Welcome back AFAP.
Pre 1989, almost all of us were members of the AFAP. They had knocked out an 'award' - offered unstinting expert support to those who had 'offended' when they believed there had been an 'unfair' decision made and many of 'the other' good things an association (Union if you like) could provide to the membership. It all got a little untidy in '89 and, to many, the AFAP became a target for the anger generated through the events of that dreadful year; see and avoid became the 'word' – unfair or warranted has been the subject of many, many often heated – 'debates'.
When the smoke cleared a bit and things settled down a bit, the AFAP ran smack bang into another rumour which soured the flavour. True or false I don't know – but, legend has it that a sizeable (important) chunk of mainstream AFAP funding came from CASA membership, with numbers and voting rights. This has never been either denied or qualified; but, over many a casual beer with others (old school and new chums) the legend has 'stuck' - becoming fact through repetition, mindless or otherwise.
The industry, that outside of the airlines needs solid, sane, experienced representation through a body all can have 'faith and trust' in. It is essential. However, it is also essential that the representation be for the members and that membership has faith in that 'voice'.
Only my opinion, but at the last Brisbane Senate Inquiry Hearing (mouthful) the AFAP seemed to have returned to it's roots; presenting plain spoken, logical, well argued truths, those which matter, spoken in a language that the political ears which matter can understand..
I say well done AFAP, my faith restored, the past forgotten and my best wishes for a speedy return to having a full voice, where it matters. Messrs Gray and Diamond proven worthy of industry support. Of course no one can afford the membership fees just now, but give it time. It ain't much of a head scratch to decide between AFAP and AOPA for the 'working' (or not) (or Wannabe) pilot.
Gray - "...We know CASA is now developing plain English-language guides so that people can understand the standards. So whilst they might say, 'It's nice to have, and we're doing it as a nice gesture for the industry to help them along,' surely it would not be necessary if recommendation 30(b) were adopted. Recommendation 31 talks about pivoting the regulations and standards, under development at that point in time, to adopt this new methodology. I would suggest that, if that had occurred, this inquiry probably wouldn't even have been called for in the first place, but here we are.
Bravo, well said, nicely done and welcome back – to the melting pot...
Pre 1989, almost all of us were members of the AFAP. They had knocked out an 'award' - offered unstinting expert support to those who had 'offended' when they believed there had been an 'unfair' decision made and many of 'the other' good things an association (Union if you like) could provide to the membership. It all got a little untidy in '89 and, to many, the AFAP became a target for the anger generated through the events of that dreadful year; see and avoid became the 'word' – unfair or warranted has been the subject of many, many often heated – 'debates'.
When the smoke cleared a bit and things settled down a bit, the AFAP ran smack bang into another rumour which soured the flavour. True or false I don't know – but, legend has it that a sizeable (important) chunk of mainstream AFAP funding came from CASA membership, with numbers and voting rights. This has never been either denied or qualified; but, over many a casual beer with others (old school and new chums) the legend has 'stuck' - becoming fact through repetition, mindless or otherwise.
The industry, that outside of the airlines needs solid, sane, experienced representation through a body all can have 'faith and trust' in. It is essential. However, it is also essential that the representation be for the members and that membership has faith in that 'voice'.
Only my opinion, but at the last Brisbane Senate Inquiry Hearing (mouthful) the AFAP seemed to have returned to it's roots; presenting plain spoken, logical, well argued truths, those which matter, spoken in a language that the political ears which matter can understand..
I say well done AFAP, my faith restored, the past forgotten and my best wishes for a speedy return to having a full voice, where it matters. Messrs Gray and Diamond proven worthy of industry support. Of course no one can afford the membership fees just now, but give it time. It ain't much of a head scratch to decide between AFAP and AOPA for the 'working' (or not) (or Wannabe) pilot.
Gray - "...We know CASA is now developing plain English-language guides so that people can understand the standards. So whilst they might say, 'It's nice to have, and we're doing it as a nice gesture for the industry to help them along,' surely it would not be necessary if recommendation 30(b) were adopted. Recommendation 31 talks about pivoting the regulations and standards, under development at that point in time, to adopt this new methodology. I would suggest that, if that had occurred, this inquiry probably wouldn't even have been called for in the first place, but here we are.
Bravo, well said, nicely done and welcome back – to the melting pot...