Senate Inquiry into CASA.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What CASA does not need is an administrator at the helm!!!!
Absolutely nothing will get done.
The good people who are left at CASA will go and no one with talent will look at CASA for employment because they know their voice will not be heard!
The person at the helm needs wide based industry knowledge so meaningless directives and regulations and the Act itself does not become even more pointless than they are. He/she needs to know the industry very well for CASA to function, the second in command needs to be the administrator and held accountable to the director (CEO - whatever).
Just look at the mess aviation security is now in with the various directives with no knowledge of life committing aviation on a daily basis.
If a professional administrator was at the helm, aviation would grind to a halt faster than it is currently.
A professional administrator would hide behind the office of legal council and not have the balls to tell them that something is not possible and their is better way to stay safe.
Absolutely nothing will get done.
The good people who are left at CASA will go and no one with talent will look at CASA for employment because they know their voice will not be heard!
The person at the helm needs wide based industry knowledge so meaningless directives and regulations and the Act itself does not become even more pointless than they are. He/she needs to know the industry very well for CASA to function, the second in command needs to be the administrator and held accountable to the director (CEO - whatever).
Just look at the mess aviation security is now in with the various directives with no knowledge of life committing aviation on a daily basis.
If a professional administrator was at the helm, aviation would grind to a halt faster than it is currently.
A professional administrator would hide behind the office of legal council and not have the balls to tell them that something is not possible and their is better way to stay safe.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you bench mark Byron against almost any other head of Department in Canberra he comes up a very poor second place. In his defence he was left a pile of Poo by the pretender Toller.
CASA needs a well qualified CEO, a leader who is not afraid of change and who can motivate a cynical and bitter middle management that has struggled for years, under resourced in critical areas ( not bodies ) tools to do the job.
A clear set of regulations to work to and legal backing that does act as a model litigant when it is necessary to go beyond the warning stage.
CASA needs a well qualified CEO, a leader who is not afraid of change and who can motivate a cynical and bitter middle management that has struggled for years, under resourced in critical areas ( not bodies ) tools to do the job.
A clear set of regulations to work to and legal backing that does act as a model litigant when it is necessary to go beyond the warning stage.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T28D,
I would not call Toller a pretender either, he was given the same turd sandwich as Byron.
Next comes pointing the bone at Smith, I believe Mr Smith was the last man that could have got the job done, he is very savvy when it comes to "co-ordinating Ministers" ( read strong arming in the media ). I believe his was the greatest opportunity lost.
I would not call Toller a pretender either, he was given the same turd sandwich as Byron.
Next comes pointing the bone at Smith, I believe Mr Smith was the last man that could have got the job done, he is very savvy when it comes to "co-ordinating Ministers" ( read strong arming in the media ). I believe his was the greatest opportunity lost.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Left Hand, If either Toller or Byron were really CEO material they would have seen the Turd sandwich as you so colourfully put the situation inside CASA and then being smart CEO qualified material they would have run a mile.
But THEY DIDN'T which really shows the lack of depth and experience they both had and in the case of Byron still has today.
Smith, different animal he Chaired the Board that oversaw CASA which is a Governance role not an executive position. There can be no comparison.
But THEY DIDN'T which really shows the lack of depth and experience they both had and in the case of Byron still has today.
Smith, different animal he Chaired the Board that oversaw CASA which is a Governance role not an executive position. There can be no comparison.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was Toller or Byron, as you put it, I would look at it as an easy way to top up my Super, enjoy the ride and try to do some good, in that order.
You may not see the comparision between the three, i do. Wasn't NAS Mr Smiths idea ?, it certainly did happen, directly.
Lets agree to disagree.
You may not see the comparision between the three, i do. Wasn't NAS Mr Smiths idea ?, it certainly did happen, directly.
Lets agree to disagree.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHRT Just how is NAS attributable to failures in the management of CASA ??? apart from NAS being a part of the aviation landscape which was open to commentary by Uncle Tom Cobley and all, I fail to see the connection.
Happy to agree to disagree, the gentlemans debate.
