Biscuit, Good pick-up. Glad to see somebody else apart from myself noticed that joke.
119.73 wasn't mentioned in the Senate Inquiry despite such a situation being discussed. One person had two hats on during questioning, previous role as CASA manager of office over sighting the airline he joined.
Lets call this airline person Mr X. Now, when employed at CASA Mr X worked alongside another CASA colleague whom we will call MR Y. Now after Mr X leaves and goes to work for the airline in question Mr Y resigns from CASA for other reasons. Not long afterwards Mr Y returns to CASA as a 'consultant' of course. Mr Y then goes and participates on the AOC audit of the airline in question, where Mr X is of course working!!
And no, they were not miles apart during the audit, they were very close together as previously at CASA both Mr X and Mr Y worked hand in hand.
Nothing unusual in that. One chump in Brisbane was also allowed to take LWAO from CASA for several months and go and set up an AOC holders SMS, then return to CASA. He also had building access at CASA during that time frame and used to come in and check his emails etc!! No conflict of interest in that one!
I am still waiting for all the dirty laundry to be aired as to why the HR Manager left! I know why, but waiting for the dirt to slide out from under the carpet...It will gradually. Senior management are a joke.
Roulette,
Is CASA supposed to make a profit? A government regulatory authority? Why bother reporting EBIT?
No, they cannot earn a profit, that is a no no. The reason for EBIT is the usual government bull**** - to produce financial facts to show the 'taxpayer' that there hard earned money is being used in a 'clear, transparent, robust, effective and correct manner', which is a crock of **** when you look at how much they are wasting on luicrous salaries, international buiness travel, jollies, folly, bonuses, failed projects, failed reg reform, and unnecessary legal actions against innocent people.