Crew travel priority over paying pax?
Gender Faculty Specialist
You're getting confused. The commander has the ultimate authority to ensure the safety of the aircraft and anyone or anything carried on it. In my OPS manual it states that I have this responsibility from the moment I arrive on board to the time I get off (it's a company confidential document so no, I won't show you but I'm sure a judge would be able to sneak a peek). Not, as you state, ultimate authority.
The cabin crew have no legal authority but may only initiate an evacuation if the situation in the cabin is clearly catastrophic.
If I consider your drug and alcohol tester to be detrimental to flight safety then I can have him removed.
The cabin crew have no legal authority but may only initiate an evacuation if the situation in the cabin is clearly catastrophic.
If I consider your drug and alcohol tester to be detrimental to flight safety then I can have him removed.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In my OPS manual it states that I have this responsibility from the moment I arrive on board to the time I get off "
WOW that took a very long time to get said and we need to believe you it is true.
LOL "I" consider I hope that's in your company ops to or you are probably off to jail or certainly wont be flying for a while!
No one can be forced to undergo CASA testing. However, refusing or failing to give a body sample may constitute a prosecutable offence. Further, anyone failing or refusing to give a body sample must stop performing or being available to perform an applicable SSAA. Failure to do so may result in a criminal charge.
WOW that took a very long time to get said and we need to believe you it is true.
LOL "I" consider I hope that's in your company ops to or you are probably off to jail or certainly wont be flying for a while!
No one can be forced to undergo CASA testing. However, refusing or failing to give a body sample may constitute a prosecutable offence. Further, anyone failing or refusing to give a body sample must stop performing or being available to perform an applicable SSAA. Failure to do so may result in a criminal charge.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: melbourne
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will an Ops Manual override the base legislation in this matter? That is the actual question as that is what the Judge assigned will review. In regards to the Random CASA testing that will happen in the sign on area and if you refuse your career is at a turning point.
Gender Faculty Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Morgan has stated his Operations Manual (a legal document) puts him responsible at the moment he/she "arrive on board" and this indeed will then be a legal position in a court as it does not override any government agency regulation and is in fact approved by one ore more.
But Captain Morgan does not have free rein and must still follow instructions/ orders of other personal like the D & A tester, Airport instructions such as push back and start clearance even a local cop that wants to make a last minute arrest on the aircraft.
He/she can not deny any of their requirements while at the gate.
But Captain Morgan does not have free rein and must still follow instructions/ orders of other personal like the D & A tester, Airport instructions such as push back and start clearance even a local cop that wants to make a last minute arrest on the aircraft.
He/she can not deny any of their requirements while at the gate.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely this about who has a duty-of-care as the senior supervisor on site, not when the regs indicate the PIC's responsibility for a flight starts and stops?
While the PIC may not be legally responsible under CASA regs, company policy and Common Law would require they take control of a situation in the absence of another authority.
On the ground with the door open, that higher authority could be the airport duty manager, police, border force, ARFF etc - if in attendance.
While the PIC may not be legally responsible under CASA regs, company policy and Common Law would require they take control of a situation in the absence of another authority.
On the ground with the door open, that higher authority could be the airport duty manager, police, border force, ARFF etc - if in attendance.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point in question is the time between sign on for duty or actual being on board the aircraft until movement under own power.
There seems no legislation for these periods so if a approved Ops Manual states it during this period/s and the regulators point in time, yes it will be a legal document.
It can not override a CASA or other Regulator without a exemption.
A CASA "random drug test is not confined to any area and is possible in any SSAA including a cockpit before or after a flight on duty or not in the cockpit.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A troll feeding facts ? or a ego who wants control by not posting factual documents and or regulations.
Every post of mine is valid even the captain that expected freight to be off loaded but got a big shock his family did instead.
Every post of mine is valid even the captain that expected freight to be off loaded but got a big shock his family did instead.
The facts are in my company manuals as approved by CASA, but they're not for public viewing. You'll have to troll some where else or call CASA on Tuesday and ask them. Thanks for the entertainment.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the regulation and pay particular attention to the last sentence.
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 224
Pilot in command
(1) For each flight the operator shall designate one pilot to act as pilot in command.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.
(1A) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability.
Note: For strict liability , see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code .
(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:
(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.
(2A) A pilot in command must discharge his or her responsibility under paragraph (2)(a) in accordance with:
(a) any information, instructions or directions, relating to the start, continuation, diversion or end of a flight, that are made available, or issued, under the Act or these Regulations; and
(b) if applicable, the operations manual provided by the operator of the aircraft.
(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 224
Pilot in command
(1) For each flight the operator shall designate one pilot to act as pilot in command.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.
(1A) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability.
Note: For strict liability , see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code .
(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:
(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.
(2A) A pilot in command must discharge his or her responsibility under paragraph (2)(a) in accordance with:
(a) any information, instructions or directions, relating to the start, continuation, diversion or end of a flight, that are made available, or issued, under the Act or these Regulations; and
(b) if applicable, the operations manual provided by the operator of the aircraft.
(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
Yesterday we needed to pay attention to last sentence, today it is secret company ops that give such authority.
