fly Fund were asked to support the Toronto Island Pilot’s Association (COPA Flight 32) with respect to their efforts to protect their place at the Toronto Island Airport (Billy Bishop City Centre). This included not only financial support of a legal action being commenced by TIPA, but lobbying efforts by COPA. The written duties of a Director not only include the obligation to accept and uphold all duly passed Board resolutions and motions, but also an express recognition that, for external purposes, the President and CEO is the official spokesperson for COPA. In passing the resolution to support TIPA in their efforts, the (past) Chair emphasized that the President and CEO would continue to be the point person on this effort.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Ronan took it upon himself to unilaterally approach one of the parties on the opposite side of the issue (a responding party in the legal proceedings commenced by TIPA which was being financially supported by COPA) and engaged in discussions. COPA’s efforts in demonstrating support to TIPA were thus undermined. Mr. Ronan subsequently tried to justify his actions by saying that he had approached the other party as an individual and not as a COPA Director. However, the opposite party now knew he was dealing with a divided COPA Board and any efforts of COPA, through the President and CEO, were now effectively undermined.
Not only did Mr. Ronan not acknowledge his mistake in this matter, he subsequently attacked the support the Board showed for TIPA (which he initially voted for) and castigated others claiming this initiative, which he himself had undermined, was ineffective.

[Docav8or]

I received this response to Paul Hayes from John Cooper this morning:


Attention Concerned COPA Members

COPA Chairman Paul Hayes has written another letter appearing to address COPA’s illegal removal of elected Southern Ontario Board member Doug Ronan.

As with Mr. Hayes’s previous statement, the Board and the staff of COPA seem to be ignoring the actual issues that led to this callous and illegal decision.

It appears that they don’t want to answer the direct questions that numerous members have been asking since Mr. Ronan’s removal.

Instead they took weeks to concoct a rhetoric-filled letter that, to my mind, still does not give COPA members the answers they deserve, namely, why and how this took place.

Mentioned in the letter is the situation at the Toronto City Centre Airport (TCCA). Mr. Hayes’s version is quite different from the story as I know it. MR. Hayes wrote:

“Mr. Ronan took it upon himself to unilaterally approach one of the parties on the opposite side of the issue”

Here are the facts - a couple of people originally involved with the Toronto Island Pilots Association (TIPA) had an opportunity to meet with Porter CEO Bob Deluce to hear his ideas of how Porter and General Aviation could co-exist at TCCA. By that time, both had distanced themselves from TIPA because they did not foresee a positive outcome from TIPA and COPA’s pending court action.

Mr. Ronan was invited to attend this meeting by these people and other concerned tenants of TCCA.

Before attending, Mr. Ronan contacted COPA head office and then-Chair Bob Kirkby to inform him of the opportunity to meet with Mr. Deluce. COPA did not want Mr. Ronan to meet with Mr. Deluce representing COPA.

Doug Ronan, as a concerned 25+ year aviation businessman and a frequent user of the TCCA, attended this meeting but did not represent COPA.

At the COPA AGM in Hanover, Doug Ronan was told by Mr. Kirkby that he was

“much too passionate, and involved”

to have anything to do with the TCCA issue. Doug Ronan was taken aback, since he felt he was elected specifically because of those descriptives; passionate and involved.

Mr Hayes’s letter also contains the following:

“As explained in the message from the Chair posted on the COPA website, it involved Mr. Ronan’s continued attacks on Board decisions, which he was expressly required to accept and uphold, once passed by a majority of the Board. Mr. Ronan did not uphold the decisions, but attacked them”

When Doug Ronan received new information about potential problems arising from two decisions made by the Board, including himself voting with the Board, he brought them to the Board’s attention. His concerns were categorically rejected for “optics reasons”. This is why Mr. Ronan continued to voice his concerns.

For its part, the Board responded with an illegal action to refund his membership.

Mr. Hayes’s references to the need for secrecy are a common theme with those running COPA. Indeed, they have kept the details of Mr. Ronan’s ouster quiet except for these two smoke-and-mirror statements.

And now I come to the meat of the matter. There was some urgency to carry out this illegal action by the Board.

What was the rush? The answer: COPA’s Annual General Meeting!



The Board had to complete this removal before the AGM since new by-laws were to be enacted then. These new by-laws do not contain this “technicality” about the president’s ability to not renew someone’s membership that was used to illegally remove Doug Ronan. If they hadn’t removed him by the AGM, they would have had to go through the proper process of getting the members involved at the AGM, or AT A special meeting of the Membership.

That’s what the rush was. Odd, isn’t it, how nothing was mentioned about this at the AGM?

The Board was in such a hurry to remove Doug Ronan that it sent him a letter asking for his resignation just one day after he was released from hospital. He’d suffered a broken back, as a passenger in an aircraft accident four days prior.

Doug Ronan has served COPA in an honest and forthright manner for seven years. And his motivation has always been for the benefit of General Aviation while serving the COPA members.

As a 53-year member of COPA, Mr. Hayes, I urge you to do the right thing for COPA, and for its members: Resign as a director and as Chairman. Please put an end to the secrecy and fabrications!

VERY IMPORTANT - PLEASE SIGN OUR E-PETITION:

Sign the E-Petition to force the COPA Board to call a Special General Meeting to take action on this unfortunate situation. Go to:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/pet ... eting.html


John Cooper
53 year COPA member
johnhcooper@gmail.com

[Docav8or]

Afraid to sign the E-petition fearing your membership will be cancelled from COPA??

Don't be - only the administrator of the E-petition can see who has signed it - the COPA staff will never see it.

Please sign the petition and help us restore COPA to a member driven organization not a dictatorship!

This is your organization help us turn it around before it's too late!


http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/pet ... eting.html

[CpnCrunch]

Paul Hayes does seem to be ignoring the issue that has pissed off so many members: the illegal (or at least, highly dubious) method they used to remove Doug Ronan. If Doug did something wrong (and I have no real opinion on that, other than I'm not entirely trusting anything that COPA says on the matter) then they should have had a vote on removing him as per the bylaws.

I'm also pretty sure that the 'technicality' they used wouldn't stand up in court. It appears to be a very dubious interpretation of the bylaws they used to justify their actions.

[midwingcrisis]

It appears that more information is coming to light as to events leading up to Mr. Ronan being removed. A question I have is: Was there a conflict of interest by representing ones self (Ronan) in a meeting with a named defendant in a civil lawsuit of which that person is a director of an association (COPA) that is providing back support to the very group that launched the suit (TIPA)?

[Docav8or]

The meeting with Mr. Deluce that Doug Ronan was invited to attend, took place on April 20, 2012. According to public records "The Application for Judicial Review" was filed on November 20, 2012. So there is absolutely no conflict of interest there - the meeting was 7 months prior to the court action.

[AirFrame]

Only the administrator of the E-petition can see who has signed it - the COPA staff will never see it.

I suspect if the petition is ever to be used as a club to call a Special Meeting of COPA members, that the list will be made public enough to confirm that all people calling for the Special Meeting are indeed COPA members. Someone on the COPA staff will need to see it.