doug ronan removed as director from copa

[Colonel Sanders]

This situation stinks.

I have voted with my wallet. All of myself
(25+ year member), my son and my father
(50+ year member) have not renewed our
COPA memberships.

I do not see why we should finance this kind
of disgraceful behaviour.

I remain an EAA, IAC, WBA and AOPA member.

[AirFrame]

I just got my renewal and have until April to decide what to do with it.

[floatingbeaver]

Perhaps we should send these pages along with a petition to Kevin "putty" Psuka and ask for his resignation, I will also not renew my copa membership which comes due in April. There are already enough of us in this thread that at the very least should shed some light on how why he should be removed as president!
FB

[New_PIC]

As a recent student pilot, I took advantage of the free 1 year student COPA membership offer. It comes due shortly and, in light of the evasive and dismissive responses, I will not be signing up for a paid membership. For my support they need to be accountable. I've seen this sort of thing before from a workplace union leadership when, as a low level crew rep, I was "strongly discouraged" from voicing any opinion but the one I was given. A policy or position should be able to stand critique, even internal critique, otherwise it should be reconsidered.

I do want to support GA advocacy, but the ends do not justify these means.

[sportingrifle]

Guys....the way to do this is to change from within. GA needs a strong united voice and like it or not, COPA is the only viable game in town. Having said that, it is obvious that something is rotten in the COPA kingdom and the proposed amendments are designed to make sure that whatever is rotten will get more so.

Here is a plan: I just noticed that we can proxy our votes at the AGM. Find a member who will be going to the AGM who wants to help fix this. Proxy your vote to him and try and vote down the proposed amendments. And then make a motion acknowledging that the executive did not follow correct protocol in removing Doug Ronan and direct them to send a letter of apology. That should get their attention and ensure they think hard before try a stunt like this again. Anybody want to run with this? And if they do, how about all you folks that quit quickly rejoin and help change out with this . My proxy awaits.....

Sportingrifle.

[AirFrame]

I'll give my proxy to someone going to the AGM. As I predicted back on page 2 or 3 of this thread, it won't make a hill of beans of difference. The vast majority of proxies are given by default to the board or the president and voted any way they want. You may make a point by having a large group of dissenters, but you will not change the status quo.

[ScreaminBanshee]

Proxy voting kills an organization like this for this exact reason. Most people don't realize that their vote is going against what they want. Most peopel don't even realize they are voting.

[dstechnical]

doug ronan has indeed been gagged by a copa lawyer
putska is changing the bylaws to justify his removal of mr ronan.
I urge all southern ontario members to vote for directors that will not rubber stamp the pres. whims. they have stacked the canidate.list

I was also informed that putska has asked for security to be hired for the next AGM, because he is afraid of what might happen when he finally forced to face the the members.

this organization needs a clean out. WE do pay the president over 200k per year, plus a rrsp contribution and a healthy severance package

[jjbaker]

Allow a little recap...

Having followed this Doug Ronan/COPA "situation" from the beginning here is what distills on my end from the limited information that has been presented by those involved: Doug Ronan disagreed with how a couple issues were being handled by COPA - here specifically the new insurance program and the Toronto City Center Airport. Apparently there were some major disagreements with both. Doug did what any good board member with the memberships best interest in mind would do; and spoke up. Obviously, it wasn't possible to side with him, because it would have pointed out some very flawed actions/decision that had been made by COPA.

Its seems as if things were allowed to progress without much ado, until Doug spoke up louder and became a nuisance to some people. He apparently even backed up his concerns with a lengthy explanation requested by the Board. The only way to not bring these concerns to the public and to silence him was to get rid of him. From what I see, the Board asked him to resign, so he renewed his COPA membership and went on to refuse silent resignation from the board.

A day later, he miracolously found his membership fees refunded. According to COPA’s bylaws at the time, the only way to legally get rid of him was to go to the members and get them to vote him out through a special meeting. That wasn't going to happen because then COPA would have to explain the whole situation to the members, – including the problems brought up by Ronan. So, the game was on with a pretty “Half assed” plan to simply not renew or refund his membership, thereby making him ineligible to serve on the board. If he is not a member, he can’t be a director. Where I come from, stuff like this is called a farmer smart move. The very interesting fact is that they rushed to do this before the AGM last June because that’s when the new bylaws were voted into force. The new bylaws at the time didn’t have the weak sauce small print. To question precedent is to ask exactly how many memberships the president of COPA has previously refused and on what grounds. How is that a member driven organization??? It seems pretty clear that COPA’s lawyer may have issued some sort of “gag order” with the threat of legal action to Mr. Ronan and some others for speaking publicly about this issue. However, in small worlds like aviation, the truth generally prevails. This all on top of the vague and pretty much nonexistent response from the COPA Board and staff which could be perceived as a blatant admission that something improper has gone on here. More than one person may know where the skeletons are hidden...

