Chris:
While we are on the subject of the Advisory Council, what happened to the reports that we were asked to provide for the SBM?
The reports from the advisory council were indeed shared with all BOD members prior to the SBM. Not only did those in attendance already have the information, but both Kristin and Scott drove your type support concerns home in their presentations. There is absolutely no question in my mind that the BOD shares your same concerns. But knowing what the issue is, is not where the problem lies.
The complete lack of action by the BOD at the SBM to move in the direction of improved type support still has me shaking my head in wonderment.
I'm afraid I must disagree with you that no action was taken. As I have posted here already, BOD members agreed "unanimously" to further study the issue, and Kristin was to head up that committee. Kristin has since resigned her position as chair of that committee, so it is now in need of a chairperson. Not an easy job as Kristin has duly noted, but we are certainly open to suggestions to fill the position.
Hope this helps. I have tried to be fair and balanced with my responses, but I will not pretend that this issue will go away nor that it will be solved in the near future. In fact, the only way it will be solved at all is with help from those desirous of Enhanced Tech Support and educating the membership. Steps have been taken to that end and I am confident they will remain ongoing in search of a resolution.
Bruce
 |
International Comanche Society A maintenance forum for ICS members to share knowledge and learn about their Comanche. Problems? - Contact Administrator at: Webmaster |
Fleet Airworthiness Steering Committee
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:49 am
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:42 am
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
by Kristin Winter » Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:30 am
Bruce,
I hope that anyone reading this exchange has a better understanding. As the old Dave Mason song goes: "There's just you and me and we just disagree."
As for my getting involved: Not without there being a hope of success . . . success that comes before I am drawing Social Security. Drop me a line if the officers resign. I will not waste my time trying to pry open closed minds, before we can even get to the issue and the best solution. Been there! Done that!
There is a way to have better type support. I am convinced of that. I was hoping that it would be through ICS. But when a door closes, another usually opens. Time will tell.
I hope that anyone reading this exchange has a better understanding. As the old Dave Mason song goes: "There's just you and me and we just disagree."
As for my getting involved: Not without there being a hope of success . . . success that comes before I am drawing Social Security. Drop me a line if the officers resign. I will not waste my time trying to pry open closed minds, before we can even get to the issue and the best solution. Been there! Done that!
There is a way to have better type support. I am convinced of that. I was hoping that it would be through ICS. But when a door closes, another usually opens. Time will tell.
Kristin
-
Kristin Winter - ICS member
- Posts: 1299
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Northern California
Fleet Airworthiness Steering Committee
by Scott Ducey » Fri Apr 30, 2010 2:45 pm
-
Scott Ducey - ICS member
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 2:11 pm
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:30 pm
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:23 pm
If the five officers, Bernie, Dick, Don, Alan, and Dave stated in writing that they were not a candidate, I would put forth a slate of officers to assume the responsibility for ICS after the convention.
Kristin:
So what you are advocating is that you want to stack the deck, which is exactly what you have stated you are opposed to with the current BOD. I don't see that as being the right answer either, but then we all have opinions. Why not take the more conservative approach by starting somewhere in the middle. Lets educate the members, insert your candidates, and let the voters decide. Maybe you will even fire up some support that you do not now even know exists. If you make your case and the interest is there, the voters will vote accordingly. The Stab Horn SB from Piper that came out this week gives you a leg up, as it is the proverbial shot across the bow.
I find it hard to believe you truly think that any of the BOD members "want" the abuse they sometimes receive just because they are trying to perform their duties to the best of their ability. I've been trying to step down for over two years and not found anyone the least bit interested in taking my position. In talking with other BOD members, they are having the same problems. Executive officers are a problem every year as well with some taking the position simply because no one else will. It's a volunteer organization and a thankless job at best. Even the knowledge of knowing that you have done your best to return some of the benefits you have received over the years is of little reward in many cases.
