DAMPS Drug and Alcohol Management
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will do, and thanks for keeping it polite. I am only trying to contribute to awareness not attack anybody personally or by profession. When I was setting up our program I discussed it with CASA they said random testing was not on the agenda so that comes as a dissappointing surprise if it is true.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose some of the problem here is unlike say mining, we have 2 totally different kinds of aviation activities represented on this forum.
While I can see some relevence to mining in the professional aviation arena, I am unaware of such an activity as recreational mining. So maybe the CASA supporters should not be so loud in quoting what is normal in other industries.
From what I have seen of mining the production and domestic sections are stricly quarantined but that is not true in aviation. A good example is Scone where houses back onto the airport and have aircraft access from private land.
I also have severe problems with CASA defacto setting up a new list of "legal" medications. While those of you who fly may have access to a DAME, I am unaware of who non fliers would access for this information. Are CASA suggesting that on top of everything else, GPs and Chemists have to consult, they now need to access CASA rules and if this is the case who pays for the extra. If it is the worker has it been made tax deductible?
If this is such a watertight set of rules with no major adverse unfair implications to an individal or organisations then CASA should be sure enough of their grounds to guarantee that they will refund all expenses if they cause a loss and it is found to be a false positive. If they won't guarantee that, then they are admitting that the whole process is flawed.
Wunwing
While I can see some relevence to mining in the professional aviation arena, I am unaware of such an activity as recreational mining. So maybe the CASA supporters should not be so loud in quoting what is normal in other industries.
From what I have seen of mining the production and domestic sections are stricly quarantined but that is not true in aviation. A good example is Scone where houses back onto the airport and have aircraft access from private land.
I also have severe problems with CASA defacto setting up a new list of "legal" medications. While those of you who fly may have access to a DAME, I am unaware of who non fliers would access for this information. Are CASA suggesting that on top of everything else, GPs and Chemists have to consult, they now need to access CASA rules and if this is the case who pays for the extra. If it is the worker has it been made tax deductible?
If this is such a watertight set of rules with no major adverse unfair implications to an individal or organisations then CASA should be sure enough of their grounds to guarantee that they will refund all expenses if they cause a loss and it is found to be a false positive. If they won't guarantee that, then they are admitting that the whole process is flawed.
Wunwing
Last edited by Wunwing; 27th Sep 2008 at 10:23.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I blame the management of the larger airlines for allowing the creation of this sort of nonsense.
Here we have the morons in Canberra writing more rules when they cannot even understand or implement some of the mess we have now.
Look at the security debacle, how to get a slab of beer airside, place it on the belt with the passenger baggage in the terminal and the baggies take it off when it gets to their side.
I cannot take a nail clippers throught security but I can walk into the tarmac staff kitchen and take any sharp object I want.
Why do airline management allow their staff to be subjected to such nonsense, especially when they complaining about costs but yet they are giving this crap the nod.
Is this the same CASA who are going to implement this that debit your credit card for your medical and then three weeks later tell you that they didn't get your medical paperwork to renew your medical ?, it is !!
This should work really well then, the travelling public can breathe a sigh of relief the knowledge that they are in safe hands and the dangerous period in Australian Aviation has passed.
Anyway, that's enough from me, I gotta go and read up on TIBA procedures.
What a complete
Here we have the morons in Canberra writing more rules when they cannot even understand or implement some of the mess we have now.
Look at the security debacle, how to get a slab of beer airside, place it on the belt with the passenger baggage in the terminal and the baggies take it off when it gets to their side.
I cannot take a nail clippers throught security but I can walk into the tarmac staff kitchen and take any sharp object I want.
Why do airline management allow their staff to be subjected to such nonsense, especially when they complaining about costs but yet they are giving this crap the nod.
Is this the same CASA who are going to implement this that debit your credit card for your medical and then three weeks later tell you that they didn't get your medical paperwork to renew your medical ?, it is !!
This should work really well then, the travelling public can breathe a sigh of relief the knowledge that they are in safe hands and the dangerous period in Australian Aviation has passed.
Anyway, that's enough from me, I gotta go and read up on TIBA procedures.
