We WILL be slugged another $200 for a new CASA Licence!

[ITCZ]

Following on from Wirraway's thread about Pilots being subjected to ASIO checks (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=111051&highlight=security+new+pilot+licence) , I am not so relaxed about the new checks -- I reckon we will be required to pay the $200 for a new licence.

The January/February 2004 editions of Australian Aviation (p28) and Flight Safety Australia (p59) both mention the requirement for pilots to bear the cost of new photographic licences.

The Australian Aviation article correctly quotes DOTARS Fact Sheet 6 (http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec/fact_sheet6.aspx) saying that Pilots will bear the $200 cost of security checking and licence issue.

The ASIC re-issue program is a separate DOTARS initiative and is described separately in Fact Sheet 4 (http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec/fact_sheet4.aspx).

These are two separate programs. One (ASIC) is a requirement by virtue of your employer wanting you to work airside, the other (licencing) is a right granted to an individual to commit aviation in any capacity, not necessarily employment related. The separate programs are probably administered by two different teams, and I for one am not so relaxed that I expect commonsense to prevail.

I fully expect that, unless someone makes a fuss, we will all get a bill for a nice shiny photo licence around June this year.

Given the time it takes for governments to set these things up (like, September 11 was how many years ago..?!) now is the time for us to ask the question. The enabling regulations would need to be in place through CASA as the licence issuer, not DOTARS as the airport security regulator.

I'll bet a month's overnight allowances that the regulations are in the pipeline right now, and I'll bet a further two month's overnight expenses that my employer won't pay for it when it comes!

And if its one thing I hate, is paying for the same job to be done twice!

[apache]

This will be the FOURTH licence I have to fork out for. Not to mention that STUPID green book which cost $10... and is now going to be useless (even more so!)

Q: ... why can't the background check/Fed Police check used for ASIC card also be used for new licence?

Q: ... what happens if we DON'T rush out and pay for a new licence ? I mean my current licence is "perpetually valid". Surely when something is valid "perpetually", then it can never be INVALID.. even if superceded?

Q: ... WHY do we have to pay a $50 bond for ASIC cards ? (my employer is making pilots pay, but saying that htey will cover the other cost [129]) ... very big of SACL considering that I have only had the card for 4 months,.... and now it is to be cancelled and reissued at extra charge.

Time to renegotiate our EBA methinks! ... mind you, I cannot recall ANYWHERE in the award where it says "pilots shall pay for ASIC cards" .

[the wizard of auz]

we need to stop this rubbish right now!!!!!!
this is a small wedge. if we let this go on, where will it stop?, we will be paying for our licence every year at a START OUT RATE of $100.00. how long will it take until it goes up to $200Pa?. not long I bet. remanisant of the $50 levy on our rego that was meant to come off.......... but still hasn't, many years on.
it also gives them the opportunity to deny or refuse an application for renewal, maybe for some minor misdemener commited in the previouse licence period. then comes the renewal by check ride at our expense...It'll never end I tell ya.
DON'T LET IT START.........It's the small end of the wedge.
it would be an absolute shame to spend $30,000 on a licence that will become invalid in 24mnths.
Lets face it..... how effective is it going to be???? bloody useless I reckon. If I was going to pack my aircraft with explosives and fly it into the Menzies police station yelling Allah akbar......... how the hell is this going to stop me.......... or even identify the fact that I have this in mind. It never can or will. I could do the same with my landcruiser and get more explosives in than I could an aircraft.

when will these people realise that they were voted into government BY the people, FOR the people??? Friggen idiots.

rant over



:mad: :mad: :mad:

[currawong]

Aircrew must be a really dodgey lot. To justify all this checking and rechecking.

And they must have been really bad, and need to be punished, hence the extra expense.

Passengers, on the other hand, the ones that flood airside periodically and board aircraft, require no checking at all.

And yet, most hijackings are the work of passengers; few crew hijack their own aircraft.

I would venture to suggest that before long we will all be required to report on a daily basis to our local police station. So they can keep an eye on us and ensure we do not develop any terroristic or unstable or criminal tendencies during the intervening 24 hours.