I just think Aviation deserves better than misguided time servers, in a world where technology is making Aviation safer and air travel is an established part of everyday life we need good leaders who can cope with the rigours of Change Management and progress entrenched negative thinking into the bright new world of risk based regulation AKA the U.S. FAA.
Happy to agree to disagree, the gentlemans debate.
I just think Aviation deserves better than misguided time servers, in a world where technology is making Aviation safer and air travel is an established part of everyday life we need good leaders who can cope with the rigours of Change Management and progress entrenched negative thinking into the bright new world of risk based regulation AKA the U.S. FAA.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T28D,
I agree with your statments regarding change management, that is where I believe the greatest challenges lay, humans generally resist change.
IMHO the problems with the legislative framework are in essence minor, but due to so many half hearted stabs at fixing the problem ( rulings, exemptions etc etc ), without consulting the industry ( far too much reliance on OLC's tea leaf and Tarot card readings in my opinion, i.e WTF is interposed travel, have not seen that in the regs, what is a fixed terminal, we all know what it was twenty years ago, but you know, things change ? ).
The Senate hit the nail on the head stating the "Industry" does not know which way is up when dealing with some challenged individuals within CASA ( incidently there are many many great persons also within the organisation who are no doubt as frustrated as the rest of us ).
Having dealt a little with the FAR/AIM, would have to say I'm suitably impressed, for one no more ammendment.
Personal note: I am so sick a tired of writing or reading about these regs, still no relevant change/progress.
Anyone thinking of taking a Chief Pilot position for a Charter or RPT organisation think carefully, in the current environment it can be a soul destroying.
I agree with your statments regarding change management, that is where I believe the greatest challenges lay, humans generally resist change.
IMHO the problems with the legislative framework are in essence minor, but due to so many half hearted stabs at fixing the problem ( rulings, exemptions etc etc ), without consulting the industry ( far too much reliance on OLC's tea leaf and Tarot card readings in my opinion, i.e WTF is interposed travel, have not seen that in the regs, what is a fixed terminal, we all know what it was twenty years ago, but you know, things change ? ).
The Senate hit the nail on the head stating the "Industry" does not know which way is up when dealing with some challenged individuals within CASA ( incidently there are many many great persons also within the organisation who are no doubt as frustrated as the rest of us ).
Having dealt a little with the FAR/AIM, would have to say I'm suitably impressed, for one no more ammendment.
Personal note: I am so sick a tired of writing or reading about these regs, still no relevant change/progress.
Anyone thinking of taking a Chief Pilot position for a Charter or RPT organisation think carefully, in the current environment it can be a soul destroying.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 24th Sep 2008 at 04:01.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good leaders consult widely, the most effective tool a real leader has are his/her ears, listening is such an important skill.
The Legislation does require consultation with Industry.
However I don't accept that Consultation dulls leadership skills or takes away the Right of Management to manage.
Good leaders are decisive, close to the people they lead and enjoy universal respect.
I would submit Byron is none of the above.
The Legislation does require consultation with Industry.
However I don't accept that Consultation dulls leadership skills or takes away the Right of Management to manage.
Good leaders are decisive, close to the people they lead and enjoy universal respect.
I would submit Byron is none of the above.
Lefthanded Rock Thrower, you state:
Let’s look at the facts. After Mick Toller had been employed at CASA for six months I decided that he was not the reformer he claimed to be. During his job interview, he made out that Australia was the “Galapagos” in aviation(with its many unique and expensive rules) and that he was a real reformer. Months after taking the job, Mick Toller appeared to change his mind. Of course this could have been because he got a clear message from the Department that the Minister was anti-change, and therefore he would get no support.
I only accepted the position as Chairman because I wanted to oversee important change. Because of this, I made it clear that I had lost confidence in Mick Toller, and I wanted to appoint a “change” CEO. I had Board support for this, but when I went to the Minister (John Anderson) he was totally opposed to Mick Toller going. After all, Mick was strongly supported by Qantas and Ansett.