What a complete
I note that there is still no response from anyone regarding my question about false positives from Sudafed or Codral use or being over the limit of 0.02 percent alcohol (but under the legal driving limit of 0.05 percent) when going airside for the purpose of retrieving sunglasses or checking the security of a tethered aircraft (as is required by my contract of aircraft hire).
I therefore assume that the legality or otherwise of such activities will be decided by the courts and I hope CASA has budgeted some hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal costs to decide these matters, since they seem incapable or resolving these obvious inconsistencies in any efficient manner in advance.
I'm also interested in whether suppliers delivering goods or services airside are fair game for testers as well if they airside
P.S. The situation I'm describing is not hypothetical as anyone who has done any air touring will tell you.
I therefore assume that the legality or otherwise of such activities will be decided by the courts and I hope CASA has budgeted some hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal costs to decide these matters, since they seem incapable or resolving these obvious inconsistencies in any efficient manner in advance.
I'm also interested in whether suppliers delivering goods or services airside are fair game for testers as well if they airside
P.S. The situation I'm describing is not hypothetical as anyone who has done any air touring will tell you.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole thing looks like a legal mine field. What about the achohol & drug Co's? they will go broke over night !
Can they come into a crew room not on airside & test crew at random?
Some very valid points in these posts, I guess somebody will be "guinea pig" some time soon & be put under the spot light lets just hope they are wealthy & can show CASA what stupidity they have yet again dreamed up to justify their jobs!
A friend of my family's who has been involved in aviation since the Wright Bros! said probably 99% of people airside have in the past been under the influence of something sometime during their careers but I don't recall too many planes falling from the sky because of it. So from now on we can exepect perfect people doing their duties perfectly under this perfect system, yeah right, like to see that!
FG
Can they come into a crew room not on airside & test crew at random?
Some very valid points in these posts, I guess somebody will be "guinea pig" some time soon & be put under the spot light lets just hope they are wealthy & can show CASA what stupidity they have yet again dreamed up to justify their jobs!
A friend of my family's who has been involved in aviation since the Wright Bros! said probably 99% of people airside have in the past been under the influence of something sometime during their careers but I don't recall too many planes falling from the sky because of it. So from now on we can exepect perfect people doing their duties perfectly under this perfect system, yeah right, like to see that!
FG
Sunfish
In the above circumstance, you are deemed to be performing a SSAA (by virtue of being airside and not a pax) and as such you can be randomly tested.
The CASA doc explained the situation of a student who, after a first solo, has a glass of champagne. He then heads out to the aircraft to tie it down or retrieve his navbag. A student in this situation according to the CASA doc is able to be tested. (My reading of the regs is that he also would be able to be tested filling in the MR hours!).
FlyingGit
Yes.
I note that there is still no response from anyone regarding my question about false positives from Sudafed or Codral use or being over the limit of 0.02 percent alcohol (but under the legal driving limit of 0.05 percent) when going airside for the purpose of retrieving sunglasses or checking the security of a tethered aircraft (as is required by my contract of aircraft hire).
The CASA doc explained the situation of a student who, after a first solo, has a glass of champagne. He then heads out to the aircraft to tie it down or retrieve his navbag. A student in this situation according to the CASA doc is able to be tested. (My reading of the regs is that he also would be able to be tested filling in the MR hours!).
FlyingGit
Can they come into a crew room not on airside & test crew at random?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.....insane it all is, we are all but totally controlled by control freaks, the world as we know is changing 4ever on a daily basis. It will take an ice-age to restore it back to pre 'CASA' days. Lets go carbon positive instead so as to hurry up the process !
CW
CW
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reg is written in such a manner that it covers EVERYONE in EVERY possible situation airside that is not a passenger.
You can be tested even if you are just standing around scratching your arse.
Its gonna be interesting come the flu season, instead of the usual large portion of your staff who pop a codral and soldier on, everyone who is concerned about being put out of work for two to three weeks will stay home sick.
I dont know of any aviation company that is likely to pay someone to have two to three weeks off for a false positive so the financial risks of coming to work with a medicated case of the sniffles are going to cause a lot of absenteeism.
CASA has supposedly had a lot of industry input into this. I'd like to know who it was because with idiots like that representing us we are all screwed.
