Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

Old 12th Apr 2013, 13:20
  #1481 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
Probably reading this book.

Who Moved My Cheese: An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life:Amazon:Books Who Moved My Cheese: An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life:Amazon:Books

Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 12th Apr 2013 at 13:24.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2013, 13:15
  #1482 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 122
Devil Hope the Indonesians don't ask the ATSB for help with the Lion air investigation

I wonder if the ATSB has already sent the draft report "Lion Air ditching due to pilot error" to the Indonesian authorities in anticipation of being asked to assist in the investigation...
scrubba is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2013, 13:35
  #1483 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
Scrubba,

This could be an interesting one as casa did have a team in Indonesia.

I'm guessing Boeing will be looking for FAA and NTSB support. Good news is no fatalities being reported.

AFP: Plane misses Bali runway and lands in sea

The Pel Air situation and whether casa and Atsb help is requested or offered could be interesting.

There is a thread running on this crash
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...down-bali.html

Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 13th Apr 2013 at 19:14.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2013, 18:31
  #1484 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Poor old 737, its a crying shame to see a couple of month old plane sitting in the drink with a broken back!

Now here is the irony. CASA, ASA and ATSBeaker have been sending inspectors, investigators and specialists to Indonesia to assist them since 2008. Around $30 million spent to date.
Lion have been trying to get permission to fly to Australia for a few years, wonder what effect if any that has on FF's decision makers?

Anyway, we will find out if Beaker allows his people to get involved as the draft accident report won't be published for 3 years, the Lion 737 landed in a few inches of water so the black boxes won't be retrieved and then the final completed report will contain lots of tautological nonsense and a heap of mi mi mi-ing!

"Safe skies aren't Indon skies"

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 13th Apr 2013 at 18:41.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 01:23
  #1485 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Giant broom required.

UITA, that is one of my favourites from the inquiry. Especially considering the state of play today, CASA is a complete mess, yet who has been around during this period of time, yep, Farquharson, Boyd, Aleck (nice try Doc, you have been at CASA over 20 years and spent only about 3 in Montreal, in a position that was still intertwined with CASA, Infrastructure and the Australian government).
All these long termers have had an active share in shaping what CASA is today. Pathetic.
There needs to be a gigantic clean out at the top tier of FF, including removal of the inept Board. That is a baseline start.
The CASA rolling stone has gathered much dross and it is hoped that the Senators will at least be able to hose away some of the crap. Maybe they can even go full tilt with a gurney and blast all the dross away?

Australia's aviation condition has a very obvious root cause identified. Now it is time to mitigate and close the loop.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:45
  #1486 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 61
MOIE -I would be particularly happy to see Aleck given his marching orders. An email marked "information I have provided to Repcon" sent to him by me was given to Rex without any reply to me.
The man should be sacked for that issue alone.
Greedy is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 13:17
  #1487 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Greedy,
Sadly the story you tell is not surprising, I have had numerous similar issues relayed to me over the years. In fact in the past few weeks alone a number of people have contacted me to tell me their own story of bullying, miscarriage of justice or reprisal. I can only imagine what other information has been provided to the Senators, PAIN or Messr Phelan.
Mr Greedy, I am truly hoping that some form of justice will be served that will give you and many others some satisfaction or a fraction of relief, time will tell my friend.

I would encourage anybody who has been pineappled in any way by FF to submit their story to the Senate. It doesn't matter whether your injustice is large or small, or whether you even had a win against Fort Fumble (very very unlikely), you can still submit that as well as any evidence to the Senate.

Oleo

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 14th Apr 2013 at 13:18.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 14:49
  #1488 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
I would encourage anybody who has been pineappled in any way by FF to submit their story to the Senate. It doesn't matter whether your injustice is large or small, or whether you even had a win against Fort Fumble (very very unlikely), you can still submit that as well as any evidence to the Senate.
I'll second that. Oleo posted first. The more evidence presented the clearer a pattern of behavior is demonstrated and less likely that everybody who has an issue is deluded, mad and the ills of society.

Senator Heffernan asked questions relating to bullying. The infamous one line email 'concentrate on the target' is interesting.


Ills of society - great band name.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 23:27
  #1489 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Movies, rock bands and tomfoolery

Halfmanhalfskull, indeed that is a great band name.
What about the following;

Band Names;
• Tautology
• The Screaming Skulls
• The 49ers
• The Hoodoo Voodoo Gurus
• Albodross
• Blackbox
• Tombstone Technology

And for comedy/circus acts or movie titles;
• The Fabulous Beaker Brothers
• The Potted Plants
• 40 000 Leagues Beneath The Norfolk Seas
• The CASA Matrix
• Mi Mi Mi Me Myself And Mrdak
• Basic Trough Instinct

Oh dear, its Monday morning.
Back to the thread.....

