Pilot sues Virgin
Do operators to FLI and KI still require that pilots load 55-65Kg bags of cray fish in and out of the aircraft whilst bent double?
No wonder the aircraft was porpoising all the way back to Essendon with outside the aft limit centre of gravity. Scary stuff and I refused to fly with that operator again.
Bottums Up
You mean all those primary school children forced to lug huge bags on their backs to and from school. Their parents must be idiots. Worse still with high school kids. I feel sorry for them all bending over with these ridiculous loads of books forcing them to crouch when walking instead of walking upright. Interesting case for class action (pun-geddit!)
That we oldies did it is irrelevant, those who go through life without back trouble are lucky. Try the flip side.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fliegensville, Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Centaurus "Where does it all stop?"
Yes where exactly, and something like this will further exacerbate things. The new WH&S laws that came into effect on Jan 1, are a real eye opener.
If you were to hire a Nanny now (and who has that kind of money, but that's an aside) You are then deemed to be a PCBU, of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking
If said nanny hurts herself in your house,............yep you guessed it
Volunteer associations are exempt, but that is not to be confused with an association of volunteers, such as committee members of a Body Corporate (QLD, or whatever the NSW equivalent is). You are then deemed to be part of a PCBU, and you are culpable if someone injures themselves onsite.
I believe it springs from Hargreaves Vs. Telstra., when whilst working from home for telstra, Hargeaves, wearing socks on a carpeted staircase slipped and hurt him/her self......Telstra was found to be at fault, figure that one out
Said it before, we're a stupid country, if this claim is succesful, expect more compliancy BS!
Yes where exactly, and something like this will further exacerbate things. The new WH&S laws that came into effect on Jan 1, are a real eye opener.
If you were to hire a Nanny now (and who has that kind of money, but that's an aside) You are then deemed to be a PCBU, of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking
If said nanny hurts herself in your house,............yep you guessed it
Volunteer associations are exempt, but that is not to be confused with an association of volunteers, such as committee members of a Body Corporate (QLD, or whatever the NSW equivalent is). You are then deemed to be part of a PCBU, and you are culpable if someone injures themselves onsite.
I believe it springs from Hargreaves Vs. Telstra., when whilst working from home for telstra, Hargeaves, wearing socks on a carpeted staircase slipped and hurt him/her self......Telstra was found to be at fault, figure that one out
Said it before, we're a stupid country, if this claim is succesful, expect more compliancy BS!
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it springs from Hargreaves Vs. Telstra., when whilst working from home for telstra, Hargeaves, wearing socks on a carpeted staircase slipped and hurt him/her self......Telstra was found to be at fault, figure that one out
Said it before, we're a stupid country, if this claim is succesful, expect more compliancy BS!
Said it before, we're a stupid country, if this claim is succesful, expect more compliancy BS!
You mean all those primary school children forced to lug huge bags on their backs to and from school. Their parents must be idiots. Worse still with high school kids. I feel sorry for them all bending over with these ridiculous loads of books forcing them to crouch when walking instead of walking upright.
For you morons that think "fitness" equals strength, you're twits. Slipping in your socks on a staircase at home is one thing; busting your back swinging a navbag into a small hole in the cockpit is another.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fliegensville, Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Agreed Oakape! Absolutely, though I intended to point out the latest round of nanny state bull dust had it's catalyst in something as unfathomable as the decision Hargreaves / Telstra.
Imagine if one day someone tripped over a nav bag.......it's becoming not so ridiculous to suggest that Nav bags must be made of an approved Hi Viz, material or be fitted with a Hi Viz cover compliant to god knows what applicable AS there would be.
I know if you wanted to look up that particular AS (Aust. Standard) you would have to buy it
Imagine if one day someone tripped over a nav bag.......it's becoming not so ridiculous to suggest that Nav bags must be made of an approved Hi Viz, material or be fitted with a Hi Viz cover compliant to god knows what applicable AS there would be.