Please note, I am all for testing, even random testing, but this limbo of a false positive needs to be cleared up. Also note that if you are over .02 you dont come back the next day, you need to have a 'comprehensive assessment', that aint gonna happen overnight. Best not come to work even slightly hungover-ever.
You can be tested even if you are just standing around scratching your arse.
Its gonna be interesting come the flu season, instead of the usual large portion of your staff who pop a codral and soldier on, everyone who is concerned about being put out of work for two to three weeks will stay home sick.
I dont know of any aviation company that is likely to pay someone to have two to three weeks off for a false positive so the financial risks of coming to work with a medicated case of the sniffles are going to cause a lot of absenteeism.
CASA has supposedly had a lot of industry input into this. I'd like to know who it was because with idiots like that representing us we are all screwed.
Please note, I am all for testing, even random testing, but this limbo of a false positive needs to be cleared up. Also note that if you are over .02 you dont come back the next day, you need to have a 'comprehensive assessment', that aint gonna happen overnight. Best not come to work even slightly hungover-ever.
Last edited by Socket; 28th Sep 2008 at 23:11. Reason: bit more to add
Stall:
If this is the case, as you have reported it, then it lowers my respect for CASA even further.
While I am not a lawyer, my understanding is that the laws and regulations are required to be written in a way that a reasonable man can determine from a reading of them exactly how to comply with them, in the sense that it is clear exactly what act results in an offence is being committed.
Furthermore, the enforcement of the law should not be capricious, arbitrary or subject to the whims of the enforcers, because that is how corruption gains a foothold in organisations.
If CASA's answer was indeed that the hypothetical student is subject to testing, then they need to spell out very clearly exactly what the process would be that selects him for testing at such a time and CASA must then explain and justify exactly how it's organisational objectives are being met by forcing our hypothetical champagne drinking first solo pilot into a procedure involving two weeks of limbo and "assessment".
If they can't do it now, and it sounds like they can't from your statement, they are going to be doing it in front of an appeals court judge or the AAT before too long. I will ask the opinion of two QC's about it at a function next weekend.
If CASA think they are being smart by introducing uncertainty into this process, then they are in for a shock. There is no parallel with drink driving legislation because (a) unlike CASA's regulations, there is little problem with false positives, provided the required time period is allowed after drinking alcohol, and (b) the definition of being in control of a car is well understood, unlike CASA's vague and fuzzy definition of an SSAA.
My guess is that "being airside", or in a building with access to airside, is going to be regarded as too wide a definition of "Safety Sensitive Aviation Activity".
The CASA doc explained the situation of a student who, after a first solo, has a glass of champagne. He then heads out to the aircraft to tie it down or retrieve his navbag. A student in this situation according to the CASA doc is able to be tested.
While I am not a lawyer, my understanding is that the laws and regulations are required to be written in a way that a reasonable man can determine from a reading of them exactly how to comply with them, in the sense that it is clear exactly what act results in an offence is being committed.
Furthermore, the enforcement of the law should not be capricious, arbitrary or subject to the whims of the enforcers, because that is how corruption gains a foothold in organisations.
If CASA's answer was indeed that the hypothetical student is subject to testing, then they need to spell out very clearly exactly what the process would be that selects him for testing at such a time and CASA must then explain and justify exactly how it's organisational objectives are being met by forcing our hypothetical champagne drinking first solo pilot into a procedure involving two weeks of limbo and "assessment".
If they can't do it now, and it sounds like they can't from your statement, they are going to be doing it in front of an appeals court judge or the AAT before too long. I will ask the opinion of two QC's about it at a function next weekend.
If CASA think they are being smart by introducing uncertainty into this process, then they are in for a shock. There is no parallel with drink driving legislation because (a) unlike CASA's regulations, there is little problem with false positives, provided the required time period is allowed after drinking alcohol, and (b) the definition of being in control of a car is well understood, unlike CASA's vague and fuzzy definition of an SSAA.
My guess is that "being airside", or in a building with access to airside, is going to be regarded as too wide a definition of "Safety Sensitive Aviation Activity".