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 14th Apr 2013 at 23:28.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2013, 12:58
  #1490 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Dom sub 22!

Dom James pipes up, submission 22:
Submission- Inquiry into Aviation Accident Investigations
(Pel-Air)

Dear Committee members,

As the release of the report draws near, I thought I would share a few things with the Committee that have been worrying me for some time. I have left the details alone and sought to frame the bigger picture, as ultimately this is what really matters.

Section 24 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act was written to prevent any person - regardless of who they are - from interfering with the ATSB's process of investigation. If one was to inhabit the mind of the author of Section 24 and the scenario they wished to prevent, then the events surrounding the investigation of the Norfolk Island accident would almost certainly be what they had in mind. Therefore, in order to respect the purpose of Section 24, it is vital that action be taken when it becomes evident it has been breached.

Anything less will make Section 24 abstract and impotent and the integrity of the ATSB will cease to exist.

Consider the following: if it became known that I had taken my training records and other similar documents from Pel-Air and hidden them from the ATSB in fear of criticisms contained within them, then I would have been subject to the provisions of Section 24 and more than likely been charged.

The present reality is however far more serious than the hiding of records by one individual. This seriousness stems from the number of persons involved, the self interest driving their actions and most importantly the way their behaviour has diminished aviation safety in Australia. It is therefore only reasonable that this conduct not be overlooked and a fair application of law applied regardless of who is involved.

My other concern is for what may occur if no one is held accountable for the misconduct that has taken place. If this does indeed happen, I fear that employees of CASA and the ATSB would regard those who have been involved in this misconduct as 'rock stars' worthy of admiration and emulation. These employees would then quite rightly regard themselves as above the law and without fear of it, discharging their responsibilities with little care or professionalism. They would take comfort knowing that even if they had to appear in before the Senate that they would emerge almost certainly unscathed. This would have grave consequences for the aviation industry, as it would demonstrate that safety is a secondary imperative after personal reputation. For the sake of the flying public this must never be allowed to occur.

I appreciate the scope of the Senate's powers and I'm not asking for the Senate to reach beyond them. All I ask is that this matter be referred to the appropriate authority so that evidence can be given under oath and the facts be examined in the appropriate forum.

Regards,

Dom James
Enough said I think....

https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...d-6c01f7b63228
Sarcs is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2013, 13:31
  #1491 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
Under oath...... appropriate forum!
Now THAT sounds like a whole lotta fun!!!
Guess some people may be needing some personal legal help,
Life's good!
GADRIVR is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2013, 18:29
  #1492 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
Interesting submission from DJ.

Anyone know if the ABC has a follow up on Four Corners planned?
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2013, 22:35
  #1493 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
And about bloody time.

There is a time in the natural order of events when some form of justice must be considered. There comes a time when beating about the bush to startle the wabbits has to stop and the metaphorical shotguns used, to eradicate the vermin.

DJ Sub 22 – "I fear that employees of CASA and the ATSB would regard those who have been involved in this misconduct as 'rock stars' worthy of admiration and emulation."
The man who treated James so very shabbily is easily identified; a stand out, with a reputation for administrative bastardry towards 'selected' pilots unparalleled; even within an outfit like CASA Bankstown. The Senate must consider what was done to DJ; there is a quite a large amount of rock solid evidence to support his claims against the CASA willing accomplice who not only happily served as Judge, jury and executioner but still retains an inexorable administrative grasp on the James throat.

It is not just DJ who has been harshly administratively served by the same individual, there are at least three others administratively prevented from earning a living. Not by a Court, but by one man twisting and perverting regulation and system to suit a purpose. DJ was and remains hard done by; well, friends and neighbours, you ain't seen nuthin yet. There exists one case, not mine to tell just yet (but soon; very, very soon) a story which I just couldn't credit, let alone believe when I first heard it told, but happily, the evidence was there. So, as I advised at the beginning of the shameful Pel Air episode, (and you were warned) two years of research into the Bankstown tactics against operators, ATO, chief pilots and line pilots is now complete; and it is not a pretty picture.