I wager half the politicians that thought up this scheme would not qualify for an ASIC themselves.

:mad:

[ITCZ]

It is all very well getting upset about it, but b!tching about it will get nowhere.

Anybody know any more about this issue than the press release? Anybody's employer objected on their behalf? Anybody spent an hour to write to DOTARS asking them to justify the need for this action? Anybody approached their federal MP saying they think this is a bad idea?

Or are we all just going to have a b!tch about it?

[currawong]

I 've got it!

Hand the job over to one of our many capable industry groups.

The union, AOPA, AAAA etc etc.

Any industry lobby group worth its weight in proverbial should be all over this one like a rash.

Are they?

[High Altitude]

Currawong whilst you make a good point I would say it is aimed more at the Al Quieda pilot...

After all how many pax could take over and fly your aircraft into a building?

But how many crim checks do you need? ASIC card, Lic, truck Lic, fork lift Lic. Bit like the medical need one for flying, one for life insurance, one to race cars..... Why can't they all be done at once?

Even so the user pays system is on the way in every bloody aspect of life...

[ugly]

Wrote to my local MP (Labor) about it - this is the responce I got

Thank you for your recent letter regarding a new requirement for General Aviation pilots to be subjected to, and bear the cost of, regular security checks.

As you will be aware from the Fact Sheet you referred to, the details of the proposal are scant and do not cover issues such as:

• the type of background check that will be conducted on pilots;

• how long the checking processes will take and the implications of "failing";

• the rationale and justification for the 2 year renewal period;

• the rationale and basis of setting the $200 cost and which organisations receive the money and for what services/tasks;

• why sports aviation has been exempt from the new arrangements;

• which countries Australia has modelled/copied this policy from, or why the Australian Government may have seen fit to institute more rigorous requirements on Australian pilots than those in other countries;

• how the arrangements will apply to pilots visiting Australia; and

• details of the implementation and consultation plan proposed for the policy.

Labor's Shadow Minister for Urban and Regional Development, Transport and Infrastructure, Martin Ferguson is arranging for these questions to be put to the Minister's repress entatives in the Senate Estimates hearings that commence on 16 February 2004. If you have additional specific questions to-add to the above list, please feel free to write, or email them to Martin's transport advisor - [email protected] or call Denise on 02 6277 4752 by Thursday 12 February.

While Labor supports improvements to ensure Australia has a rigorous aviation security system, we intend to pursue the issues you have raised to ensure they are fair and justified to that end.

[cirrus32]

Ugly,

You're lucky, I didn't even get a reply from the email I sent to my local member and to John Anderson on the issue. Maybe I'll follow up with a letter!

H

[The Hedge]

I think this may call for a letter to the Shadow Transport Minister and to get a response from him on the subject. Being election year and all that, the ALP may see opposing this as an oppurtunity to grab a few votes.

Martin Ferguson

[email protected]

Ugly,

Maybe you could direct your letter to him?

[ugly]

You're lucky, I didn't even get a reply from the email I sent to my local member and to John Anderson on the issue. Maybe I'll follow up with a letter! Try snail mail instead of email

I also sent a quick email to the contact with same

[eh you! Pilot!]

I have written to Dotars on a whole range of issues in the past..... never got any replies to letters..... even when i did follow them up........ Frankly the Government just doesn't care...... They don't abide by the fact that " THEY ARE THERE BECAUSE OF US AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[ITCZ]

Well, for my money, our elected officials won't know what to do unless we tell them.

I have written to John Anderson. I have also contacted the AFAP, and they say the issue is very much alive. They have my letter saying 'hey, whats up, what are we going to do about it...'

Nothing is more irritating than a whinger that does nothing to fix the problem he/she is complaining about. So unless you 'pudknockers' start writing letters to the people who can do something about it, you may as well get ready to hand over your $200.

[scrambler]

Finally got a reply to my email to Mr Anderson. Be patient as it only takes around 6 weeks!