I made it clear to Minister Anderson that I would never remain as Chairman of CASA – and therefore be held accountable – if I did not have the authority to appoint people I had confidence in. I said Mick Toller must go, and we must appoint a person who will support change. I said that if Mick Toller was not going, I would.
John Anderson, being a minimalist, said I should bury the hatchet and remain. He missed the point. I always liked Mick Toller as a person – it was just obvious to me that he was not going to make the changes that were necessary. I realised that I would have another four years of frustration with no change at all, and merely being a figurehead. I had no intention of doing this. I resigned, and I’m glad I did.
One day we may get a Minister who will support reform – let’s hope it is before a major accident. Then we will be able to concentrate on finishing the reform process to remove the enormous number of unnecessary costs that completely strangle an industry that could be successful. When this happens, I may be available to assist – however I may be doing something else, or into the onset of dementia!
I believe Mr Smith was the last man that could have got the job done, he is very savvy when it comes to "co-ordinating Ministers" (read strong arming in the media). I believe his was the greatest opportunity lost.
I only accepted the position as Chairman because I wanted to oversee important change. Because of this, I made it clear that I had lost confidence in Mick Toller, and I wanted to appoint a “change” CEO. I had Board support for this, but when I went to the Minister (John Anderson) he was totally opposed to Mick Toller going. After all, Mick was strongly supported by Qantas and Ansett.
I made it clear to Minister Anderson that I would never remain as Chairman of CASA – and therefore be held accountable – if I did not have the authority to appoint people I had confidence in. I said Mick Toller must go, and we must appoint a person who will support change. I said that if Mick Toller was not going, I would.
John Anderson, being a minimalist, said I should bury the hatchet and remain. He missed the point. I always liked Mick Toller as a person – it was just obvious to me that he was not going to make the changes that were necessary. I realised that I would have another four years of frustration with no change at all, and merely being a figurehead. I had no intention of doing this. I resigned, and I’m glad I did.
One day we may get a Minister who will support reform – let’s hope it is before a major accident. Then we will be able to concentrate on finishing the reform process to remove the enormous number of unnecessary costs that completely strangle an industry that could be successful. When this happens, I may be available to assist – however I may be doing something else, or into the onset of dementia!
Last edited by Dick Smith; 24th Sep 2008 at 01:59.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T28
Yes, but ...
Agreed re good leaders.
The question is whether CASA on Byron's arrival needed just a 'leader'.
Given what has been written about the state of the organisation, and what has happened since, he was certainly decisive but could hardly be close to the fifty percent of staff departing or enjoy their respect as his role was to ensure the change.
It is often said organisationally that there is a need for a slash and burn CEO followed by a peacemaker to work with the changed culture. Happened with the council amalgamations to some extent.
Yes, but ...
Agreed re good leaders.
The question is whether CASA on Byron's arrival needed just a 'leader'.
Given what has been written about the state of the organisation, and what has happened since, he was certainly decisive but could hardly be close to the fifty percent of staff departing or enjoy their respect as his role was to ensure the change.
It is often said organisationally that there is a need for a slash and burn CEO followed by a peacemaker to work with the changed culture. Happened with the council amalgamations to some extent.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, welcome aboard.
I am not convinced Australian Aviation needs "to be reformed", much of the current legislation is cast in blood,,,,,, it works.
Wasn't the CAA reformed into the CASA, what form will this mystical confused creature take next ?.
Fix the current legislation, eg:
Is dingo baiting an "aerial ag operation" or just run of the mill "airwork", simple answer I would suggest ( in contradiction to CAR 2 ), but due to incomplete legislation it went to the big man ( Toller from memory ) for ruling, then, HERE, then uh oh, changed again, even more uncertainty.
Dick, if you would indulge me, why was NAS so high on the agenda, when the base legislation was in dire need of repair ?, thanks in advance.
I am not convinced Australian Aviation needs "to be reformed", much of the current legislation is cast in blood,,,,,, it works.
Wasn't the CAA reformed into the CASA, what form will this mystical confused creature take next ?.
