Page 2 of 2

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:42 pm
by mariabaranova
Hi, filled the application on CA website today but the response I got was that I don't match the requirements - specifically "You must have at least 7 years of experience post your admission to CPA Australia as a full member". Do you think it is a good idea to give them a call - or this requirement stands irrespective of "spilling" factor? Thank you beforehand, Maria

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:38 pm
by nakedadmin
That would be a minimum they would enforce. It's temporarily down from 10 years. So from 1 Jan it's back to 10 years.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:13 am
by chuck_meister
Well, my CA membership was approved yesterday. Still so sad giving up my CPA membership at the end of the month. Whilst it would provide a certain pleasure to defiantly attend the AGM, it just makes feel sick to the stomach in up another years worth of membership fees for the board and management to waste.

Reading through the hand book I did come across this little nugget,

4. Mandatory ethics
You need to ensure that you undertake a minimum of 4 hours of ethics training every 5 years. CA ANZ offers training in this area.

I would be very interested to look at the CPD records of current/past board members who were dual members to see if they were compliant with this section of the by laws.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:26 pm
by The Nude CPA
chuck_meister wrote:
Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:13 am
Well, my CA membership was approved yesterday. Still so sad giving up my CPA membership at the end of the month. Whilst it would provide a certain pleasure to defiantly attend the AGM...
Respect your decision, but please reconsider renewing your CPA membership for at least another year... change requires votes (and voices).

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:48 am
by theallseeingeye
Handing over another year’s money to this opaque, stonewalling, unaccountable organisation is a double-edged sword.

I perfectly understand the rationale for staying, being able to vote for change, and getting involved to drive improvement. Past events make clear the need for higher levels of member involvement and oversight.

But mark my words, if we all stay to do that, this Board will tout any slight reduction in renewals this December as a validation of their weak-natured “nothing to see here “ approach, claim victory, and continue to thwart efforts for meaningful change towards accountability and genuine member representation. Whereas a good kick up the arse by way of a significant drop in renewals from members in the CAANZ eligibility range would make it clear they have not done enough.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:02 am
by nakedadmin
theallseeingeye wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:48 am
But mark my words, if we all stay to do that, this Board will tout any slight reduction in renewals this December as a validation of their weak-natured “nothing to see here “ approach, claim victory, and continue to thwart efforts for meaningful change towards accountability and genuine member representation.
Everyone who is paid up to 31 Dec gets counted as a member until 30 April even if they do not renew. Meaning they will claim victory as you say. The people that do not renew will only drop off when the member numbers are reported in the 2018 financial statements and the people that renew for another year to advocate for change will only drop off in the 2019 membership numbers.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:56 pm
by The Nude CPA
theallseeingeye wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:48 am
But mark my words, if we all stay to do that, this Board will tout any slight reduction in renewals this December as a validation of their weak-natured “nothing to see here “ approach, claim victory, and continue to thwart efforts for meaningful change towards accountability and genuine member representation. Whereas a good kick up the arse by way of a significant drop in renewals from members in the CAANZ eligibility range would make it clear they have not done enough.
Probably.

But leaving the organisation is handing them victory (and the organisation) rather than allowing them to only claim victory.

The next five or so months is a crucial period.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:09 pm
by Steve Hamilton
nakedadmin wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:02 am
theallseeingeye wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:48 am
But mark my words, if we all stay to do that, this Board will tout any slight reduction in renewals this December as a validation of their weak-natured “nothing to see here “ approach, claim victory, and continue to thwart efforts for meaningful change towards accountability and genuine member representation.
Everyone who is paid up to 31 Dec gets counted as a member until 30 April even if they do not renew. Meaning they will claim victory as you say. The people that do not renew will only drop off when the member numbers are reported in the 2018 financial statements and the people that renew for another year to advocate for change will only drop off in the 2019 membership numbers.
I would think if you make the effort and resign your membership they can't count you. You need to return the certificates anyway. Also resigning will hopefully stop the reminder emails to renew your membership, then the threatening ones that you haven't renewed and will be charged extra, then the really threatening ones about striking you off as a member asking for your certificates back!

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:17 pm
by Magnet
Steve Hamilton wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:09 pm
I would think if you make the effort and resign your membership they can't count you. You need to return the certificates anyway. Also resigning will hopefully stop the reminder emails to renew your membership, then the threatening ones that you haven't renewed and will be charged extra, then the really threatening ones about striking you off as a member asking for your certificates back!
I still think the best way to show your anger with the way CPA has been run is to vote for the member resolutions that are going to be put forward at the AGM next year. This way real change can be made.