We can continue to hash this back and forth, but at least for the forseeable future, ICS is the best game in town to address and fix the problem for a number of reasons, most of which have already been discussed over time. My money and support remains with them until such time as that changes.
Bruce
Kristin:
So what you are advocating is that you want to stack the deck, which is exactly what you have stated you are opposed to with the current BOD. I don't see that as being the right answer either, but then we all have opinions. Why not take the more conservative approach by starting somewhere in the middle. Lets educate the members, insert your candidates, and let the voters decide. Maybe you will even fire up some support that you do not now even know exists. If you make your case and the interest is there, the voters will vote accordingly. The Stab Horn SB from Piper that came out this week gives you a leg up, as it is the proverbial shot across the bow.
I find it hard to believe you truly think that any of the BOD members "want" the abuse they sometimes receive just because they are trying to perform their duties to the best of their ability. I've been trying to step down for over two years and not found anyone the least bit interested in taking my position. In talking with other BOD members, they are having the same problems. Executive officers are a problem every year as well with some taking the position simply because no one else will. It's a volunteer organization and a thankless job at best. Even the knowledge of knowing that you have done your best to return some of the benefits you have received over the years is of little reward in many cases.
We can continue to hash this back and forth, but at least for the forseeable future, ICS is the best game in town to address and fix the problem for a number of reasons, most of which have already been discussed over time. My money and support remains with them until such time as that changes.
Bruce
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
Fleet Airworthiness Steering Committee
by Scott Ducey » Fri Apr 30, 2010 6:53 pm
Bruce, I don't want to speak for Kristin, but I do not think it has to do with 'stacking the deck', it has to do with the frustration that no decision was made to steer the ship towards the future. You mentioned that no one wants your job. As I said, I expressed a strong interest in Don's job, but then suddenly (after my presentation) Don had a change of heart.
Kris and I are not the only ones banging the type support drum. This has been going on for quite a few years. Here and at the other forum. Unfortunately most want to point fingers, blame others, and expect someone else to do their work/bidding on behalf of their ideas. Finally, someone took the time to do work, outlined a plan and a means to finance it, and the response..."NO". Dick Kuszick did not provide any facts concerning the membership - we heard broad over-reaching statements about the "membership". "The membership will leave". While no one knows the answer to that, what we do know is we provided a detailed financial analysis that demonstrated that even if there was an exodus of members, ICS would remain in the black. Obviously we would not want to loose 1 member, but we showed you our analysis that said we could take a 40% hit, and still be liquid. All of this presented in detail in the numbers given to every member of the board. It didn't matter.
I sort of feel this way about the whole thing. Imagine if you are a physician and you had a patient that had some tests done. You tell that patient, we have an x-ray, an MRI and cat scan that all show you have a malignant tumor that needs to be operated on. And the patient says to you, "you know what I do not need to do anything about it, because I have been fine all these years, and I will be fine in the future". You then say, "you might have been healthy up until this point, but this is a canerous tumor, and it needs to come out now". I sort of feel like ICS Board is being the unreasonable patient. We came to the meeting with facts, options, scenario's and were open to other suggestions. We were unanamously rejected. Even the Young Persons Advisory Council, Dick glossed over the conclusions, even elected not to point out that one group specifically stated we should implement Kristin Winters type support plan.
I am aware that you have a pretty thankless job, and do not like hearing some of the things that have been posted. I have tried to simply focus on the presentation and the reasons / logic behind it. I have not stooped to calling names - that is not me. I am sorry about some of the name calling from others. I don't like those kinds of remarks, and and frankly feel it is childish behavior.
Bruce we disagree. While I appreciate that you are one of the ones on the deck, doing all the work, keeping the ship moving. Its an admirable job, and as one member, thank you for doing it. I just happen to disagree with the captain and the direction he/she is steering the boat.