Oh and don't expect any answers to specific questions as you will only get a nicely padded out standard response about why we need to have new security measures.

I can see that at $36 for a federal police check that only leaves the measly sum of $164 to cover the production of the licence and CASA admin fees. User pays is great in a monopoly!

[RYAN TCAD]

If it does come to the point where the Authorities expect us to pay the $200, then what about us all banding together and just NOT paying it! That would stuff them surely. It would only work however, if we ALL CHOSE NOT TO PAY! and hence make a stand.

My 2 cents worth!

Bo!

[dzeroplus]

RYAN TCAD

Good idea, same should apply to pilot wages!

You need one out, all out................ but it won't happen!

[farqueue]

I mentioned this to a friend who works as a security guard at Perth, and she said that they are being sluged $50 for their ASIC cards now.

Asked CASA about the `sports aviation' bit. Bottom line is, if you have a CASA licence, you will be hit for $200. Including SPLs!! Also said there is meant to be a full briefing paper out in the first quarter, not holding his breath I suspect though!

So why does it cost an extra $150 to issue a SPL to a 16yo girl still at school, over the $50 for a full time employed rent-a-thug?

[tealady]

I've heard that management at YMMB will be charging $200 for a card that will give access to the tarmac at YMMB - I suppose some of this will be for another police check and the rest for their own pockets. Why can't the fact that you have a pilot licence that you have already paid $200 for be enough?

[scrambler]

Tealady I think you may have heard wrong the cost according to MAC website is $16.50

http://www.moorabbinairport.com.au/securitycards.htm

[currawong]

Seems the folks in education and childcare that require "Blue Cards" pay.....


Nothing.

[dogcharlietree]

Once again, common sense isn't so common.
Here am I, born and bred in Oz, served in Her Majesty's Service, defending this country, been part of this country's aviation industry for over 35 years, held an ASIC card for quite a few years and now have to jump through the hoops like a newbie.
Ah... bureaucracy.........where would we be without Fort Fumble :(

[kookabat]

Hi guys,
This is also being discussed on the YSSY message board:
http://www.vpmag.com/yssy/viewtopic.php?t=6853
Personally I have written to my local member, got the standard bureaucratic cr@p back from John Anderson... so have a few letters here to send to Mark Latham and the Shadow Ministers for Transport and Homeland Security tomorrow. We need to kick up a stink about it if we are to have any chance of stopping yet another rediculous tax disguised as a 'security' measure!!!

Adam

[sharpshot]

And I thought it was just the U.K. that was fast becoming the "police state".
I just validated my U.K. licence for a CASA one last December so I could fly into Avalon 2005........if I understand correctly, my $50 piece of paper is now worthless and in a two week trip to Melbourne, will never get security cleared to fly anywhere.

What is access going to be like at say Moorabbin to go up with an instructor?

And hey, what happens to passengers:confused:

[ITCZ]

Just received a [very late] reply to my initial email to John Anderson from his "Surface Transport Advisor," Zoe Wilson.

A page and a half of what was basically a re-statement of the policy on the website.

So the 2000+ persons who have browsed this post -- IT IS REAL, it IS coming, you WILL be up for roughly $200 for a new licence in July.

Here it is...

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services, Leader of the Nationals

11 March 2004

Dear Mr [ITCZ]

Thank you for your letter of 12 February 2004 to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services, the Hon John Anderson MP, concerning new pilot licensing requirements that include a thorough background checking of pilots. Mr Anderson has asked me to reply on his behalf. I regret the delay in replying.

Aviation security is kept under constant review to ensure that measures remain appropriate to current intelligence on threats to Australian aviation. Most recently, there was a comprehensive review of aviation security following a revised threat assessment issued by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation in July 2003.

As a result of this review, on 4 December 2003 Mr Anderson announced a major expansion of the nation's aviation security regime. As a part of the expansion, background checking has been extended to a larger part of the aviation industry in recognition of the nature and levelof the threat. The threat assessment has highlighted pilot identification as an important issue that must be addressed as part of aviation security requirements in Australia. Ensuring that pilots and trainee pilots are subject to security checking will reduce the likelihood of persons who might pose a threat to aviation gaining access to aircraft through legitimate means, such as undergoing training and progressing through other licensing requirements. This measure will complement the new [:hmm: ITCZ] credit card style pilot licences with embedded photographs, which will offer a higher level of security.

