Darren Pleasance’s letter to AOPA Board led to his departure

As I read these posts one questions keeps coming up. People say AOPA is "effective" for GA, but how is this determined? How is it measured? People say the lobbying AOPA does is strong and delivers, but how is this determined? What are the matrix used to support this statement?

We can measure membership numbers, donations, pilot sessions held, business members, event attendance, membership utilization of benefits, and debate the effectiveness of each. We can graph trends and see how these data points change as the organization progresses.

But how to we determine lobbying, influence with key parties, favorable decisions, and the like? It's all subjective. People post here they are "the" advocate for GA? What is this comment based on? I wish someone would break this all down for everyone. I can hear it now; AOPA did BasicMed. Not true. Other alphabet organizations were also engaged. Would we have basicmed if AOPA was on the sidelines? Likely, but that is my subjective response.

The republicans senators in Washington DC have lunch together 3 days a week. Several senators are pilots and they will NOT let anything advance that threatens what they love so much. Is this a result of AOPA lobbying efforts? No way to tell, but I say no. Senators (who are pilots) don't need AOPA telling them their rights are being challenged - they already know it.

AOPA has a huge war chest. Huge! They are obsessed with growing that and that is job #1.

So much of "we can't live without AOPA" being said is subjective and based on individual experiences and feelings as I don't see data beyond a few basic matrix that help prove if they are or are not effective as an organization. What IS detailed is what they pay staff and their leadership team.

I see permanent damage being done to AOPA with the current circus unfolding. Can they regain their stature - that's up to the board realizing the old ways will no longer advance the organization. Do I want them to die? Maybe they need to contract significantly and then re-emerge. Maybe EAA needs to start a vertical supporting certified along side experimental and we have one large organization supporting GA piston. NBAA will keep doing what they do on the business/charter side of GA. It will be interesting to see how AOPA emerges from this.
 
Last edited:
While I understand the argument that a poorly run organization is better than none at all, I don't agree with that, especially in the case where the organization isn't run by the members. At that point I really don't think it's an organization of members but a not for profit corporation. That may not be a bad thing, I suppose. But when someone donates money to the Kidney Foundation, they aren't under any illusions that they have a voice in how the organization is run.

I agree with Rick, above, that I don't see any value add. Maybe I'm wrong. But for those that do think that there's value in AOPA my suggestion would be to donate rather than join, because otherwise you're helping to facilitate the claim that the organization is representing X thousand members.

The concept of senators who are also pilots having lunch is interesting. Clearly they understand the effort that goes along with learning to fly. They also probably have at least a reasonable respect for the popular election process that let them to their position. I can't help but wonder how they would view the permanent appointment, and nomination from the board to the board process that exists in AOPA.

I'm not a big fan in general, but roughly paraphrasing a Kissinger quote, small scale politics are miserable because they're so unimportant. That seems to describe this group. Even these days, I do trust the election method better than the appointed/inherited method. Maybe just me.
 
I'm a life member of AOPA because I believed (and continue to believe) that if you're not at the table, you're on the menu.

That said, the most infuriating thing to me is how the AOPA BoT is effectively completely insulated from the rank-and-file, to the point that there is literally no avenue by which regular AOPA members can even influence the membership of the BoT, let alone the direction of the organization. I have difficulty understanding how this came about without outcry. Apathy? Fait accompli? It may be legal, but it certainly doesn't pass the sniff test as ethical or moral.
 
AvNavCom said:
I'm a life member of AOPA because I believed (and continue to believe) that if you're not at the table, you're on the menu.

That said, the most infuriating thing to me is how the AOPA BoT is effectively completely insulated from the rank-and-file, to the point that there is literally no avenue by which regular AOPA members can even influence the membership of the BoT, let alone the direction of the organization. I have difficulty understanding how this came about without outcry. Apathy? Fait accompli? It may be legal, but it certainly doesn't pass the sniff test as ethical or moral.
Click to expand...
Did you give the Board your proxy? AOPA sure pushed everyone to do this.

If so, that's how things like this happen.
 
GLMS_NC said:
Did you give the Board your proxy? AOPA sure pushed everyone to do this.

If so, that's how things like this happen.
Click to expand...
Even if you don't give your proxy (and I didn't), so long as the Board controls a significant plurality of them to overcome any number of members who show up to an annual meeting including any insurgent proxy campaign (and the Board will always have the advantage there because of ready access to member communication and basic organizational inertia), the Board can vote at will.

Anyone ever watch the business portion of a Berkshire Hathaway meeting? Buffett runs the meeting as Chairman: "I call for a vote on proposition no. X; Charlie [Munger] and I have already voted in favor and therefore the proposition is approved."

AOPA membership has no avenue to force a Board vote on any given proposition; nor to even nominate an outsider candidate for election. The most any insurgent campaign can hope for is to collect enough proxies to outnumber those held by the Board, and thereby force a stalemate until the Board relents to one degree or another.
 
DJTorrente said:
Even if you don't give your proxy (and I didn't), so long as the Board controls a significant plurality of them to overcome any number of members who show up to an annual meeting including any insurgent proxy campaign (and the Board will always have the advantage there because of ready access to member communication and basic organizational inertia), the Board can vote at will.

Anyone ever watch the business portion of a Berkshire Hathaway meeting? Buffett runs the meeting as Chairman: "I call for a vote on proposition no. X; Charlie [Munger] and I have already voted in favor and therefore the proposition is approved."

AOPA membership has no avenue to force a Board vote on any given proposition; nor to even nominate an outsider candidate for election. The most any insurgent campaign can hope for is to collect enough proxies to outnumber those held by the Board, and thereby force a stalemate until the Board relents to one degree or another.
Click to expand...
That's the point I was making. Having all (or a significant majority) the member votes they were able to stack the rules in their favor, which they have done, making challenges against them or their fellow BoD members tough, if not impossible.

Getting those proxies back into member hands is exactly what had to be done. The bylaws limit members in many forms so we will see what happens and how the BoD responds to this action.
 
DJTorrente said:
AOPA membership has no avenue to force a Board vote on any given proposition; nor to even nominate an outsider candidate for election. The most any insurgent campaign can hope for is to collect enough proxies to outnumber those held by the Board, and thereby force a stalemate until the Board relents to one degree or another.
Click to expand...

True, but there's more than one way to skin a fat cat.

Board members draw no salary. How much of a PITA does the position have to be before they'll decide it's not worth their time? Members can flood the AOPA with emails, petitions, physical letters, phone calls, etc. Members can voice their displeasure with the AOPA to the AOPA's sponsors and advertisers. Members can speak up at AOPA venues. Members can even begin to contact the companies the Trustees work for or operate.

When the conventional approach won't work, an unconventional one just might.

Remember the impact one lone, unknown musician with a broken guitar had on United Airlines?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top