Dear Alex,
Thank you for establishing contact to ascertain whether I wish to proceed with my defamation action against CASA.
Please accept this as my response; that I do wish to proceed with that litigation, noting that the person who sent that direction, CASA Region Manager Mr. XXXXX XXXXXXXX resigned from CASA last week. I'm not sure how that impacts on any case but am advising you, nevertheless. i.e. is the litigation against him as an individual, or against his employer being CASA, or possibly both.
I would also point out that this matter is also being investigated by the Commonwealth Ombudsman and I anticipate that his findings when released, will add significant weight to my case.
Regarding CASAs' previous offer, it is totally unacceptable, and I wish to proceed on the basis that any claim would have to far exceed the paltry and rather mischievous offer that CASA put forward previously. CASA has clearly demonstrated that they are not acting with good intent.
Regarding the reputational damage which also led to a period of 8 months of unemployment, it has been significant. It has extended to my reputation with peers in the industry, my past employees, work colleagues, my suppliers, neighbors, school community, and indeed my own family i.e. wife, children, parents, and siblings.
The nation's Aviation Safety Regulator, CASA, has directed that my employment was "untenable" based on comments I was making publicly. There is no safety case for that direction at all.
The reasonable assumption of many in the industry, and outside of the aviation industry is that I must have done something wrong on the basis of a safety-related matter when that is clearly not the case, and CASA will be unable to refute that statement. For clarity, CASA actions had no basis in safety, and the direction was made to my employer on "comments that I was making publicly".
I have asked CASA to identify those comments that I allegedly made, which led to the direction to terminate my employment. CASA has steadfastly refused to respond to those requests. Their action was in my opinion unlawful, unfair, and unjust.
For clarity, there is no position in the legislation for a "deputy Head of Operations". My position was the Head of Operations, and I operated as the "Alternate Head of Operations". That is to say that the position was a CASA approved position as the Head of Operations. , I was fully approved by CASA to immediately step into the role of the Head of Operations.
The CASA Enforcement Manual (link follows) outlines procedures required in Administrative Law if CASA wishes to remove me from that CASA approved position of Head of Operations. These procedures were completely ignored.
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...f/009rfull.pdf
After having spent 25 years in the industry and earning an impeccable reputation for safety, regulatory compliance, and acting with good intention, it was destroyed in an instant with that direction from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. I was chased out of an industry that I loved and had committed my life to.
The impact has been far too disproportionate, and the ramifications substantial.
Please note that I have written to the Board of CASA and that correspondence is included at the tail end of this letter. My hope is that the Board of CASA will act with ethics to direct that this matter be resolved, although based on past experience I do not feel that they will, and for that reason, I do wish to proceed to an independent determination via the legal system.
If you think it prudent, however, and I will follow your learned advice, you may elect that one last attempt to reach out to CASA is the best way forward. I will leave it to you to determine how best to resolve this matter as efficiently and fairly as practical.
On other matters and on high-level advice, I will also be proceeding with a case of negligent misstatement/ misfeasance and malfeasance against CASA for the significant commercial damage inflicted on my business, and several other businesses and individuals as part of this process.
I have no doubt that the CASA actions were vindictive and vexatious, so I can assure you that you have an energized litigant that you will be representing.
For your information, the Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) provided an opportunity to begin telling my story, and that presentation a couple of weeks ago attracted 17,000 views and 80,000 shares. I have been presented with another opportunity on Tuesday 7th September at 7 PM, I anticipate an even larger audience for that presentation, and I will send a copy of that to you for consideration.
I look forward to guidance from you on the next step, and please find my recent correspondence to the Board of CASA, thank you for your ongoing support.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
"To the Board of CASA, comprising the following Individuals
Mr. Anthony Mathews (Chairperson), Mr. Shane Carmody (CEO of CASA), Mr. Mark Rindfleish, Mr. Michael Bridge, Ms. Donna Hardman, Ms. Elizabeth Hallet, and Ms. Marilyn Andre. In your roles, you are responsible for ensuring that CASA performs its role in a "proper, efficient, and effective manner."
You will be fully aware of the significant allegations I have bought against CASA Employees;- Mr. Jonathan Aleck CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs
- Mr. Graeme Crawford, CASA Executive Manager of the Aviation Group,
- Mr. Craig Martin, CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and Surveillance.
The conduct of these gentlemen in my opinion has been unlawful, unfair, and unjust, and has brought enormous economic harm to me, my family, and other individuals, aeroclubs, and businesses.
I have had discussions with a number of legal firms, and I am confident that I have a valid basis for a claim against CASA on behalf of affected Parties, and it appears that case would be based around misfeasance, malfeasance and negligent misstatement
I am now at a point in this process where I need to clearly ascertain whether I proceed with my legal case or, do we arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution with a less combative approach. The latter clearly being my preferred option.
Should you choose the path of litigation, I need to be very clear that once that journey commences, the opportunity for a negotiated settlement is lost, and I will pursue my matter through to a legal determination.
The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a very clear direction from the Board of CASA, in conjunction with your insurance company being Comminsure.
The more combative approach will be the more costly, divert valuable CASA resources from primary tasks, and expose CASA to a far higher level of public scrutiny. In my opinion, it should be an unnecessary approach, but that decision now rests with the CASA Board.
As you are aware I have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter, but until this point, the Board has resolutely refused those offers. I am now calling on you to make your decision and advise me of that decision.
As the Board already has the facts in front of them, I anticipate that you should be able to arrive at a prompt and well-considered opinion.
Could you please advise me by 5 PM on Friday 4th September of the Board's decision.
In assisting you to arrive at your decision, I re-extend my offer to meet with the Board at any time prior to that date.
Yours respectfully, Glen Buckley