I know if you wanted to look up that particular AS (Aust. Standard) you would have to buy it
Just weighed my Nav bag and contents at 6.2kg. That is with all that I need to sign on at Virgin. The 18.0kg that is being claimed will be interesting, which union is representing the case?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weighed down by this entire matter
I reckon he was carrying around all that 'Virgin flair' in his bag, along with a home packed lunch, personally signed copy of 'Losing My Virginity' and some face painting kits, hence the excessive bag weight.
The bag was still a few kilos lighter than one would expect because he wasnt carrying around the Virgin 'must haves'!!
Personally I hope his litigation goes well, I mean the Virgin founders managed to extract millions out of the company for their own future enjoyment so why not this bloke? Go for broke son, claim some PTS also if you can !
The bag was still a few kilos lighter than one would expect because he wasnt carrying around the Virgin 'must haves'!!
Personally I hope his litigation goes well, I mean the Virgin founders managed to extract millions out of the company for their own future enjoyment so why not this bloke? Go for broke son, claim some PTS also if you can !
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: on the floor and I can't get up
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lifting and twisting will ruin your back. It's a lot worse than than a clean straight lift.
Never twist your back when it's under load!
This bloke may have a chance...
oh&s, jsa... workcare/safe/cover field day
Never twist your back when it's under load!
This bloke may have a chance...
oh&s, jsa... workcare/safe/cover field day
Last edited by Dangnammit; 7th Feb 2012 at 21:52.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad backs in the making
I apologize for the thread drift, My youngest son is in year 9 and has to carry all his school books every day because at his school lockers are banned due to some kids leaving their lunch in them and growing salmonella etc. and unannounced changes in timetable.
I have lost my class 1 and 2 due to a motor vehicle accident giving me back injuries. I sympathize with the plaintiff in this case.
I have lost my class 1 and 2 due to a motor vehicle accident giving me back injuries. I sympathize with the plaintiff in this case.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
would this happen if someone was overweight, losing his hearing, boozing to the max, possibly having difficulty with the medical and ready for retirement?
My youngest son is in year 9 and has to carry all his school books every day because at his school lockers are banned due to some kids leaving their lunch in them and growing salmonella etc.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are back
Good to hear you are back Gobbledock. No I am not near retirement (not that I know of at least). Anybody that actually consumes QF catering is in business class (how can you stuff up a wrapped muesli bar) and has themselves to blame.
Eight Gun Fighter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I'm surprised you folks are carrying around so much paper weight in the days of iPad/iPod, CD-Roms etc. Even having a second unit as a back-up would not weigh very much. I made a suggestion that our MCM and Boeing manuals be converted to CD-Roms about 15 years ago. Was not taken seriously. Would have saved 100th of the weight minimum and about 50 feet of shelf space.
How much do you reckon all this sort of carry-on (pun intended) costs Australia? The Asian and Middle East Airlines don't have to pay for all this legislation, mitgation, .......flagellation....
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Airborne
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And how much does it cost them... in terms of quality of living and employment of the populace... economic figures do not measure quality of life, which is what it is all about really.
I'd live in Australia any day, even if my taxes are a little higher than Asia and the Middle East.
I'd live in Australia any day, even if my taxes are a little higher than Asia and the Middle East.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OHS Act
As an OHS Rep, I offer the following; (apologies to those that have been to the OH&S training and can recite these paragraphs verbatim)
21. Duties of employers to employees
(1) An employer must, so far as is reasonably practicable, provide and
maintain for employees of the employer a working environment that is safe and
without risks to health.
Penalty: 1800 penalty units for a natural person; 9000 penalty units for a
body corporate.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), an employer contravenes that subsection
if the employer fails to do any of the following-
(a) provide or maintain plant or systems of work that are, so far as is
reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health;
(b) make arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable,
safety and the absence of risks to health in connection with the use,
handling, storage or transport of plant or substances;
(c) maintain, so far as is reasonably practicable, each workplace under
the employer's management and control in a condition that is safe and
without risks to health;
(d) provide, so far as is reasonably practicable, adequate facilities for
the welfare of employees at any workplace under the management and
control of the employer;
(e) provide such information, instruction, training or supervision to
employees of the employer as is necessary to enable those persons to
perform their work in a way that is safe and without risks to health.