Best Regards,
Scott Ducey
Kris and I are not the only ones banging the type support drum. This has been going on for quite a few years. Here and at the other forum. Unfortunately most want to point fingers, blame others, and expect someone else to do their work/bidding on behalf of their ideas. Finally, someone took the time to do work, outlined a plan and a means to finance it, and the response..."NO". Dick Kuszick did not provide any facts concerning the membership - we heard broad over-reaching statements about the "membership". "The membership will leave". While no one knows the answer to that, what we do know is we provided a detailed financial analysis that demonstrated that even if there was an exodus of members, ICS would remain in the black. Obviously we would not want to loose 1 member, but we showed you our analysis that said we could take a 40% hit, and still be liquid. All of this presented in detail in the numbers given to every member of the board. It didn't matter.
I sort of feel this way about the whole thing. Imagine if you are a physician and you had a patient that had some tests done. You tell that patient, we have an x-ray, an MRI and cat scan that all show you have a malignant tumor that needs to be operated on. And the patient says to you, "you know what I do not need to do anything about it, because I have been fine all these years, and I will be fine in the future". You then say, "you might have been healthy up until this point, but this is a canerous tumor, and it needs to come out now". I sort of feel like ICS Board is being the unreasonable patient. We came to the meeting with facts, options, scenario's and were open to other suggestions. We were unanamously rejected. Even the Young Persons Advisory Council, Dick glossed over the conclusions, even elected not to point out that one group specifically stated we should implement Kristin Winters type support plan.
I am aware that you have a pretty thankless job, and do not like hearing some of the things that have been posted. I have tried to simply focus on the presentation and the reasons / logic behind it. I have not stooped to calling names - that is not me. I am sorry about some of the name calling from others. I don't like those kinds of remarks, and and frankly feel it is childish behavior.
Bruce we disagree. While I appreciate that you are one of the ones on the deck, doing all the work, keeping the ship moving. Its an admirable job, and as one member, thank you for doing it. I just happen to disagree with the captain and the direction he/she is steering the boat.
Best Regards,
Scott Ducey
-
Scott Ducey - ICS member
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 2:11 pm
by Kristin Winter » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:21 pm
Bruce,
I am not so interested in stacking the deck as removing the roadblocks. We could mount a campaign. But to do so, we have to factor in that we have to overcome the encumbancy factor. We would have to go to the membership and explain why they needed a new board. I don't think that this would be very pleasant for the participants or the membership. It is my judgment that the personal and financial cost of mounting an election challenge equals or exceeds that required to start from scratch.
Unfortunately, ICS has damaged its brand. I have substantially more people emailing me in support of a new organization than I do who are urging me to work with ICS or run for office. People have lost faith. The only way for ICS to turn that around is to make a clean break with the management of "No".
I am sure that the officers are tired of the abuse, etc. It is a regretable part of running a volunteer organization. After the nomination period is closed, I for one, will turn a deaf ear to any such complaints from the officers. This is their chance to pass the bullseye t-shirts to someone else.
I am not so interested in stacking the deck as removing the roadblocks. We could mount a campaign. But to do so, we have to factor in that we have to overcome the encumbancy factor. We would have to go to the membership and explain why they needed a new board. I don't think that this would be very pleasant for the participants or the membership. It is my judgment that the personal and financial cost of mounting an election challenge equals or exceeds that required to start from scratch.
Unfortunately, ICS has damaged its brand. I have substantially more people emailing me in support of a new organization than I do who are urging me to work with ICS or run for office. People have lost faith. The only way for ICS to turn that around is to make a clean break with the management of "No".
I am sure that the officers are tired of the abuse, etc. It is a regretable part of running a volunteer organization. After the nomination period is closed, I for one, will turn a deaf ear to any such complaints from the officers. This is their chance to pass the bullseye t-shirts to someone else.
Kristin
-
Kristin Winter - ICS member
- Posts: 1299
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Northern California
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:38 pm
While I appreciate that you are one of the ones on the deck, doing all the work, keeping the ship moving. Its an admirable job, and as one member, thank you for doing it. I just happen to disagree with the captain and the direction he/she is steering the boat.