DJ Sub 22 – "This seriousness stems from the number of persons involved, the self interest driving their actions and most importantly the way their behaviour has diminished aviation safety in Australia. It is therefore only reasonable that this conduct not be overlooked and a fair application of law applied regardless of who is involved."
Here, the reader must pause for thought: Airtex was done over by the same process, by the same man, but in reverse. Where Pel Air was 'excused' and granted every accommodation, Airtex was not. Forget the "allegations" for just a moment, consider the grotesque differences, deficiencies, manipulation and grossly different outcomes. On one hand the evidence is conveniently buried, behaviour excused. On the other, evidence must be abandoned, two separate matters are rolled into one and every small detail amplified to a fare thee well, in the name of Safety. BOLLOCKS. One parallel though, the willing accomplice was provided, in both cases, a sacrificial pilot, to do with as pleased. Neither pilot proven guilty of anything under law; it's about time CASA prosecuted or reinstated. That's piss on the pot or get off it, for those who prefer a direct line.

DJ Sub 22 –"These employees would then quite rightly regard themselves as above the law and without fear of it, discharging their responsibilities with little care or professionalism. They would take comfort knowing that even if they had to appear in before the Senate that they would emerge almost certainly unscathed."
This statement, is for me is the nub of industry complaint, it's not the regulations but the way the system can and is perverted to suit a predetermined outcome. Senators, there is a long list of folks who have been extraordinarily penalised by misuse of a system which was designed and built for honest men. Ask the questions, the results will astound you.

Go Dom: go hard, you do not walk alone.

Selah.

Last edited by Kharon; 16th Apr 2013 at 23:04. Reason: Bloody ABC were offered the story, on a plate, gift wrapped - result SFA.
Kharon is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2013, 23:48
  #1494 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Chocolate frogs for Dom. A big raspberry for Fort Fumble.

All,

Perhaps if the Senators studied up a little on 'The 49ers' as just one example they would see what the current DAS's attitude is towards fairness, justice or reasonableness towards other human beings. It is no surprise that Dom was to be executed, in a metaphorical sense.
I once heard a well positioned government individual say that a 'particular' DAS (reader use discernment) was, quote 'the most intelligent psychopath he had ever met'. Interesting when you hear a bureaucrat reason that way.

Dom, good for you son, you receive two chocolate frogs (now don't do a CASA, please share with the other kiddies). Your submission didn't wreak of denial, obsfucation or the old excuse of 'I wasn't around, I was in Montreal at the time, I was in a different role', 'I had my pants around my ankles gorging from a taxpayer trough while touring the world business class'!!
Dom you made a valid, accurate, well known and serious point - The actions of certain individuals in the bureaucracies under scrutiny are downright unacceptable.
The time has come for the lid on decades of malfeasance to be blown right off.
The situation has become untenable, serious actions must be taken forthwith.

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 16th Apr 2013 at 23:51.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2013, 03:48
  #1495 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Dom CAR 265 and the legality of CAsA caveats??

Kharon said:
The man who treated James so very shabbily is easily identified; a stand out, with a reputation for administrative bastardry towards 'selected' pilots unparalleled; even within an outfit like CASA Bankstown. The Senate must consider what was done to DJ; there is a quite a large amount of rock solid evidence to support his claims against the CASA willing accomplice who not only happily served as Judge, jury and executioner but still retains an inexorable administrative grasp on the James throat.
It would also appear that the ‘administrative bastardry’ is eagerly supported by that individual’s immediate superior, surprisingly both these individuals have not one iota of commercial experience as a pilot, nor do they fathom the complexity of snagging/retaining a pilot job and then maintaining all the appropriate licences/approvals to keep your job secure and enhance your career progression.

Then there is CAR 265! CAR265 would appear (and I’m not a lawyer so this is only my opinion) to have been originally designed to capture the errant pilot or approval holder to get them back on track and within the rules by administrative action by the regulator. However the two individuals, mentioned above, seem to have a different intention for using CAR265 and that is to completely decimate the errant pilot/approval holder to the point where they are pushed out of the industry. Does that sound familiar anyone??? (probably could question mark for a dozen pages me thinks!)

Note: It is interesting that in the last 30 years there has only been two cases of CAR265 being presented in the AAT. This would suggest that 99.9% of the time that; (a) pilots generally accept their punishment and move on; and (b) generally pilots don’t need the angst and probably can’t afford the legal costs to contest the matter in a court. FF people like tweedle dum and tweedle dee use this to their advantage….

So to DJ and CAR265, which reads…
265 Suspension of licence or authority for purpose of examination
(1) If:
(a) CASA requires the holder of a licence to undergo an examination under regulation 5.38, 107 or 117; or
(c) CASA requires the holder of an authority to undergo an examination under regulation 33;
CASA may suspend the licence or authority by giving the holder of the licence or authority written notice of the suspension.
(2) Where the result of the examination does not show any ground on which the licence or authority may be suspended or cancelled, CASA shall forthwith terminate the suspension of the licence or authority and, by notice in writing served on the holder of the licence or authority, notify the holder that the suspension has been so terminated.
(3) Where CASA, upon the result of the examination becoming known, does not terminate the suspension in accordance with subregulation (2) but gives to the holder of the licence or authority a notice under subregulation 269 (3), the licence or authority shall remain suspended during the time specified by CASA in that notice as the time within which the holder of the licence or authority may show cause why the licence or authority should not be varied, suspended or cancelled under regulation 269.”

Okay now if we refer to CAIR 09/3 and take a look at what FF originally enforced upon DJ:



To be fair to FF, they did modify and lessen the re-examination requirements (from Hansard 22/10/2012)….“Mr McCormick: No, that is incorrect. On 25 February 2010, following correspondence with Mr James's lawyers, CASA modified the exam requirements requiring Mr James to only pass: flight planning (aeroplane), performance and loading (aeroplane), APLA, meteorology (aeroplane and helicopter), human factors (aeroplane and helicopter)”….


However from Hansard Page 30 Monday, 22 October 2012:
Mr McCormick: On that basis in December 2009 in the interests of safety Mr James's commercial pilot licence, airline transport pilot licence and multi-engine command instrument rating were suspending pending the completion of specified testing and examinations. After Mr James met the examination and testing requirements relating to his commercial pilot licence and command instrument rating, the suspension of those authorisations was lifted on 25 July 2011. Once he completed the remaining requirements relating to his airline transport pilot licence on 27 March 2012, CASA lifted the suspension of his airline transport pilot licence permitting Mr James to seek employment as a co-pilot of a multi-crew aeroplane. Unless and until he first passes the aeronautical proficiency check he has been required to undertake, however, he may not conduct a flight as pilot in command of a multi-crew aircraft for which an ATPL is required. We are waiting for Mr James to tell us when he wishes to take that flight test.
Note: Perhaps there is a sub note here (which also gives credence to Mr Lyon’s sub 18)? Given, that DJ passed all the theory exams within a relatively short time frame, then perhaps (as Mr Lyon points out) the are deficiencies in the FF examination system?

However it would appear there is a ‘passing strange’ FF caveat that has been introduced since the writing of the CAIR 09/3 paragraph 4.3 above, which even the DAS feels is justified under CAR 265…. “Unless and until he first passes the aeronautical proficiency check he has been required to undertake, however, he may not conduct a flight as pilot in command of a multi-crew aircraft for which an ATPL is required. We are waiting for Mr James to tell us when he wishes to take that flight test.”

So question: Does CAR 265 allow tweedle dum and tweedle dee (with DAS support) to introduce such an extra caveat? Also, DJ has apparently met all the other ‘flight test’ requirements including a MECIR and he has also had his licence suspension on his ATPL lifted. So how is it then possible to put a restriction on his ATPL of "co-pilot only of a multi-crew aeroplane"?

Normally such a flight test assessment (ATPL Command upgrade) is a function of an individual operator’s CAR217 and is only undertaken after command upgrade training. I don’t believe I know of any other ATPL pilot in Australia that has ever had such a restriction placed on his or her ATPL licence?

Kharon:
There exists one case, not mine to tell just yet (but soon; very, very soon) a story which I just couldn't credit, let alone believe when I first heard it told, but happily, the evidence was there.

I’ve heard the same story from a reliable source and if the rumours are true the matter involves an even bigger aberration and apparent misuse of CAR 265 by tweedle dum and tweedle dee!

Doing a Kelpie!
Sarcs is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2013, 05:05
  #1496 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Florence
Age: 70
Posts: 120
Question Can someone set me straight on Canley Vale

I'm finding all of this a little confusing. I've just read Avtex Air Services Pty Ltd and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2011] AATA 61 (4 February 2011) in its entirety.

Are the posters here saying that the normally very measured Egon Fice and thus the AAT is part of a regulatory conspiracy to stitch up the Siewert group?

Are those posters saying that all was well and that what transpired is just normal GA practice?

Can someone please clarify for me (without hysteria) exactly what the significance of these events is to the Pel-Air debate?

Last edited by Prince Niccolo M; 17th Apr 2013 at 05:06.
Prince Niccolo M is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2013, 21:50
  #1497 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
Some may find this presentation of interest - pretty dry style.

halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2013, 22:32
  #1498 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,518
Regarding sociopaths/psychopaths, yes, many of them are extremely intelligent and hard working. They can also turn on amazing charm when needed. Since they manage "up" all the time, they can be promoted to high office (even Prime Minister) by an unwary organisation or nation.

The downside is that these people cannot empathise with ordinary people, they treat everyone perceived to be below them very very badly at best. They are convincing liars because without empathy they can keep a strait face when they lie. They will connive, scheme and backstab anyone who they perceive to be between then and promotion. Once in power they pursue their own ends, llegal or illegal, without compunction. They are also great haters and will remember and punish you for the slightest wound, even if it was accidental.

The problem for organisations is that only another sociopath will willingly work for a sociopath Boss. Hence, once one of them gets in and rises in an organisation, good people are forced out and are replaced by more sociopaths, since only a sociopath is happy to provide the daily arse licking demanded by their sociopath boss.

I am personally acquainted with Four such creatures, and I go out of my way to avoid them.

If, as alleged, there is one in Bankstown, then I won't be flying there anytime soon.

As for Dominic James, he is being badly treated for Two reasons:

1. He has created work and embarrassment for CASA.

2. The risk averse nature of CASA means that they have to guard against the possibility of media criticism if the unfortunate Dominic James ever has another prang. Same as the medical people, they aren't interested in keeping the public safe, it's about keeping their jobs safe.

Fortunately human resources folk are now aware of the problem, but it is going to take a long time to fix and many organisations will wither and die before the disease is finally under control. The fix, by the way, is testing for emotional intelligence - where any sociopath will always score a big fat zero

Last edited by Sunfish; 17th Apr 2013 at 22:40.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2013, 23:30
  #1499 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
On the toss of a coin.

Nicely put Sunny, Choccy frog and the pot plant of your choice. The Bankstown Chronicles will keep for another day; at present the focus should be on the Norfolk inquiry and the results of what, I am sure has been a fairly exhausting process for the Senators back room crew and themselves, is due shortly. The concern is how the minister (or minions) will respond. The DAS made a very short statement which (paraphrased) said Go hard, do your worst, you still have to trump my ace. That is probably the most worrying aspect of this entire commode-y.

I note, PNM posted a question on the last page related to the Airtex v Pel Air comparison I mentioned. This is, perhaps, not the right forum for the discussion to be deflected to Airtex, happy to respond on a thread related to that company, delighted in fact. But bring the Kevlar, tin hat and a cut lunch. The claim made to have 'read' all of the data is suspect; I have 27 very full lever arch files here in my study and almost as much again in 'electronic' format, it's quite a read. So my Prince, if you have indeed ploughed your way through all the material, interviewed the participants, obtained Statutory declarations and are prepared to 'slug it out', I stand ready. However, should your curiosity be that of an innocent but interested bystander my -Twiddle 616- on this thread may go some way toward assisting your future research. In fact the posts from about 610 through to 660 are most informative.

The short version is simple, Pel Air was all lined up for a severe thumping, neat and tidy. It never happened!: eight days from stop to go, over Christmas - to "cleanse" and rehabilitate an operation?? think about it. Compare the prolonged agony of Polar or Barrier. Airtex was 'set up' for a similar treat. So which side of the CASA coin will dictate your company fate, the head side or the tail end side?.

"Is there a problem officer?" – "Yes sir, I believe there is".....

Last edited by Kharon; 17th Apr 2013 at 23:57. Reason: Why not, if you can, that's what I ask. Why not ???
Kharon is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2013, 07:31
  #1500 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Queensland
Age: 49
Posts: 11
Thanks for all the posts here, very informative.

I have concerns with the use of KPI's and bonuses in public safety organisations that came in during the 90's and still exists. We can play semantics with the terms bonuses, at-risk-components, benchmarks, targets, etc.
Key Performance Indicators should reflect points that are reached as a consequence of an overall good performance. Attaining these numbers becomes the objective and this ties in with corporate sociopathic behaviour. Maybe it is wiser to not to define these targets as numbers.
For example, promoting and overseeing safe operations should lead to a reduction in safety occurrences, and thus reports. This should mean a safer environment. The target is not safety but a reduction in reporting. Where does the lead us to?
I understand that there is now a corporate move away from this. I would appreciate Sunfishs thoughts?
tontinewarrior is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.