Whilst I appreciate the concerns you raise regarding costs, the Australian Government maintains that the costs of security measures are the responsibility of owners or operators of aircraft and airports. The licence fee for pilots will be determined on a cost-recovery basis. The Department of Transport and Regional Services will be consulting with industry organisations in designing the detailed implementation of these measures, including on the matters you raise in your letter.

The Australian Government recognises that extending the aviation security regulatory framework to additional aviation participants, and pilots in particular, imposes new obligations that may create some inconvenience and add some costs in conducting aviation activities, be they business or hobby-related. I would want to emphasise that the Australian Government has only implemented these measures after careful consideration of the information available to it. The requirements are a necessary part of a comprehensive and reasoned approach to increasing the security of the aviation sector in a changing global environment.

I should also emphasise that the Australian Government is grateful for your general support of the measures being implemented to protect the community from parties that may have ambitions to unlawfully interfere with aviation.

Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of the Minister.

Yours Sincerely
[signed]
Zoe Wilson
Surface Transport Adviser


Some interesting bits for me are.....

New credit-card style pilot licence...
Where have I heard that before? Will they have room to print all the "ICAO Compliance" information that presently takes 6 x A6 pages?

The licence fee for pilots will be determined on a cost-recovery basis.... versus the measures being implemented to protect the community from parties that may have intentions.....

I am personally quite sick of hearing this tired 1980's era Thatcheresque/Reaganesque user pays cant. A small section of the community is forced to 'build a fence' as it were to protect the community at large. I pay, everybody else benefits. I am not the user, I am being USED!!

...will be consulting with industry in designing the detailed implementation....
I have heard nothing from my company, from CASA or AirServices, and LC at the AFAP has not been approached. So which 'industry' people are they talking to?

But mainly, I will be replying to Ms Wilson to say that the main question I had for the Minister remains unanswered -- that is,

Dear Ms Wilson - Why Should We Pay Twice?

[tealady]

In all fairness, anyone who drives any sort of transport whether it be a GA aircraft, glider, ultralight, hot air balloon, truck, motorbike or car should indergo the same security checks. Yhis is a blatant form of discrimination - maybe the aviation fraternity should discriminate against Mr Anderson and his family by not allowing them anywhere neart an airport let a lone onto an aircraft! Sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yea, about the same amount of stupid this latest cockeyed idea is. Can this be taken to the equal opportunity commission?

[Icarus2001]

Here is an extract from the RRP Update newsletter from late 2003.


Flight Crew Licensing Standards Sub-commitee

The sub-commitee sought SCC (Standards Consultative Commitee) determination on:

The potential for the delay in the issue of pilot licences as a result of new security requirements. The SCC were advised by CASA that the new licences would have a photograph and the security checks including Police records, Political Motivated Violence, and an Immigration check. The SCC agreed the DOTARS would organise a member from the Flight Crew licensing Standards sub commitee to meet with the Security Council to pass on the sub-commitees concerns and explain the potential cost to industry.

So in other words Mr Anderson shot off his mouth about what he was going to do about Aviation safety with regard to new licences without his DOTARS advisors actually speaking to any CASA Licensing people about the legislation and implications.

Here we are at the end of March with no indication of how this will be made to work in July, 3 months away!