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: aussie
Age: 51
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish has raised some excellent points and there is many that are very similar..
lets say you are visiting a interstate airport in your private A/C on the weekend and forget a case or something..
after 2 beers at 0.03 you drive back to the airport and go retrive it with your dayglo vest, asic, staff card, aopa card and god knows what else.. and get tested..
you havent even got the keys to the plane..
no false positive here though..
if you work for Qantas during the week and your friendly contractor needs the numbers then you probably just lost your job !!
CASA dont seem to mind if you send your pissed passenger onto the tarmac (so long as the escort has an ASIC) just dont do it yourself....!
lets say you are visiting a interstate airport in your private A/C on the weekend and forget a case or something..
after 2 beers at 0.03 you drive back to the airport and go retrive it with your dayglo vest, asic, staff card, aopa card and god knows what else.. and get tested..
you havent even got the keys to the plane..
no false positive here though..
if you work for Qantas during the week and your friendly contractor needs the numbers then you probably just lost your job !!
CASA dont seem to mind if you send your pissed passenger onto the tarmac (so long as the escort has an ASIC) just dont do it yourself....!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reality Check Here for the GA Jock
Has anybody thought about the reality of the plain hard-working GA pilot out there in the bush who gets pulled up for, maybe, Nurofen+ or Panadeine for a light flu symptom or the like ??
Do you think the GA operator is going to wait 2 weeks until he/she is cleared to fly - no way !! He/she will get sacked (under some other trumped up charge) and take the next driver in the queue.
And this could happen in some cities too where there are plenty of rogue operators around who wouldn't think twice about giving you the boot in favour of some new jock who is ready to fly in a heartbeat. These operators make the poor pilot feel guilty enough as it is when suggesting sick leave, if its just a "sniffle" - they tell them get out there and fly, or we find someone else who will.
Now thats the reality of an Aus GA pilot - maybe not for a 217 org. or airline pilot, but the poor old GA jock.
Do you think the GA operator is going to wait 2 weeks until he/she is cleared to fly - no way !! He/she will get sacked (under some other trumped up charge) and take the next driver in the queue.
And this could happen in some cities too where there are plenty of rogue operators around who wouldn't think twice about giving you the boot in favour of some new jock who is ready to fly in a heartbeat. These operators make the poor pilot feel guilty enough as it is when suggesting sick leave, if its just a "sniffle" - they tell them get out there and fly, or we find someone else who will.
Now thats the reality of an Aus GA pilot - maybe not for a 217 org. or airline pilot, but the poor old GA jock.
Going for a class 2 medical after some years out of the scene.
If my flatmate smokes the funny stuff am I likely to be turned down?
Is testing part of the exam?
I couldn't find anything on CASA.
If my flatmate smokes the funny stuff am I likely to be turned down?
Is testing part of the exam?
I couldn't find anything on CASA.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Number of accidents in commercial operations primarily caused by drug/alcohol intake - 0
Based on this historical evidence the likely number to be prevented in the future - 0
The only positive outcome will be a big promotion for the bright spark who has been riding this horse and cart. Seen it before. Of course as soon as they move on it will be forgotton about, but unfortunately we will be left with a piece of legislation that someone will pull out in 20 years time, blow the dust off, and hang someone with because they had a beer in the hangar after work.
Of course it will be rather simple to get this policy and procedures into your organisation. Simply make it part of your Total Error Management System, above your Safety Management System, next to your Fatigue Management system, adjacent to your Crew Resource Management Training, and just after your Risk Assessment and Control Policy!! Of course your Transport Security Policy has to fit in there as well.
Once you've drafted that lot and trained everyone up - which should take about 12 months - you can finally go flying. But don't have a beer to celebrate that achievement, that's illegal.
As a famous bear once said - Bother!
Based on this historical evidence the likely number to be prevented in the future - 0
The only positive outcome will be a big promotion for the bright spark who has been riding this horse and cart. Seen it before. Of course as soon as they move on it will be forgotton about, but unfortunately we will be left with a piece of legislation that someone will pull out in 20 years time, blow the dust off, and hang someone with because they had a beer in the hangar after work.
Of course it will be rather simple to get this policy and procedures into your organisation. Simply make it part of your Total Error Management System, above your Safety Management System, next to your Fatigue Management system, adjacent to your Crew Resource Management Training, and just after your Risk Assessment and Control Policy!! Of course your Transport Security Policy has to fit in there as well.