Scott:
I appreciate your kind comments, but I do not expect any thanks for what I do nor do most others to my knowledge. We do what we do because we want to help. The same basic premise I'm sure that you and Kristin operate on.
There were several "captains" both young and old there at SBM, and unfortunately, not even one of them agreed with your solution. Maybe "Old Salts" (Sea Fairing Old Geezers) for the most part, but certainly seasoned in the workings of ICS and it's members. Lets not forget that it was mostly these "old farts" as they have also been referred to here, who helped build ICS when they were still young "Whipper Snappers". To discount their assumption of the pulse of a majority of the current membership is wrong in my opinion. Some have actually been through the battles most of us have only heard about.
In any case, we will just have to disagree that the BOD did nothing. Kristin as one of the strongest proponents for Type Support was given pretty much free reign to pick the members of the new committee and take control of its direction. You can argue all day long that it is practically an impossible situation, but again, you knew that going in. The BOD wants a solution to this issue, we just did not feel that yours was the proper one at this point in time. If frustration turns you off, join the crowd. The fact is this particular issue has frustrated "everyone" and as is evident here continues to do so.
We will get this done Scott, with or without your help. It might not happen as fast as you want to see it done and it might not take the form you think it should, but it will happen. It would be nice to have your and Kristin's name on the finished product because of all the effort the both of you put into it.
Bruce
Scott:
I appreciate your kind comments, but I do not expect any thanks for what I do nor do most others to my knowledge. We do what we do because we want to help. The same basic premise I'm sure that you and Kristin operate on.
There were several "captains" both young and old there at SBM, and unfortunately, not even one of them agreed with your solution. Maybe "Old Salts" (Sea Fairing Old Geezers) for the most part, but certainly seasoned in the workings of ICS and it's members. Lets not forget that it was mostly these "old farts" as they have also been referred to here, who helped build ICS when they were still young "Whipper Snappers". To discount their assumption of the pulse of a majority of the current membership is wrong in my opinion. Some have actually been through the battles most of us have only heard about.
In any case, we will just have to disagree that the BOD did nothing. Kristin as one of the strongest proponents for Type Support was given pretty much free reign to pick the members of the new committee and take control of its direction. You can argue all day long that it is practically an impossible situation, but again, you knew that going in. The BOD wants a solution to this issue, we just did not feel that yours was the proper one at this point in time. If frustration turns you off, join the crowd. The fact is this particular issue has frustrated "everyone" and as is evident here continues to do so.
We will get this done Scott, with or without your help. It might not happen as fast as you want to see it done and it might not take the form you think it should, but it will happen. It would be nice to have your and Kristin's name on the finished product because of all the effort the both of you put into it.
Bruce
Last edited by Bruce Thumann on Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
by Bruce Thumann » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:07 pm
I have substantially more people emailing me in support of a new organization than I do who are urging me to work with ICS or run for office.
Kristin:
That's kinda my point exactly. Most of the membership does not read either forum, is not educated about the Type Support issue, and very likely could care less at this point. What is the percentage of our "membership" that is advocating you start another Type Club or work with ICS. I will wager you it is very low, but these "are" at least the ones who are paying attention.
I am fairly certain the BOD would be for educating the membership on the issues. Part of your new committee assignment I'm sure would have been to design or implement a way to do that.
As for passing the bullseye T-shirts around, grab one and go for it. The By-Laws as you know were changed last year to remove any barriers that would have presented any problems with your running for ICS office. Maybe that was an indication that some actually "want" you to throw your hat in the ring. "Prez Kristin" has a nice ring to it.
Bruce
Kristin:
That's kinda my point exactly. Most of the membership does not read either forum, is not educated about the Type Support issue, and very likely could care less at this point. What is the percentage of our "membership" that is advocating you start another Type Club or work with ICS. I will wager you it is very low, but these "are" at least the ones who are paying attention.