[the wizard of auz]

Well I personally refuse to take part in this nonsense. I will not be held to ransom by an unthinking government that is meant to be representing the majority, not some hairbrained idea of an individual. How many times to these people have to be told and by how many people, that this is simply irresponsable use of money that we are being railroaded into spending with little or no consultation from the industry.
I will continue to fly my aircraft that I am currently allowed to fly untill I am jailed and make a Public noise about this lunacy.
I would be all for it if it made any differance at all to anyones safety, but it won't make one iota of differance to anybloodything.
these people need to realise that they were voted into power by the people, to represent the peoples wishes. thats what a democratic government is all about.
:mad: :mad:

[kookabat]

>I would want to emphasise that the Australian Government has only implemented these measures after careful consideration of the information available to it.
-just like they did before invading Iraq?:suspect:

Wizard: hear, hear... now all we need to do is get more people doing it!

adam

[Crack]

I don't like it either, but I see a irony in the fact that this happened with the NZ CAA, ( It is called user pay's) and in the end, the industry just bent over and let the CAA have its way, the industry was so scared "****eless" of upsetting the personalities they had to work with within the department. The only interest the (companies/Employer's) has is in making money and if it doesn't concern the above then they won't say boo, ( I do seem to remember Air NZ refusing to pay the increased landing charges at Wellington) .
Wouldn't it be really great if the industry workers could all agree to keep the Aluminium on the ground for a day, but I gues pipe dreams are free aye wot?, the NZ CAA has become a world leader in the USER pay system, and is constantly amending rules and coming up with New rules, and then charging the industry for the compliance cost's, and guess what , they show a profit? they must be on the right track????:mad: :mad:
What you can look forward to is more of the same with rewrites of regs, instructor ratings, RPT compliance, aerial work compliance,
"****e" they even invent rules, just to create a profit, and you think I am kidding???????.
They even pay fee's to "industry Professionals" to validate their reasons to change things and re-invent the wheel?.
They have " THINK TANKS" and working groups dedicated to come up with ways to charge more, you still think I am kidding , yeah right??????.
****e they even use SAFETY as a issue with which to make money.
A cynic, or a realist, I don't know which I am either, it is getting hard to stay in the flying game, I still enjoy the flying, but I am really these last few years getting to hate what, was once a proud industry. I was once so proud to be a pilot, now as I struggle to finish out my flying career over the next few years I just see myself as a WHORE :mad: :mad:
And the IRONY of IRONY is the people doing this are or once were just as keen on aeroplanes as the rest of us.
Add to you flight case a tube of K-Y Gel, you are going to need it , and you can probably even claim it against your tax.:mad: :mad: As I say realist or cynic, you decide.
Let the replies tear me apart over this, I would love, just love to mention some names and statements made by so called policy makers.
BRING IT ON you useless mother ******* in the departments.
:mad: :mad:

[Yakka]

I just sent my letters by snail mail to my local member and to John anderson with a big "please explain" I encourage you to all do the same.

I will post the reply if I get one.

[chief wiggum]

So... what happens to me if I am stuck in ,say Birdsville, for two years and cannot get to a CASA office for a new licence ? AM I no longer safe to fly ?

What happens when I get my new licence ? Am I supposed to display it at all times... just like an ASIC card ?... along with wings, ASIC, W@nker bars and name tag... we are all going to look like Libyan Generals!

If we DON'T have to display it... then what is the point of it ? The only time I have ever been asked for my licence is when I have started work with a new company. I have never been challenged on the tarmac, and asked to produce my licence.

BIG BROTHER WANTS TO WATCH YOU!!!!.. and make YOU pay for the priviledge

[ITCZ]

x repost to bring it to the top of the list again x

[Ultralights]

s, the Australian Government maintains that the costs of security measures are the responsibility of owners or operators of aircraft and airports.


so we work to rule. we all refusre to pay, we dont ket our cards/checks tax receipt, and as a result, we are all declared unsafe to fly aircraft.

wonder how long before the decision is reversed if the Entire aviation indusrty remains grounded! (every aircraft in Australian territory)

[Biggles_in_Oz]

the Australian Government maintains that the costs of security measures are the responsibility of owners or operators of aircraft and airports
So, why are they subsidising RPT operators, some airports, installing regional CCTV, creating more inspectors and 'rapid deployment teams' and ......