The spillers group was able to get 4,000 signatures. That's 4000 members who actively took an interest in the whole saga. Even if 4000 spillers resigned their membership (extremely unlikey)
i would think that natural growth from new associates signing up would cover this loss. At worst they will record 160,000 members again in 2018/19...which mean no real change to them.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:39 pm
by JWheldon
Magnet you are correct. The only way to correct the CPA is to vote for the member resolutions at the AGM.

Accountability is non-existent at CPA Australia. You just have to look at the AGM's. Graeme Wade reminded the members at the Senate Committee of the poor attendance at the AGM. Well did not see the board of CPA Australia trying very hard to encourage more interest and involvement in the AGM and policies of CPA Australia, The board of CPA Australia didn't really want members to attend the AGM, because then they had to justify to someone what they had been doing, if at all they were asked a questions.

The previous board and the board since 2007 with Alex Malley have not really added to the overall quality of CPA Australia, nor improved the status of being a CPA in the market. They focused on their business model, with an individual as a figure head, like McDonald's uses Ronald McDonald to promote it brand and sell its product. They have freely admitted, in relation to marketing that it has been the same percentage spend rate since 2006, when Graeme Wade, Michelle Dolin were first appointed to CPA Australia. If it is not broken, not questioned, reduces their work rate, then keep doing it.

The accountability at CPA Australia is non-existent, because the board did not want questions asked, so that they could do what they wanted, with few members to cause problems. The state presidents, the committee members, the past presidents have done little to seek accountability. The audit function is not designed to provide confidence in the not for profit sector or probably the listed company sector. The boards don't really want this changed to a system of audit, like those undertake by state auditor generals, because then issue of concern are highlighted in the annual report. Thus the checks and balances in the system is broken.

So for those member, that think the moving to the ICAANZ will mean a better organisation with improved systems of accountability, then think again. Unfortunately many member have to change due to the loss of the limited liability scheme, under the watch of the, the Public Practice Committees, the general manager of CPA Australia Peter Docherty, Jeff Hughes COO membership, Adam Awty COO/CFO etc. So, have any of these individuals been held to account for this great failure????

The only way to improve CPA Australia, with a current board of individuals, who have been involved with CPA Australia, through the last ten years, under the management of Alex Malley, is to vote for change at the AGM.

Lets get rid of the life time membership for these individuals (the gold card aka to the federal politicians reward to themselves)

Lets vote for change. BE HEARD, BE RECOGNISED. BE A CPA!!!!

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:00 pm
by Steve Hamilton
Magnet wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:17 pm
Steve Hamilton wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:09 pm
I would think if you make the effort and resign your membership they can't count you. You need to return the certificates anyway. Also resigning will hopefully stop the reminder emails to renew your membership, then the threatening ones that you haven't renewed and will be charged extra, then the really threatening ones about striking you off as a member asking for your certificates back!
I still think the best way to show your anger with the way CPA has been run is to vote for the member resolutions that are going to be put forward at the AGM next year. This way real change can be made.

The spillers group was able to get 4,000 signatures. That's 4000 members who actively took an interest in the whole saga. Even if 4000 spillers resigned their membership (extremely unlikey)
i would think that natural growth from new associates signing up would cover this loss. At worst they will record 160,000 members again in 2018/19...which mean no real change to them.
Magnet, I respect you position, good on you for sticking it out!

I've been a very proud CPA sole public practitioner at the coal face for over 17 years and a member for 28 years. We as a group, public practitioners, were treated like mugs by Mr Malley over the PSC Scheme lapse. I was vaguely unhappy with the Naked CEO marketing strategy for a number of years but didn't poke my head up for fear of getting it chopped off.

Brett to his undying credit started asking the questions publicly that many of us were thinking.

Now we are what, 12 months down the track and the culture of the organisation still hasn't changed. The sole focus of the board, old and new, seems to be maintaining the status quo for the ruling elites within the organisational structures. Where is the focus on what members want and need? For an organisation who's motto is INTEGRITY there hasn't been much of that shown. The increase in Mr Malley's termination entitlement's is a case in point. How the hell did those two decisions benefit the membership in any way? If Mr Malley was threatening to resign because awkward questions were being asked by the membership surely this is the time when the board, including those two supposedly independent directors, should have stood up and called his bluff. But no the board like a lot of other institutions in Australian society were more interested in protecting the reputation of the organisation. If Mr Malley walked the Naked CEO branding strategy would be shown for what it always was, a personal vanity project of a narcissist. As with most board decisions it backfired costing the membership an extra $2-3 million.

