CASA asking for variation from Discrimination Act

[OZBUSDRIVER]

I think I need a life. Caught a bit of the House of Reps broadcast this morning. A bill has been entered for a variation from the Discrimination legislation for Casa. The argument put went along the lines of protecting ourselves and the paying public from pregnant pilots in their third trimester and the like. Not sure how far this will go because debate was ajourned for a later sitting.

Would this affect those soles who managed to beat up CASA into overlooking colour blindness. Prob reading to much into this but it could have more sinister repurcussions further down the track.

Regards

Mark

[tubby one]

until you understand why this is necessary and that it is not having a 'hack' at anyone I suggest you stay driving a bus - preferably one that stays on the road.

put simply without a variation it would not be legal to require pregnant pilots to stop flying at a given point in the pregnancy. it is about responsibility not bloodymindedness. but then it is always easier to kick than think isn't it.

[Disco Stu]

OZBUSDRIVER

You're going to have to help me out here.

What on earth do you mean by "Would this affect those soles who managed to beat up CASA into overlooking colour blindness."

Nobody 'beat up CASA' although through reasoned medical research, data and argument ICAO (and by default CASA) ultimately modernised its colour blindness standard. This was pretty much achieved by one Doctor/Pilot from Australia.

What this has to do with pregnancy you will have to inform me.

Thanks

Disco Stu
A bit colour blind but definately NOT pregnant.:ok:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

OK I'll make it simple. If CASA gets a variation against the discrimination act. Would it be a simple thing for CASA to put rules in place that would jeapordize your job on the basis of age. Would be terrible to get thrown on scrap heap aged 60 ala US. Sure, Politicians would use something as obvious as pilot who is also pregnant. I think you should be more worried for more minor things.

Please forgive my ignorance. My choice of wording was not precise over the battle to get past this issue. I understand a lot of work was done by one Oz doctor to turn around the law against pilots who were colour blind from obtaining CPL. I will go and study what grounds he used to initially get CASA to look at a different test. I actualy thought that the good doctor used anti-discrimination laws to get CASA to look at it in a different light. Please excuse my ignorance if I am wrong. But Tubby One Just because I do not wear brade on my shoulders doesn't mean I am not professional in my approach to my flying, Play the ball and think laterally. Think what CASA may get away with if they do not have to fear discrimination charges. As I said I may be reading too much into it. But , wouldn't it be terrible to lose your livelyhood over something as arbitary as your age.

Keep It Safe up there

Mark

OK. researched Arthur Pape 1987. He was first to take on authorities in 1987 thru Administrative Appeals tribunal. In 1989 he was instrumental in another case that opened up investigations in colour blindness impacting on activities as a pilot. That opened up the industry for successful colour blind applicants.

There were/are are a number of cases involving colour blind ATC going thru the relevant tribunal on anti-discrimination grounds. Indeed there is a letter from Dr Pape arguing against CASA obtaining such a variation in 2002. How simple would it be to loose your licence for something trivial and have no recourse. As this legislation has only just been presented in the Reps (if you are/ could be affected), I suggest you get someone from your union to make representations to the Senate to block/modify it before it is too late.

But... then again, I'm only a busdriver . What would I know?

Regards

Mark

[Icarus2001]

But , wouldn't it be terrible to lose your livelyhood over something as arbitary as your age.

In the world I live in age is definately not arbitrary. Most things at either end of your allotted time are governed by age so why not flying? Since we are rushing headlong in to being another state of the US of A then the argument must be that we should follow their lead. I don't think so but that is the logic of the current arguments.

As to your point Bus Driver I hear what you say but it will be the wording of the regulation that we need to check carefully not the concept. Perhaps they will rule out flying for people without a Y chromosone.(That is women for those who did not pay attention in class:rolleyes: ) That will make some on these forums very happy.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Icarus2001 Thank-you.

Here is a link to the rel. Hansard. Click and then go to bill 25740.

http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps/dailys/dr110304.pdf

Also recommend doing a "Google" on Dr Arthur Pape.

I shall leave it upto you people to decide if it is worth fighting for.

Regards

Mark

[tubby one]

OBD my comments do not come from braided shoulders, rather from a rational approach to just what the regulator is about.
if you care to look you will find that most of the restrictions reflect the requirements of ICAO or commonwealth law apart from the Aviation Act.

[poteroo]

Age Discrimination?

I've always wondered how CASA has escaped a challenge to CAR 5.110 - Commercial Pilot: requirements if over 60 years old.

If a pilot over 60 years old, or over 65 years old, as described in this regulation, is able to satisfactorily pass their medical - then is there any reason to ask them to undertake extra flight reviews?

Over 60, but under 65 - annually
Over 65. - 6 monthly.


Is there any quantifiable support for these extra flight reviews, or is it just being done because oldies must have lost their skills - so we'll test them more frequently ?

My interpretation is that it is an AFR, which seems inappropriate because I'm a current Instructor 1, and doing the instructors review every 2 years.

Does this mean then that my Annual F.R. needs to be done as an instructor, or do I take the LHS and act as a CPL for the purpose of the annual? After 65, I'll be looking at twice annual checks on my competency to fly from the LHS, but then every 2 years, it will be an instructing review.

I didn't realise that my skills deteriorated after both these ages - much like the engine on my 170 fails after it reaches 100 hrs or TBO!!

happy days,