I am fairly certain the BOD would be for educating the membership on the issues. Part of your new committee assignment I'm sure would have been to design or implement a way to do that.
As for passing the bullseye T-shirts around, grab one and go for it. The By-Laws as you know were changed last year to remove any barriers that would have presented any problems with your running for ICS office. Maybe that was an indication that some actually "want" you to throw your hat in the ring. "Prez Kristin" has a nice ring to it.
Bruce
- Bruce Thumann
- ICS member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:05 am
by trmckn » Sat May 01, 2010 5:05 am
Hi Bruce,
"That's kinda my point exactly. Most of the membership does not read either forum, is not educated about the Type Support issue, and very likely could care less at this point. What is the percentage of our "membership" that is advocating you start another Type Club or work with ICS"
I think that you'd be surprised. I'd guess that I represent a large percentage of the active (flying) membership in that I check into both this forum and COF several times a week, but rarely post...especially when it relates to these sorts of issues. Given the choice, on those few occasions that I have a technical question, I choose to post here rather than COF because (until this issue) I find that it's a bit more civil here....And Zach will respond with an answer here just as quick as he does over there. But, I do check both to keep educated, and if anybody ever bothered to ask me, I'd tell them that I'd much prefer to have ICS working on the future of the fleet rather than sending me a magazine. Particularly since I'm only paying you the equivalent of fuel cost for about 1 flight hour. I respectfully submit that just because you aren't hearing an outcry from non-posting membership, you shouldn't assume that we're not out here paying attention.
The magazine is fine, and I do like getting it every month, but I can't really believe that a majority of the active pilots of Comanches would bail out on ICS just because the society can't afford to put it out. You guys know the numbers better than I do, and I guess it's possible that a large percentage of the membership isn't actively flying anymore.... In my case at least, you'll continue to get my membership dues with or whithout a magazine, so long as there's at least a little value in the site, and so long as I perceive that at there is some positive bearing on keeping expertise out there. So, you get to keep the cost of filling one of my aux tanks.... I've still got another aux tank and two mains though, and that's there for the taking for any other group out there that can keep me flying... Maybe I'm the only one out there who doesn't post but feels this way. I doubt it though...
Tom McKnight
"That's kinda my point exactly. Most of the membership does not read either forum, is not educated about the Type Support issue, and very likely could care less at this point. What is the percentage of our "membership" that is advocating you start another Type Club or work with ICS"
I think that you'd be surprised. I'd guess that I represent a large percentage of the active (flying) membership in that I check into both this forum and COF several times a week, but rarely post...especially when it relates to these sorts of issues. Given the choice, on those few occasions that I have a technical question, I choose to post here rather than COF because (until this issue) I find that it's a bit more civil here....And Zach will respond with an answer here just as quick as he does over there. But, I do check both to keep educated, and if anybody ever bothered to ask me, I'd tell them that I'd much prefer to have ICS working on the future of the fleet rather than sending me a magazine. Particularly since I'm only paying you the equivalent of fuel cost for about 1 flight hour. I respectfully submit that just because you aren't hearing an outcry from non-posting membership, you shouldn't assume that we're not out here paying attention.
The magazine is fine, and I do like getting it every month, but I can't really believe that a majority of the active pilots of Comanches would bail out on ICS just because the society can't afford to put it out. You guys know the numbers better than I do, and I guess it's possible that a large percentage of the membership isn't actively flying anymore.... In my case at least, you'll continue to get my membership dues with or whithout a magazine, so long as there's at least a little value in the site, and so long as I perceive that at there is some positive bearing on keeping expertise out there. So, you get to keep the cost of filling one of my aux tanks.... I've still got another aux tank and two mains though, and that's there for the taking for any other group out there that can keep me flying... Maybe I'm the only one out there who doesn't post but feels this way. I doubt it though...
Tom McKnight
- trmckn
- ICS member
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:44 pm
Return to ICS General Membership Discussions
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests