jetstar curfew fine at YSSY
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you click on the word 'operator' :
Sounds like the PIC to me.
Vaguely remember a NOTAM about the ARFF from a few weeks ago. Anyway, not all that relevant really. The point I was trying to make was after specifically being told that a dispensation wasn't available, if you departed anyway and had to return, evacuate with pax injured in the process where would that leave the PIC as far as future litigation.
I don't really want to get into a back and forth discussion about Curfew Acts, ARFF etc etc. FWIW I think the Sydney curfew is a joke and that the decision to depart was safe, was in the best interest of the pax and made good commercial sense. I just believe the PIC was leaving himself open to further repercussions. Not having a dig at him. Afterall, you and I have just had a leisurely read through the act, a luxury he didn't have. But I would like to think if I found myself in that situation I wouldn't blindly do what Ops told me to do. My lack of knowledge about the law would cast enough doubt in my mind not to go.
Sounds like the PIC to me.
Vaguely remember a NOTAM about the ARFF from a few weeks ago. Anyway, not all that relevant really. The point I was trying to make was after specifically being told that a dispensation wasn't available, if you departed anyway and had to return, evacuate with pax injured in the process where would that leave the PIC as far as future litigation.
I don't really want to get into a back and forth discussion about Curfew Acts, ARFF etc etc. FWIW I think the Sydney curfew is a joke and that the decision to depart was safe, was in the best interest of the pax and made good commercial sense. I just believe the PIC was leaving himself open to further repercussions. Not having a dig at him. Afterall, you and I have just had a leisurely read through the act, a luxury he didn't have. But I would like to think if I found myself in that situation I wouldn't blindly do what Ops told me to do. My lack of knowledge about the law would cast enough doubt in my mind not to go.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So operations has told the Captain to depart after curfew because no dispensation was available..
Everyone involved now knows that a deliberate breach of curfew is to be undertaken. The law is to be knowingly broken. The Captain was just 'following orders'.
I don't envy the position this guy was put in.
I wonder what the consequences would have been for this individual, had they refused? Was he 'ordered' or 'requested' to depart?
Everyone involved now knows that a deliberate breach of curfew is to be undertaken. The law is to be knowingly broken. The Captain was just 'following orders'.
I don't envy the position this guy was put in.
I wonder what the consequences would have been for this individual, had they refused? Was he 'ordered' or 'requested' to depart?
Here is an extract from the QANTAS CODE OF CONDUCT & ETHICS:
Speaks for itself really. Who, and how many, have been counselled, disciplined etc for a serious breach of Qantas Group Policy?
Compliance with Laws and Regulations
Qantas Operations – Compliance with Laws
4.1 The operations of the Qantas Group must, at all times be conducted in compliance with all laws and regulations applicable in
Australia and in the jurisdiction in which operations and activities
are being undertaken.
Observing the Letter and Spirit of the Law
4.2 Compliance with the law means observing the letter and spirit of the law as well as managing the business of the Qantas Group so that Qantas and Qantas Employees are recognised as "good corporate citizens" at all times.
Interpretation of Laws
4.3 It is recognised that, in some cases, there may be uncertainty about which laws and regulations are applicable and there may be
difficulties in interpretation. In such circumstances, Qantas
Employees must seek advice from the Qantas Legal Department to
ensure compliance.
Qantas Operations – Compliance with Laws
4.1 The operations of the Qantas Group must, at all times be conducted in compliance with all laws and regulations applicable in
Australia and in the jurisdiction in which operations and activities
are being undertaken.
Observing the Letter and Spirit of the Law
4.2 Compliance with the law means observing the letter and spirit of the law as well as managing the business of the Qantas Group so that Qantas and Qantas Employees are recognised as "good corporate citizens" at all times.
Interpretation of Laws
4.3 It is recognised that, in some cases, there may be uncertainty about which laws and regulations are applicable and there may be
difficulties in interpretation. In such circumstances, Qantas
Employees must seek advice from the Qantas Legal Department to
ensure compliance.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Springfield
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy fix - Compensate anyone living who bought or rented a house before the airport was built by a seven figure sum, tell every person who bought a house at deflated prices due to it being under the flight path to go pound wet sand up their arse and make it a 24 hour airport.
There will be none living who beat the airport in, and if there are any left they will be of venerable age and probably deaf.
The whingers have all had their houses double glazed for nothing.
For them, there is a bus leaving in 5 minutes - be under it.
Best all
EWL
There will be none living who beat the airport in, and if there are any left they will be of venerable age and probably deaf.
The whingers have all had their houses double glazed for nothing.
For them, there is a bus leaving in 5 minutes - be under it.
Best all
EWL
And to the wally who wrote about PER - the nearest residential area looks to me to be about 2.5-3NM from the southern threshold ... don't compare apples with foie gras.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DuffMan,
They don't use that runway during curfew hours!
Ken Borough
Company motherhood statements aren't worth the paper they are written on. Would the legal department even be awake after 11pm? Would you like to be the Captain who refused to depart and then had this piece of paper waved under his nose by people with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight?
Would it even be considered a legal document?
They don't use that runway during curfew hours!
Ken Borough
Company motherhood statements aren't worth the paper they are written on. Would the legal department even be awake after 11pm? Would you like to be the Captain who refused to depart and then had this piece of paper waved under his nose by people with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight?
Would it even be considered a legal document?
Max 1, if the Board and/or Chairman has any sense of complying with its own fiats, then some really hard questions should be asked about Jetstar's wanton and deliberate infringment of the curfew. Here's some more sober reading from Qantas website about Corporate Governance etc.
Be warned - look at how some Qantas Freight people were hung out to dry by their senior management. Indeed, one poor employee is doing time at the pleasure of Uncle Sam and if price fixing/collusion were a crime in Australia, several others would be cracking rocks by now. Bear in mind that those at the top were granted indemnities.
Be warned - look at how some Qantas Freight people were hung out to dry by their senior management. Indeed, one poor employee is doing time at the pleasure of Uncle Sam and if price fixing/collusion were a crime in Australia, several others would be cracking rocks by now. Bear in mind that those at the top were granted indemnities.
Performance of Duties by Qantas Employees
2.1 Qantas, its subsidiaries and associated entities (Qantas Group),
Directors, employees, consultants and all other people when they
directly or indirectly represent the Qantas Group must comply, at all
times, with all laws governing its Australian and international
operations. They must also conduct the Qantas Group’s operations
in keeping with the highest legal, moral and ethical standards.
2.2 All Directors and employees of Qantas, its subsidiaries and
associated entities (Qantas Employees) must conduct the business
of the Qantas Group with the highest level of ethics and integrity.
This obligation applies particularly to dealings with shareholders,
customers, suppliers, competitors, governments, regulators, other
Qantas Employees and all others stakeholders.
2.3 Qantas Employees must, at all times, act:
i. ethically, honestly, responsibly and diligently;
ii. in full compliance with the letter and spirit of the law and this
Code; and
iii. in the best interest of the Qantas Group.
Breach of the Code
2.4 Any breach of applicable laws, prevailing business ethics or other aspects of this Code will result in disciplinary action. Such
disciplinary action may include (depending on the severity of the
breach) reprimand, formal warning, demotion or termination of
employment.
2.5 Similar disciplinary action will be taken against any supervisor or manager who directly approves (and/or condones) such breach or has knowledge of the breach and does not immediately take
appropriate remedial action.
2.6 Breach of applicable laws or regulations may also result in
prosecution by appropriate authorities. Qantas will not pay, directly
or indirectly, any penalties imposed on a Qantas Employee as a
result of a breach of law or regulation. Qantas will also not pay the
legal costs of a Qantas Employee convicted of breaching such law
or regulation.
2.1 Qantas, its subsidiaries and associated entities (Qantas Group),
Directors, employees, consultants and all other people when they
directly or indirectly represent the Qantas Group must comply, at all
times, with all laws governing its Australian and international
operations. They must also conduct the Qantas Group’s operations
in keeping with the highest legal, moral and ethical standards.
2.2 All Directors and employees of Qantas, its subsidiaries and
associated entities (Qantas Employees) must conduct the business
of the Qantas Group with the highest level of ethics and integrity.
This obligation applies particularly to dealings with shareholders,
customers, suppliers, competitors, governments, regulators, other
Qantas Employees and all others stakeholders.
2.3 Qantas Employees must, at all times, act:
i. ethically, honestly, responsibly and diligently;
ii. in full compliance with the letter and spirit of the law and this
Code; and
iii. in the best interest of the Qantas Group.
Breach of the Code
2.4 Any breach of applicable laws, prevailing business ethics or other aspects of this Code will result in disciplinary action. Such
disciplinary action may include (depending on the severity of the
breach) reprimand, formal warning, demotion or termination of
employment.
2.5 Similar disciplinary action will be taken against any supervisor or manager who directly approves (and/or condones) such breach or has knowledge of the breach and does not immediately take
appropriate remedial action.
2.6 Breach of applicable laws or regulations may also result in
prosecution by appropriate authorities. Qantas will not pay, directly
or indirectly, any penalties imposed on a Qantas Employee as a
result of a breach of law or regulation. Qantas will also not pay the
legal costs of a Qantas Employee convicted of breaching such law
or regulation.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now once again you little clowns. Think about it. It is basically the cost of departing during curfew hours. I reckon the government is happy the curfew hours are broken. It is a easy income source. Money for jam. That is the reason they are able to taxi in the first place. If the goverment was serious about the curfew they wouldn't even let you taxi to the line up position. And yes it is Australia. I wouldn't be doing it anywhere else.
Depart if you like. But beware there is a big cost associated with doing this action whch will inturn allow operators to depart who are ging to suffer severely if the flight is delayed.
Depart if you like. But beware there is a big cost associated with doing this action whch will inturn allow operators to depart who are ging to suffer severely if the flight is delayed.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dog, let me make this really simple for you. If you were (apparently) the captain faced with this decision and you were 95% sure you wouldn't face legal action, personally, for breaking the curfew would you go?
Only a one word answer required ....
Only a one word answer required ....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This can be easily solved.
All that is needed is a one million dollar fee for departures during curfew hours. That's the only thing big companies take any notice of. It also saves the cost of the court procedures and moves money the lawyers would get back to aviation, where it should be.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are we PILOT'S or LAWYERS boys?
You don't bite the hand that feeds you.............not unless you have a lot of colleagues along with you
( ie a good Union )
You are reading way too much into this..............
Our job is to fly the damn plane Maverick, not be bush lawyers.
You don't bite the hand that feeds you.............not unless you have a lot of colleagues along with you
( ie a good Union )You are reading way too much into this..............
Our job is to fly the damn plane Maverick, not be bush lawyers.
Funny thing that YSSY curfew, Elton John's Gulfstream3 was allowd back into YSSY each night after midnight during his last tour after he had finished playing in Brisbane and Melbourne , likewise the HS-748 and C580 freighters could operate into YSSY during curfew hours, bet you the RAAF B737 wouldn't cop a fine taking VIP's somewhere during the curfew.
Isn't that the point GE
Do we fly the plane like Maverick or do we fly it IAW the laws/regulations/common sense we have.
Doesn't take even a bush lawyer to know this was against the rules (agree with them or not). Where do you draw the line?
I agree with your point too Station8, the RAAF only gets away with it because the government would have to pay to upgrade the aircraft to make them meet the regulations they set. Instead the government (all sides) just goes the cheap option and calls them a state aircraft to avoid the laws they set for everyone else. This applies to safety as well.....but thats for a different thread
Do we fly the plane like Maverick or do we fly it IAW the laws/regulations/common sense we have.
Doesn't take even a bush lawyer to know this was against the rules (agree with them or not). Where do you draw the line?
I agree with your point too Station8, the RAAF only gets away with it because the government would have to pay to upgrade the aircraft to make them meet the regulations they set. Instead the government (all sides) just goes the cheap option and calls them a state aircraft to avoid the laws they set for everyone else. This applies to safety as well.....but thats for a different thread
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mae Sai
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAAF have never broken the curfew at Sydney. Political suicide.
Not one million, bushy. Ten million. The fine was lifted from $110,000 to $550,000 a few years back after our middle eastern friends broke curfew, and look where we are now!
And, yes, Sydney goes to CAT9 vice 10 RFF just before Curfew.
Not one million, bushy. Ten million. The fine was lifted from $110,000 to $550,000 a few years back after our middle eastern friends broke curfew, and look where we are now!
And, yes, Sydney goes to CAT9 vice 10 RFF just before Curfew.
Sorry Ada, I should have been a bit clearer there. Not saying that defence ever broke the curfew. It was more in relation to the 707, easy cheapish ways to husk kit the old girl but never did, just declared it exempt because it was a state aircraft
I have seen the RAAF park the aircraft when they couldn't meet curfew. I have never seen RAAF VIP fleet arrive or depart in breach of curfew. I do recall a C130 landing at Sydney during the curfew after declaring an emergency (which is permitted in the legislation).
I think the fines were significantly increased after a SE carrier elected to depart. It was Mardi Gras so no accommodation was available, cheaper to pay the fine...
Missy (missing you already)
I think the fines were significantly increased after a SE carrier elected to depart. It was Mardi Gras so no accommodation was available, cheaper to pay the fine...
Missy (missing you already)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Question.....
I was under the impression a Jet aircraft could depart syd off Rwy 16R ONLY after 2300, provided they had "pushed back" prior to 2300...
Is that not the case anymore.?
What Rwy did Jet* depart from..?
I was under the impression a Jet aircraft could depart syd off Rwy 16R ONLY after 2300, provided they had "pushed back" prior to 2300...
Is that not the case anymore.?
What Rwy did Jet* depart from..?
Question.....
I was under the impression a Jet aircraft could depart syd off Rwy 16R ONLY after 2300, provided they had "pushed back" prior to 2300...
Is that not the case anymore.?
What Rwy did Jet* depart from..?
I was under the impression a Jet aircraft could depart syd off Rwy 16R ONLY after 2300, provided they had "pushed back" prior to 2300...
Is that not the case anymore.?
What Rwy did Jet* depart from..?
Missy (missing you already)
Last edited by missy; 15th May 2009 at 00:18. Reason: additional information