If you stated yesterday and before I said it can be in company ops manuals , I may just trust you a bit more than I currently do.
So sorry I am not a True Believer due that fact - your subsequent research may in fact be true and company policy to keep private but I doubt you knew that at the time and can easily now be a lie to cover face as no other documents/s can support a similar ops manual (current trading company or not).
In my OPS manual it states that I have this responsibility from the moment I arrive on board to the time I get off
I think AP who would have you and Bandalot who thinks the legal responsibility for the disposition of the aircraft and its occupants lies with someone other than the PIC ( someone yet to be named) until the aircraft moves under its own steam are doing the pilots amongst us a favour here by getting us to think about how we consider each delegation of authority while still on the ground....ie if something unusual is happening while at the gate do we need to get out of our seat and actively control the pace and tone of the operation before going back to the nuts and bolts of pre flight procedures ( performance, briefing, flight deck set up etc) because these things will wait.
Beyond that, after an event, if there are fatalities I think you'll find that the determination as to whether the PIC is responsible or not will come from what he/she knew and whether they acted on the best information they had at the time, whether due diligence was exercised or not.
All pilots if licenced by CASA must comply with the Australian regulations and in particular in this example Reg 233. The Ops manual must comply with the regs. They are the law. It doesn't matter where you are in the World if operating a VH reg aircraft with an Australian licence, the PIC is required by laws to adhere to the regs unless for an absolute safety reason endangering life.
Does any pilot disagree with this?
Does any pilot disagree with this?
All pilots if licenced by CASA must comply with the Australian regulations and in particular in this example Reg 233. The Ops manual must comply with the regs. They are the law. It doesn't matter where you are in the World if operating a VH reg aircraft with an Australian licence, the PIC is required by laws to adhere to the regs unless for an absolute safety reason endangering life.
Does any pilot disagree with this?
Does any pilot disagree with this?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Captain had said "Sorry, we can't take any empty ULDs because we need to maximize our fuel useage or whatever, I wouldn't have had a problem.
What was unacceptable was his arrogant and condescending attitude toward a local, in who's country he was standing. It was not just that but the general bullying he displayed. I don't care about the story behind it, I was not going to stand for this arrogant prick speaking to staff like that. He likely wouldn't have behaved the same way in Sydney because he probably would have been told to watch his mouth. No excuse for his behavior.
What was unacceptable was his arrogant and condescending attitude toward a local, in who's country he was standing. It was not just that but the general bullying he displayed. I don't care about the story behind it, I was not going to stand for this arrogant prick speaking to staff like that. He likely wouldn't have behaved the same way in Sydney because he probably would have been told to watch his mouth. No excuse for his behavior.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point with that was simply that if there was fire around the aircraft and the PIC could not see precisely where it was, he/she would communicate with someone on the ground before ordering an evacuation. That comes under the 'common sense' that everyone is talking about.
Beyond that, after an event, if there are fatalities I think you'll find that the determination as to whether the PIC is responsible or not will come from what he/she knew and whether they acted on the best information they had at the time, whether due diligence was exercised or not.
Beyond that, after an event, if there are fatalities I think you'll find that the determination as to whether the PIC is responsible or not will come from what he/she knew and whether they acted on the best information they had at the time, whether due diligence was exercised or not.
I try to contact the engineer through the headset, no joy.
I call ATC, they cannot see us as we are behind the terminal - they can see some smoke.
Smoke appears in cockpit, cabin crew yell there is smoke in the cabin.
Do I ? : 1. keep trying to call anyone for assistance.?
2. Packup my navbag and go for a coffee in the terminal.?
3. Call for an evacuation, or at very least a rapid disembarkation. ?
In (1 and 2) and there are fatalities I would suggest I would be screwed.
In (3) and something went wrong and there were fatalities I reckon I did what I could.
Fair thread drift from crew priority over pax though!
OK, I am in the cockpit pre-flighting and there is a cargo or APU fire warning.
I try to contact the engineer through the headset, no joy.
I call ATC, they cannot see us as we are behind the terminal - they can see some smoke.
Smoke appears in cockpit, cabin crew yell there is smoke in the cabin.
Do I ? : 1. keep trying to call anyone for assistance.?
2. Packup my navbag and go for a coffee in the terminal.?
3. Call for an evacuation, or at very least a rapid disembarkation. ?
In (1 and 2) and there are fatalities I would suggest I would be screwed.
In (3) and something went wrong and there were fatalities I reckon I did what I could.
Fair thread drift from crew priority over pax though!
I try to contact the engineer through the headset, no joy.
I call ATC, they cannot see us as we are behind the terminal - they can see some smoke.
Smoke appears in cockpit, cabin crew yell there is smoke in the cabin.
Do I ? : 1. keep trying to call anyone for assistance.?
2. Packup my navbag and go for a coffee in the terminal.?
3. Call for an evacuation, or at very least a rapid disembarkation. ?
In (1 and 2) and there are fatalities I would suggest I would be screwed.
In (3) and something went wrong and there were fatalities I reckon I did what I could.
Fair thread drift from crew priority over pax though!
And yes, how we got to this after someone was bashed and dragged out the door of a UA aircraft is quite entertaining.