GA gets no subsidies but is required to pay for 'easily visible' anti-theft' measures.

http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec
http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec/Reg_Aviation/Reg_Fact_sheet1.aspx


The licence fee for pilots will be determined on a cost-recovery basis.
Does this mean that your licence will cost more if ASIO actually questions your neighbours/colleagues/family/coworkers
about you ?

[DeltaSix]

That's it, I'm going overseas to work........

Stuff them. I'm not paying that. I'd convert my license to a banana republic one if they'll ground me.

If they say this has something to do with Australia's security, then why dont they take it out of the defense and security budget.

I'm telling you, this is just a blatant excuse for a revenue raising exercise by them. Next thing you know, they'll charge you for breathing the air.

F#@*K them.

[THREEGREENS]

I just saw my first photo licence - what a flipping joke! It is paper covered in plastic, it is not waterproof and is the poorest possible example you could ever expect to see - kids in kinder could have done it better.
As I see it, CASA only had to have all the reviews (security) conducted and then issue an authorisation to the licence holder to go to their local RTA office and have a photo licence issued similar to the car licence. CASA would only have had to issue the blanks to the RTA. As there are RTA's (or similar) right throughout Australia in every state and usually within easy reach of most of us, this would have been the far better option instead of the scappy little bit of paper that they are issuing now. The RTA type licence could have doubled as an ID card for access to airports and associated places......what a wasted opportuntiy!:mad:

[X-dash8thrasher]

.THREE GREENS

CASA only had to have all the checks conducted and then direct the licence holder to go to their local RTA office and have a photo licence issued similar to the car licence. CASA would only have had to print templates on the licence paper they already use and issue the blanks to the RTA. As there are RTA's (or similar) right throughout Australia in every state and usually within easy reach of most of us. The RTA type licence could have doubled as an ID card for access to airports and associated places......it was an effective cost saving opportuntiy!

I have personally made this suggestion to both the bankstown office and the canberra office in 2001 and again in 2003.

the response from office staff on both occasions were facial expressions that implied i should be swinging from tree branches and eating banana's.

As you said what a wasted opportunity for (1) initial cost saving for CASA (2) standardising aircrew identification at ALL airports australia wide (3) fixing the licence format once and for all (no more having to go back and forth between various green books/folders and card formats)

[Ultralights]

I give up, i have sent 15 letters, 5 hand written and hand delivered, EVERY one came back with the same Identical response! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

100 days have since past, and i still havnt seen my medical renewal:mad: :mad: :mad:

thats it for me, no more ARN number.
i havnt flown a VH rego aircraft now in 4 months! and only because of CASA and australias famous beaurocratic BULL****E!

on another thought, seeing as i have held a PPL for over 16 yrs, (my licence is a CAA Flight crew card!) and its perpetually valid, ex medical, does that mean i can still fly in CTA on my RAA ticket as my radio operators licence is still valid??

[Obiwan]

thanks to everyone who signed the petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/ozavbill/petition.html) so far, it just passed the 300 mark. However, I would like it to say 3000+, so if you haven't signed it, or know someone who hasn't please let them know.

[Like This - Do That]

Hello PPRuNers

I've signed the petition but I cringed a little at some of the comments. Some of them were shockers - poorly written, bad grammar, words misspelt, etc. Some looked like the ravings of loonies - the bureaucrats and pollies who see the list will have a field day! One look at some of those rants will convince them that the entire industry is a menace that should be shut down as soon as possible.

Is there some way the comments can be excised or edited?

LTDT

[Obiwan]

LTDT
Unfortunately I can't edit the comments or change the wording of the petition - its basically like a written petition, you wouldn't want someone changing you comment, or the actual petition after you'd signed it.

Having said that - I can download the petition as a file and theoretically edit out some of the dumber comments before sending the the list to the pollies... like they'd even read it...

On a different note - I received a form reply from one Senator so I emailed back pointing out that she had not addressed any of my points. I did receive another reply that someone will actually investigate the issues I've raised and get back to me.

[kookabat]

Had a letter forwarded to me by Tony Windsor, stating that "a response will be forwarded to you [Windsor] in due course", from the Minister's office. No direct reply from my handwritten ones yet though...