It really boils down to this,
1. Was there previously a hazard identified, and if so..
2. Was a risk assessment undertaken?
3. Where appropriate control measures in place?
4. Was the employee executing their duty in relation to Section 25 of the OH&S Act?
I will paste section 25 hereunder. For what it is worth, my own opinion in relation to this particular case is reserved as I would need to be right accross all the particulars.
I am not an advocate of suing or the "yank" way of doing things. I am in favour of reporting of potential risks to safety, employers and employees consulting to ensure a workplace is as safe and comfortable as possible.
25. Duties of employees
(1) While at work, an employee must-
(a) take reasonable care for his or her own health and safety; and
(b) take reasonable care for the health and safety of persons who may be
affected by the employee's acts or omissions at a workplace; and
(c) co-operate with his or her employer with respect to any action taken
by the employer to comply with a requirement imposed by or under this
Act or the regulations.
21. Duties of employers to employees
(1) An employer must, so far as is reasonably practicable, provide and
maintain for employees of the employer a working environment that is safe and
without risks to health.
Penalty: 1800 penalty units for a natural person; 9000 penalty units for a
body corporate.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), an employer contravenes that subsection
if the employer fails to do any of the following-
(a) provide or maintain plant or systems of work that are, so far as is
reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health;
(b) make arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable,
safety and the absence of risks to health in connection with the use,
handling, storage or transport of plant or substances;
(c) maintain, so far as is reasonably practicable, each workplace under
the employer's management and control in a condition that is safe and
without risks to health;
(d) provide, so far as is reasonably practicable, adequate facilities for
the welfare of employees at any workplace under the management and
control of the employer;
(e) provide such information, instruction, training or supervision to
employees of the employer as is necessary to enable those persons to
perform their work in a way that is safe and without risks to health.
It really boils down to this,
1. Was there previously a hazard identified, and if so..
2. Was a risk assessment undertaken?
3. Where appropriate control measures in place?
4. Was the employee executing their duty in relation to Section 25 of the OH&S Act?
I will paste section 25 hereunder. For what it is worth, my own opinion in relation to this particular case is reserved as I would need to be right accross all the particulars.
I am not an advocate of suing or the "yank" way of doing things. I am in favour of reporting of potential risks to safety, employers and employees consulting to ensure a workplace is as safe and comfortable as possible.
25. Duties of employees
(1) While at work, an employee must-
(a) take reasonable care for his or her own health and safety; and
(b) take reasonable care for the health and safety of persons who may be
affected by the employee's acts or omissions at a workplace; and
(c) co-operate with his or her employer with respect to any action taken
by the employer to comply with a requirement imposed by or under this
Act or the regulations.
Some of the post's on here a quite disgusting. People like Hoss, whom now works at VA should be ashamed of themselves. This person is a fellow pilot a company one at that!
No wonder the Flight Ops etc. is a basket case with people like you and others on here driving in the knife in the back of a fellow pilot. You people disgust me.
I hope that none of you experience such a problem, then again maybe it would be for the best (for others) that you do, you may learn empathy.
The mention of ipads could quite possibly be the words of the reporter..........
No wonder the Flight Ops etc. is a basket case with people like you and others on here driving in the knife in the back of a fellow pilot. You people disgust me.
I hope that none of you experience such a problem, then again maybe it would be for the best (for others) that you do, you may learn empathy.
The mention of ipads could quite possibly be the words of the reporter..........
so far as is reasonably practicable
I'm sure there'll be lawyers aplenty happy to argue at length about whether lifting a nav bag out from beside a seat is just too risky.