Once you've drafted that lot and trained everyone up - which should take about 12 months - you can finally go flying. But don't have a beer to celebrate that achievement, that's illegal.
As a famous bear once said - Bother!
Havent been to any forums and havent really read much on this but everyone seems to be saying what if....what if... Here's my what if,
What if you get tested after popping a panadeine for a headache and it comes up positive. You then get stood down pending the lab analysis which of course comes back negative. WHO pays your salary/wages whilst this is going on. Your employer (fat chance) or CASA (even fatter chance)? Can someone enlighten me as to where we stand in relation to this matter. As previously posted, in GA your most likely to be dropped straight away. Well where are the FEDS on something like this. We have had f#ck all from everyone on this matter, CASA, the FEDS and your employer no doubt.
What if you get tested after popping a panadeine for a headache and it comes up positive. You then get stood down pending the lab analysis which of course comes back negative. WHO pays your salary/wages whilst this is going on. Your employer (fat chance) or CASA (even fatter chance)? Can someone enlighten me as to where we stand in relation to this matter. As previously posted, in GA your most likely to be dropped straight away. Well where are the FEDS on something like this. We have had f#ck all from everyone on this matter, CASA, the FEDS and your employer no doubt.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is my first post on Pprune after lurking for several years. Be gentle!
I attending one of the briefing sessions in Brisbane. In fact I was the only attendee - personal briefing.
The real hidden danger here is the drugs testing. There are a plethora of over the counter drugs which will give a false positive in the tests and the tests are designed to detect drugs taken in the past 7 DAYS. Don't worry about the Panadiene or Nurofen Plus or poppy seed bun that you had last night or this morning its the one that you had last Saturday that is more likely to get you caught out.
There will need to be a significant education program as to what can give false results or there are going to be a lot of pilots, engineers, refuellers, baggies having a couple of weeks forced leave.
FWIW, As it stands I think that the legislation is unworkable. The implementation date of the random testing has been a regular question at the senate estimates so it is fairly clearly being pushed politically.
I attending one of the briefing sessions in Brisbane. In fact I was the only attendee - personal briefing.
The real hidden danger here is the drugs testing. There are a plethora of over the counter drugs which will give a false positive in the tests and the tests are designed to detect drugs taken in the past 7 DAYS. Don't worry about the Panadiene or Nurofen Plus or poppy seed bun that you had last night or this morning its the one that you had last Saturday that is more likely to get you caught out.
There will need to be a significant education program as to what can give false results or there are going to be a lot of pilots, engineers, refuellers, baggies having a couple of weeks forced leave.
FWIW, As it stands I think that the legislation is unworkable. The implementation date of the random testing has been a regular question at the senate estimates so it is fairly clearly being pushed politically.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Classified
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a mulitple choice question:
What poses the most danger to aviation safety?
(a) Eating three poppy seed bagels for breakfast.
(b) A international pilot (domestic too soon) armed with 110ml of tootpaste.
(c) Popping a couple of panadenes to ease a minor headache.
(d) Half the continent without ATC services for hours at a time.
Anthony Albanese and Warren Truss (his predecessor) are both clowns.
They think the answer is a+b+c.
There has never been a Regular Public Transport accident or incident in this country where drugs or alcohol (or toothpaste!) have been listed as a cause.
Comparing professionals at work with random road users is not a valid comparision. Get off my back with all your stupid, useless & costly rules you government b******s
What poses the most danger to aviation safety?
(a) Eating three poppy seed bagels for breakfast.
(b) A international pilot (domestic too soon) armed with 110ml of tootpaste.
(c) Popping a couple of panadenes to ease a minor headache.
(d) Half the continent without ATC services for hours at a time.
Anthony Albanese and Warren Truss (his predecessor) are both clowns.
They think the answer is a+b+c.There has never been a Regular Public Transport accident or incident in this country where drugs or alcohol (or toothpaste!) have been listed as a cause.
Comparing professionals at work with random road users is not a valid comparision. Get off my back with all your stupid, useless & costly rules you government b******s