The IRP report is disappointing at best. Some interesting things came out, like the Naked CEO marketing strategy being controlled by Mr Malley and the termination payment process. As previously highlighted no one has been held to account. The shear size of the membership means calling an extraordinary meeting seems next to impossible. The apathy of the broader membership has also surprised me greatly.

As stated in a previous post getting anything done at the AGM will be difficult. Whatever resolutions eventually get put on the agenda will be lucky to be discussed. If you try and cancel life memberships I'm sure an argument about "natural justice" will come up, maybe refer it to a committee for consideration by the board.

The issue of what will be a valid proxy I'm sure will come up and need to be determined prior to the meeting. How will proxies be lodged and accepted by the board? Some games will surely be played as the ruling elites won't want to give up the power. Also I'm sure the previous president's dinner after the AGM will hurry the meeting along so that some items will be put off until next year.

All this from an organisation of accountants, some of the most straight forward people in business that supposedly see through marketing ploys and games to get to the facts.

So by all means keep fighting the good fight but I know a lot of public practitioners over here in the West have made the decision to move on... Sometimes the only way to get through to the elites is to vote with your feet, or wallet.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:52 pm
by JWheldon
A silly thought.

Maybe the old board wanted to cancel the limited liability scheme, so they could then do away with a public practice section of CPA Australia, and the millions of dollars that goes with running it and the complaints that they get from the public practitioners, who make up the smallest component of CPA Australia. They could save millions of dollars with doing away with the public practice committees, and not paying the sub contractors associated with the quality assurance reviews for public practitioners, etc. The public practitioners, make the most noise and are the most vocal about issues, yet they assume that the rest of the membership, just follow with the status quo. So if the public practitioners go, then most of the issues disappear.

Maybe this is why the old board and new board wants this silly change at CPA Australia about guidelines for dealing with staff at CPA Australia, and angry members.

Maybe the board wanted to change the organisation to an education only business, and reduce it is costs associated with the public practitioners.

Maybe Peter Docherty the general manager of the public practice unit, has lost the confidence of the board with the many problems under his watch in the public practice area.

Maybe they didn't want CPA Australia Advice to really be successful, because they still haven't provided the members with a business plan, they tired to hide the facts about its operation, its remunerations and the size of its loan funding from CPA Australia. The members had to find out the information relating to CPA Australia Advice from alternative sources. They were really only interested in what they could get out of CPA Australia via this loss making venture.

Maybe they are not really concerned about the money already lost with AAT (bookkeeping venture), because it remunerates Jeff Hughes and other CPA Australia staff.

So maybe the members that are shifting to ICAANZ IPA etc are within the plans of the old board and the new board?

Maybe it is within their acceptable statistics?

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:49 pm
by Magnet
Steve Hamilton wrote:
Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:00 pm
Magnet wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:17 pm
Steve Hamilton wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:09 pm
I would think if you make the effort and resign your membership they can't count you. You need to return the certificates anyway. Also resigning will hopefully stop the reminder emails to renew your membership, then the threatening ones that you haven't renewed and will be charged extra, then the really threatening ones about striking you off as a member asking for your certificates back!
I still think the best way to show your anger with the way CPA has been run is to vote for the member resolutions that are going to be put forward at the AGM next year. This way real change can be made.

The spillers group was able to get 4,000 signatures. That's 4000 members who actively took an interest in the whole saga. Even if 4000 spillers resigned their membership (extremely unlikey)
i would think that natural growth from new associates signing up would cover this loss. At worst they will record 160,000 members again in 2018/19...which mean no real change to them.
Magnet, I respect you position, good on you for sticking it out!

I've been a very proud CPA sole public practitioner at the coal face for over 17 years and a member for 28 years. We as a group, public practitioners, were treated like mugs by Mr Malley over the PSC Scheme lapse. I was vaguely unhappy with the Naked CEO marketing strategy for a number of years but didn't poke my head up for fear of getting it chopped off.

Brett to his undying credit started asking the questions publicly that many of us were thinking.

