Kharon the AAAA 2008 submission makes for very interesting reading.
Five years has past and what's changed?
The same gripes appear in virtually every post concerning CAsA on this website and in almost every publication you pick up, despite what appears to be concerted cyber warfare, whether instigated by CAsA or not, by certain individuals to either, get a thread shutdown, or muddy the water by diverting the discussion off topic.
Some interesting snippets:
“Key Issues Summary”
- Independent review of CASA’s functions required, drawing heavily on industry input.
- Current governance arrangements do not appear to be supporting or encouraging transparency, accountability or performance.
- Industry consultation mechanisms at the technical level may be adequate (for example on regulatory reform working groups), but at the strategic level they are either non-existent or in need of review. Asking industry what their view is and then ignoring it completely is frequently dressed-up as ‘consultation’.
- CASA needs a central policy making function that binds all staff to a single interpretation that has been developed with industry consultation. This must be a central feature of any attempt to improve CASA’s culture.
- CASA must develop a systems-based approach to managing interactions with industry that are currently piecemeal and treated as ‘once-offs’.
- Cost recovery must be based on establishing CASA’s essential functions and priorities (see independent review above), identifying any functions that can be transferred to industry while maintaining safety integrity and removing any requirements that do not deliver a safety outcome that addresses an identified and significant risk.
- CASA must be directed by Government to pursue aggressively an efficiency and cost-cutting program that reduces the burden on industry.
Seem to have heard much of the same stuff recently
“In many ways, reform has been compromised by current governance and management structures, a lack of drive for urgent change from the top of CASA and an ongoing combative approach from some in CASA towards industry.”
The angry man in charge?
“Trying to work with CASA is akin to prolonged guerrilla warfare, where success goes to the industry person or organization that can build an alliance with competent staff within CASA and assist them to defeat the other retrograde forces at work within CASA to protect turf, retain power, resist change and to stifle industry.”
Sounds a tad like Wodger Wabbit territory
“It is industry that leads and daily implements aviation safety in Australia, not CASA.”
YUP!
“The effect of much of CASA’s processes is to stop industry from achieving adaptation to a changing market rather than to facilitate it, often as a result of CASA staffs’ personal outlook on aviation.
The FOI of the day routine
“Transparency, accountability and clear performance outcomes are almost unknown concepts within CASA, despite pockets of forward thinking individuals who try and hold CASA to the same standards that are delivered by other public service agencies.”
Hmmm Mr. Truss where are you?
“A poor CASA culture that focuses on personal power at the expense of
aviation safety, sensible regulation and industry development.”
Down the rabbit burrow again
“Management does not seem able to formulate a coherent plan for improvement, nor appears capable of enforcing their will over lower managers, delegates and even field staff in the organisation.”
Which is why Chief pilots are still being overruled when they voice serious safety reservations about operational matters foisted on them by unqualified FOI's pushing their own personal agenda's.
“For example, the role of FOIs and AWI’s varies enormously between individuals and offices, apparently without any coordination from a central manager. Similarly, the outlook of senior management is not shared by many others in the organization, and the perspective of central office to the regions appears worlds apart.”
Which is why operators of the same aircraft can all be operating differently based on the preferences and opinions of their handling FOI.
“In many cases to consult or not, to work positively with industry or not, or to abide by normal standards of good policy development or not, are not decisions made at high level after consideration of the strategic environment. They are frequently made at a local level, often with an agenda of frustrating central office and increasing the power of local staff.”
“There has been no research presented by CASA or government in the pursuit of cost recovery that would indicate proper account has been given to how much of an increase in costs the industry and industry clients can bear and the possible impact of increased costs.”
The impact is clients forgoing aviation for other means of transportation
“For example, the current migration of GA pilots out of CASA controlled aviation to aviation managed by Recreational Aviation Australia should be seen as pilots voting with their feet."
And the migration of foreign commercial students to New Zealand
"The long-term impact of this migration on pilot-shortages and cost-recovery may be substantial. In turn, the impact on the national need for a vibrant and safe aviation industry must not be overlooked.”
Says it all really
Mr. Truss you really need to stand up and be counted.