It is quite interesting that the two issues that Ronan was bringing up to many members and the Board developed exactly the kind of problems Ronan had predicted. It appears that COPA’s new insurance program continues to have problems including the premature departure of the first underwriter. Also, COPA seems to have all but lost the fight for GA at the Toronto City Center airport. The draft plan I have seen has virtually no mention of GA. It seems as if much of this went sideways because COPA has preferred to solve its issues in courts for the last couple of years, seemingly fighting a battle they can’t win.

Aviation is a funny world, in that we can do wrong, come clean and stand a chance to recover and regain our reputation and the respect of fellow airmen. Honesty and unclouded, straight talk is required for such to happen. For any group claiming to be "member driven" there is a golden rule that always works. Put the interests of your membership above and beyond your own agenda. Listen and work together, reach out to people who disagree, rather than trying to gag them. Everybody knows, the truth cannot ever be illegal to say, otherwise, the tail is wagging with the dog...

I've seen many crazy things in 25 years in aviation. When a executive distrusts his own members enough to ask for protection during meetings, its time to pack up and go home. That's downright sickening. Stuff like this is poison and it is a cancer that will eat the association alive. Disassociating and distancing oneself from such a sinker may be the one smart thing one has ever accomplished.

[photofly]

COPA seems to have all but lost the fight for GA at the Toronto City Center airport. The draft plan I have seen has virtually no mention of GA.

If you're talking about the 2012 draft plan, then I believe you're not reading it correctly.

Legal moves at CYTZ on behalf of GA have been brought by a select group of local pilots, and not by COPA. Not all of those pilots are COPA members, and not all members of the COPA flight there are part of the group. Some financial support has been received from COPA, but it's not a COPA show.

Furthermore, the draft plan was prepared by outside consultants, before any action was brought.

GA is still alive and well at CYTZ.

I would add that just because Psutka kicked Ronan out of COPA, doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

[PilotDAR]

I would add that just because Psutka kicked Ronan out of COPA, doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

Hmmm, all sorts of interesting trails could be followed from that statement.....

[jjbaker]

COPA seems to have all but lost the fight for GA at the Toronto City Center airport. The draft plan I have seen has virtually no mention of GA.

If you're talking about the 2012 draft plan, then I believe you're not reading it correctly.

GA is still alive and well at CYTZ.

I went back and see that I misinterpreted the timelines at hand and have edited my post. Thanks for pointing this out. It still appears as if TIPA supported by COPA has been fooling around in the courts for the past couple of years nothing's really gone anywhere - meanwhile Porter seems to be plowing ahead with expansion plans.

I would add that just because Psutka kicked Ronan out of COPA, doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

Could you elaborate on that? I am not getting what you're referring to/ getting at or maybe I haven't had enough coffee, yet...

[Jungle Jim]

Perhaps we should be refering to the COPA prez. as Kevin Putin!

Jim

[l_reason]

Perhaps we should be refering to the COPA prez. as Kevin Putin!

Jim

Are they long lost Brothers?

[photofly]

I would add that just because Psutka kicked Ronan out of COPA, doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

Could you elaborate on that? I am not getting what you're referring to/ getting at or maybe I haven't had enough coffee, yet...

Sure. Ronan could still be wrong about his approach to cosying up at CYTZ instead of fighting. It's just one man's opinion, and he doesn't even have skin in the game. He could be wrong about the insurance thing. One can have that opinion, and also see that Psutka et. al. should have followed their bylaws.

Porter's current expansion plans don't directly threaten private owners at CYTZ. There's no move to increase the slot count, at present, and we all fit within the noise envelope. More slots means the loss of flight training (specifically circuits) at CYTZ, according to the consultants' report - not the loss of privately owned GA there.

It's more to do with how the TPA handles things, than with Porter.

[PilotDAR]

whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

"Correct" could be in the eyes of the beholder. Perhaps Mr. Ronan was doing his best to represent the interests expressed by the COPA members he represented. That would be a reasonable action for a Director....

[photofly]

whether Ronan's judgement about matters is correct.

"Correct" could be in the eyes of the beholder. Perhaps Mr. Ronan was doing his best to represent the interests expressed by the COPA members he represented. That would be a reasonable action for a Director....

That's really my point. I've no doubt he was doing his best to represent the interests of the members as he saw those interests to be. It would be natural to say "he was silenced therefore he must be right" - but his poor treatment isn't any kind of evidence that his judgement on those matters is sound.

[AirFrame]

It doesn't matter what Doug's position was on any issue, right or wrong.
What matters is that he was drummed out in a method that contravenes the bylaws of the organization.

Someone at COPA chose to use the backdoor approach for removal. The alternative would be publicising the perceived transgressions of a board member, and calling on the membership at large to remove him at an AGM. Which conveniently was coming up pretty close after this whole thing broke. Given that the majority of the membership in large organizations typically follows the status quo, it probably wouldn't have been a hard sell to get enough proxies for the board to get their way. It just wouldn't have been as pretty politically.

That it wasn't done through the "correct" channels makes me wonder whether there are other factors at play, and what other board activities are happening that haven't been brought to light... Maybe making Doug's removal more public would have "outed" other skeletons from the closet?