Fix the current legislation, eg:
Is dingo baiting an "aerial ag operation" or just run of the mill "airwork", simple answer I would suggest ( in contradiction to CAR 2 ), but due to incomplete legislation it went to the big man ( Toller from memory ) for ruling, then, HERE, then uh oh, changed again, even more uncertainty.
Dick, if you would indulge me, why was NAS so high on the agenda, when the base legislation was in dire need of repair ?, thanks in advance.
Max, you are 100% correct however one person can only do so much.
Behind the scenes I have being doing everything I can about the airport situation and lots of other things.
However as stated on another thread, with Mike Taylor being renewed as transport head for another 5 years, I think we are doomed. Look at what he has presided over for the last 4 years. And remember during that time lots in the industry have attacked me and no one has criticised Taylor!
John Anderson was a disaster because he was completely under the control of the Department with no vision or policy of his own.
I have the time and ability to reverse the situation however to be successful I have to have the support of like minded people who are prepared to stand up and take flack from the very people they are trying to help.
It was the Transport Department bureaucrats who set the policy in train for our airports to be sold off however they are never identified or held accountable.
Have you ever seen Mike Taylor give an interview on what his vision is for Australian aviation? No - and you probably never will , because his training is in Agriculture and his knowledge of the real effects of the airport sell off would be virtually nil.
Behind the scenes I have being doing everything I can about the airport situation and lots of other things.
However as stated on another thread, with Mike Taylor being renewed as transport head for another 5 years, I think we are doomed. Look at what he has presided over for the last 4 years. And remember during that time lots in the industry have attacked me and no one has criticised Taylor!
John Anderson was a disaster because he was completely under the control of the Department with no vision or policy of his own.
I have the time and ability to reverse the situation however to be successful I have to have the support of like minded people who are prepared to stand up and take flack from the very people they are trying to help.
It was the Transport Department bureaucrats who set the policy in train for our airports to be sold off however they are never identified or held accountable.
Have you ever seen Mike Taylor give an interview on what his vision is for Australian aviation? No - and you probably never will , because his training is in Agriculture and his knowledge of the real effects of the airport sell off would be virtually nil.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's cut the thread drift, shall we?
People, I have removed virtually all posts from the last 36 hours and created a separate thread named "Australian Airspace Discussion".
http://www.pprune.org/d-g-general-av...iscussion.html
Feel free to continue your issues with airspace over there.
This thread is about the CASA inquiry. Lets keep it that way, thanks.
TID
http://www.pprune.org/d-g-general-av...iscussion.html
Feel free to continue your issues with airspace over there.
This thread is about the CASA inquiry. Lets keep it that way, thanks.
TID
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: OZ
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
* Transporting passengers or cargo;
* For hire and reward;
* In accordance with fixed schedules;
* From fixed terminals;
* Over specified routes;
* For hire and reward;
* In accordance with fixed schedules;
* From fixed terminals;
* Over specified routes;
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is wrong!!!!!!!
The coral sea airlines case concluded that a flight that was planned for the following day was in fact a scheduled flight, and the route as defined by the flight plan made it a "fixed route". No-one knows what a "fixed terminal" is.
This made it RPT.
Nearly every charter flight in Australia operates this way, but if they prosecuted everyone who did it there would be chaos and ridicule. They use it to put companies out of business when they want to. Selected cases.
This should be better defined. The uncertainty it causes is one of the reasons for the decline of GA. (maybe that is what they want)
This made it RPT.
Nearly every charter flight in Australia operates this way, but if they prosecuted everyone who did it there would be chaos and ridicule. They use it to put companies out of business when they want to. Selected cases.
This should be better defined. The uncertainty it causes is one of the reasons for the decline of GA. (maybe that is what they want)
Bushy. Coral Sea Airlines did not operate RPT flights as defined by CAR206(1)(c). But it was a good excuse to take Mostafa out, considering the range of other issues including the amphibious Shrike.
"But no one at CASA makes a decision"
Mr Smith,
You, while holding a significant position on the CASA Board not all that long ago was in a position to make such a change occur, why didn't you do anything about it???
You, while holding a significant position on the CASA Board not all that long ago was in a position to make such a change occur, why didn't you do anything about it???