Now we are what, 12 months down the track and the culture of the organisation still hasn't changed. The sole focus of the board, old and new, seems to be maintaining the status quo for the ruling elites within the organisational structures. Where is the focus on what members want and need? For an organisation who's motto is INTEGRITY there hasn't been much of that shown. The increase in Mr Malley's termination entitlement's is a case in point. How the hell did those two decisions benefit the membership in any way? If Mr Malley was threatening to resign because awkward questions were being asked by the membership surely this is the time when the board, including those two supposedly independent directors, should have stood up and called his bluff. But no the board like a lot of other institutions in Australian society were more interested in protecting the reputation of the organisation. If Mr Malley walked the Naked CEO branding strategy would be shown for what it always was, a personal vanity project of a narcissist. As with most board decisions it backfired costing the membership an extra $2-3 million.

The IRP report is disappointing at best. Some interesting things came out, like the Naked CEO marketing strategy being controlled by Mr Malley and the termination payment process. As previously highlighted no one has been held to account. The shear size of the membership means calling an extraordinary meeting seems next to impossible. The apathy of the broader membership has also surprised me greatly.

As stated in a previous post getting anything done at the AGM will be difficult. Whatever resolutions eventually get put on the agenda will be lucky to be discussed. If you try and cancel life memberships I'm sure an argument about "natural justice" will come up, maybe refer it to a committee for consideration by the board.

The issue of what will be a valid proxy I'm sure will come up and need to be determined prior to the meeting. How will proxies be lodged and accepted by the board? Some games will surely be played as the ruling elites won't want to give up the power. Also I'm sure the previous president's dinner after the AGM will hurry the meeting along so that some items will be put off until next year.

All this from an organisation of accountants, some of the most straight forward people in business that supposedly see through marketing ploys and games to get to the facts.

So by all means keep fighting the good fight but I know a lot of public practitioners over here in the West have made the decision to move on... Sometimes the only way to get through to the elites is to vote with your feet, or wallet.
I've only been a fully qualified CPA for 6 months and am incredibly frustrated by this saga...I can only imagine how annoyed you are Steve after so many years! I respect your position also.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:14 pm
by Steve Hamilton
[
Magnet wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:17 pm


I've only been a fully qualified CPA for 6 months and am incredibly frustrated by this saga...I can only imagine how annoyed you are Steve after so many years! I respect your position also.
I feel your pain, having put the effort in to get qualified only to see the organisation and designation being trashed by the action of a few.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:37 pm
by cpa66
After 26 years I am done with CPAA after today's statement from the Chairman especially Item 4. The $5m payout to the sociopath Malley is down the toilet and no intent of recouping it back. Each member has contributed approx $40 from their annual membership to pay his termination payment. Obviously another example of the Board acting in the best interest of its members. The Board should be accountable as has been espoused so many times on this forum but obviously that will not happen. Application into CA !

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:44 pm
by certified sane
I renounced my membership today ensuring they cannot count me at year end. Today's announcement would have been the only reason for me to stay, but again they failed to deliver anything but disappointment.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:26 pm
by Brett Stevenson
What they didn't provide certified sane was the QC's opinion on whether the directors who approved the three year termination payment in Malleys contract in 2016 were in breach of their directors duties.
That is the critical question.
After we found out the details of the contract Nov 30 from the IRP Final Report (even they delayed informing us of that until the Final R rather than tell us in the Prelim Report) we surmised that chasing Malleys termination pay was not possible if it was a contractual obligation.
But by gee for the directors who approved such a contract (2016 directors, have a look at the annual report and especially the Nominations and Remunerations Committee to see them listed. I will have more to say on this in my detailed response to the IRP Final Report) perhaps are sleeping a little easier tonight.
I'm not so sure they can slumber too peacefully yet. But crikey however you want to look at this we really have been diddled, and the CPA board we now have seem just as bad as the one they replaced.
You ask any non-CPA's about this and they just laugh at hoe stupid we have been.
I'm sorry you renounced your membership certified sane but perhaps your pseudonym is very correct. How sad is it that good members who were prepared to speak out about these obvious and proven wrongs are now leaving in disgust.
It is a sorry reflection on what was once a great organisation and a respectable designation.
You know what annoys and depresses me more about today than anything (and crikey there is lots to be depressed about today in the CPA memo) is the continuing silence of our divisional councilors and Presidents. Pathetic is the most apt descriptor I can think of.

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:28 pm
by Brett Stevenson
Sorry cpa66, we tried our hardest.
They really are pathetic.
I'd repeat all I said in my reply to certified sane but you can read it and equally apply it to yourself.