[sportingrifle]

+1 Despite being a fervent long time supporter of COPA, I am really struggling with wheather or not i should send money to such an obviously dysfunctional organization. he purpose of the directors is to provide direction to the executive, not the other way around. A healthy organization should not only tolerate dissenting opinions, but welcome them. Most major f**ck ups in any organization in history are caused in part, by "group think." Quelling dissent and rewarding "yes men" is what facilitates this.

[PilotDAR]

A healthy organization should not only tolerate dissenting opinions, but welcome them.

Hear, hear......

[jjbaker]

Probably helpful to point out that there can't really be a gag order, per se unless COPA has reached a judge who was willing to issue a gag. What I think this might be is a cease and desist & demand letter, nothing more than letting the enemy know that one intends to sue in case further statements are made (truth or not). Ask me how I know, after having a similar situation.

The bylaws of any wash my back, I'll wash yours old boys club never supersede printed law and last time I checked, law spells out that in order to have a character defamation, a person must either speak the untruth about any particular individual and in case of a public person (subject to higher, harsher scrutiny) there has to be some sort of intention to harm said person. Malice is generally incredibly hard to prove and oftentimes the lawsuits burn a lot of money but only serve to bring more skeletons to the surface.

The bylaws of any organization only govern and cover what goes on inside of that organization. They are not law, nor can one go and sue the crap out of Joe Blow for being treated unfairly according to the bylaws. COPA is not a democracy, and its time to realize that the organization is a toothless paper tiger when it comes to being membership- driven. It is driven and directed by whomever has the most proxy votes.

Last time I checked, you can petition a change to the bylaws and if you manage to collect the right amount of proxy's you can vote Tarzan out of the jungle and order Jane to run around naked. Fact is that they could proxy a change to the bylaws that dissolves the board of directors entirely, or paint the place glitter pink and there wouldn't be a thing a judge would/ could do about it.

Whenever you have a proxy war (I speak from experience, proxy wars are often hidden) the person that reaches and persuades the largest part of the membership into any particular action has the power. Guess why regular members are prevented from gaining access to fellow members contact details... Guess why a letter to the editor can't be printed, guess why you can't type the truth on an associations website. Guess why its sometimes considered wiser to cancel someones membership, when it prevents that person from sharing the truth and affecting revenue right from within.

Everything to keep things under a lid and out of the public eye.
This way things remain to be little brush-fires that can be stomped out.

Singing Kumbaja may make this bitter pill easier to swallow...

[PilotDAR]

From my outsider's position, I see that COPA's President, and some Directors have taken issue with Mr. Ronan's opinions and actions. They are entitled to their opinion, but so is Mr. Ronan. Mr. Ronan's accepting a role as a Director did not bind him to "tow the party line" of COPA. A Director is honour bound to represent the members as best possible.

But, apparently the COPA President and some Directors have taken it upon themselves to actively prevent Mr. Ronan from representing the COPA members who elected him, and to express the opinions he holds. In my opinion, that is a conflict of their moral role to the members they serve. They acted around the member's interests, to serve interests of their preference. It does not appear that the member's collective opinion was formally sought before this was done.

So now, COPA presents the intent to change bylaws with respect to how Directors serve, at the upcoming annual meeting - interesting timing...

And, COPA asks for proxy votes from its members for that meeting. Those proxies, if given, empower the COPA President to vote with that proxy!?! If I were a COPA member, I would find that whole concept very alarming, and suspicious. WHOSE interests will be represented, if the COPA President votes with those proxies? My personal opinion is that to give a proxy for this meeting would be to enable the perpetuation of actions which already do not represent many member interests.

But, I'm not a COPA member - by conscious choice. I used to be, for many years, but COPA has demonstrated more recently to me a number of times that member's national interests were not always COPA leadership interests. I spoke with my one membership voice, and do not support the present COPA leadership. COPA IS its members. The President serves the organization's (member's) interests, NOT the other way around! So COPA no longer gets my support, I serve aviation from outside COPA.

I hope that the COPA President will have a change of heart before the meeting, and create more transparency for the members to see. Proxy voting is not going to get that done!

From what I read here, others feel similarly. I predict that COPA will become less relevant in Canadian aviation. The COPA President will thus become less relevant too. I hope for those COPA members who value COPA's role in Canadian aviation will assure that their intent is conveyed to COPA leadership AS THEY INTEND. They must not blindly give up their right to vote to another person, or ultimately the COPA President, who has been criticized already for working counter to member's interests.

[AirFrame]

Ahem: TOE the party line. Not TOW.

http://grammartips.homestead.com/toetheline.html

[PilotDAR]

Ahem: TOE the party line. Not TOW.

Ah, you're right, and I even thought about that before I typed it, and still got it wrong! But, it is pretty heavy party line, it might have to be towed, rather than toed.....

[AirFrame]

Hmm... You make a good point...

(and finally, someone who doesn't take offense at a grammar correction... )