CASA Appoints new Safety Director
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Appoints new Safety Director
Once again Aviation gets it wrong and puts a bureaucrat in charge! -"The new Director of Aviation Safety was chosen after an international search for the best available person to further develop CASA as a world leader in aviation safety regulation." - couldn't have been much of a search! No piloting experience, no engineering experience, no operational experience, no senior management in aviation positions, no form four or accountable manager experience, no aviation qualifications, no prior safety or quality qualifications or experience. Would CASA accept an operators submission for nominated post-holder if they did not have appropriate qualification or experience? Yet, the guy they put in overall charge has neither. 
Incredible that those responsible for safety would be so negligent in their duties in appointing someone who has no front-line experience.
Jobs for the boys methinks
https://www.casa.gov.au/media-releas...viation-safety
Incredible that those responsible for safety would be so negligent in their duties in appointing someone who has no front-line experience.
Jobs for the boys methinks
https://www.casa.gov.au/media-releas...viation-safety
I wonder if the best person to run a public service agency is a person with previous public service administration experience?
At the end of the day, He/She does not need to fly or fix aeroplanes or load bags or do anything else in an operational sense - the DAS manages the Department to ensure the law is implemented as it stands, with the guidance of the Board. At least there is a pilot/engineer on the board (but he is a Nationals appointee and he will be removed if the ALP win govt).
The Law is written and amended by the Parliament.
The Parliament is the People's representative body as voted in by the good people of Australia.
The last two Pilot-DASs have been miserable failures either in their attitude to the GA sector (McCormack) or in their ability to manage and influence the culture of the department (Skidmore).
My grandfather was a teacher who became a schools inspector and eventually the head of the NSW Education Dept. Sadly that was a different era (he retired in 1968) and heads of department have since included Tanya Plibersek's drug-convicted husband and Mark Scott, ex head of the ABC.
What other Federal Govt agencies have an "experienced industry operator" at the helm?
Does the banking regulator have an ex-banker? Would any of us think that is a good outcome?
Does the health regulator AHPRA have a Doctor in command? if so why not a Nurse?
Does the Education dept have a Teacher or a school principal?
While it makes sense to us, does it make sense from a best-outcomes-from-public -policy angle?
Discuss.
At the end of the day, He/She does not need to fly or fix aeroplanes or load bags or do anything else in an operational sense - the DAS manages the Department to ensure the law is implemented as it stands, with the guidance of the Board. At least there is a pilot/engineer on the board (but he is a Nationals appointee and he will be removed if the ALP win govt).
The Law is written and amended by the Parliament.
The Parliament is the People's representative body as voted in by the good people of Australia.
The last two Pilot-DASs have been miserable failures either in their attitude to the GA sector (McCormack) or in their ability to manage and influence the culture of the department (Skidmore).
My grandfather was a teacher who became a schools inspector and eventually the head of the NSW Education Dept. Sadly that was a different era (he retired in 1968) and heads of department have since included Tanya Plibersek's drug-convicted husband and Mark Scott, ex head of the ABC.
What other Federal Govt agencies have an "experienced industry operator" at the helm?
Does the banking regulator have an ex-banker? Would any of us think that is a good outcome?
Does the health regulator AHPRA have a Doctor in command? if so why not a Nurse?
Does the Education dept have a Teacher or a school principal?
While it makes sense to us, does it make sense from a best-outcomes-from-public -policy angle?
Discuss.
Folks,
Now that Shane Carmody has been confirmed in the job, at least let us hope he gets on with the job, putting substance to the comments he has made so far.
He is up against it, as I hear he has already had the "Iron Ring", present iteration, blocking him doing some of the things he wanted/tried to do as "Acting".
Top of the list simply must be injecting some rational risk management into all CASA activities --- starting off with medical standards --- we have a "driver's license" medical that isn't, for the RPL, and the travesty of what has been done on Colour Vision should be immediately reversed, and the AAT decision that served us so well for so many years, become the standard again.
There is no reason (and the "CASA Kultcha" is not a reason) why we have to have medical standards that are so much tougher than USA, and long standing reforms reversed.
Even at this stage, it is not too late to bring the "ADS-B" mandate into line with risk management criteria, and have a mandate more in line with USA/EU, preferable even more limited, given the very limited traffic in the greater volume of airspace than US or western Europe. ---- and "being fair" to all the poor sods who have already spent millions is not a reason to maintain the present mandate.
Unfortunately a non-aviation CEO/DAS needs expert input for his decision making, and I see evidence that such genuine (as opposed to self-confessed) expertise is pretty thin on the ground ---- with the possible exception of obtaining draconian judgements in cases of trivial regulatory infringements.
Tootle pip!!
Now that Shane Carmody has been confirmed in the job, at least let us hope he gets on with the job, putting substance to the comments he has made so far.
He is up against it, as I hear he has already had the "Iron Ring", present iteration, blocking him doing some of the things he wanted/tried to do as "Acting".
Top of the list simply must be injecting some rational risk management into all CASA activities --- starting off with medical standards --- we have a "driver's license" medical that isn't, for the RPL, and the travesty of what has been done on Colour Vision should be immediately reversed, and the AAT decision that served us so well for so many years, become the standard again.
There is no reason (and the "CASA Kultcha" is not a reason) why we have to have medical standards that are so much tougher than USA, and long standing reforms reversed.
Even at this stage, it is not too late to bring the "ADS-B" mandate into line with risk management criteria, and have a mandate more in line with USA/EU, preferable even more limited, given the very limited traffic in the greater volume of airspace than US or western Europe. ---- and "being fair" to all the poor sods who have already spent millions is not a reason to maintain the present mandate.
Unfortunately a non-aviation CEO/DAS needs expert input for his decision making, and I see evidence that such genuine (as opposed to self-confessed) expertise is pretty thin on the ground ---- with the possible exception of obtaining draconian judgements in cases of trivial regulatory infringements.
Tootle pip!!
Once again Aviation gets it wrong and puts a bureaucrat in charge! -"The new Director of Aviation Safety was chosen after an international search for the best available person to further develop CASA as a world leader in aviation safety regulation." - couldn't have been much of a search! No piloting experience, no engineering experience, no operational experience, no senior management in aviation positions, no form four or accountable manager experience, no aviation qualifications, no prior safety or quality qualifications or experience. Would CASA accept an operators submission for nominated post-holder if they did not have appropriate qualification or experience? Yet, the guy they put in overall charge has neither.
Incredible that those responsible for safety would be so negligent in their duties in appointing someone who has no front-line experience.
Jobs for the boys methinks
https://www.casa.gov.au/media-releas...viation-safety
Incredible that those responsible for safety would be so negligent in their duties in appointing someone who has no front-line experience.
Jobs for the boys methinks
https://www.casa.gov.au/media-releas...viation-safety
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney Harbour
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I give everyone a fair go and will give Mr Carmody a fair go also. I personally think Mike Smith would have been better for the industry, however Mr Carmody will be better for the government possibly. The FAA is run by an Administrator, so why can't CASA?
We should help Mr Carmody weed out the "road blocks" in CASA.
We should help Mr Carmody weed out the "road blocks" in CASA.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are right in the respect that everyone should be given a 'fair go' and furthermore if he was CEO or COO I wouldn't even bat an eyelid but Director of Safety is a very specialised role requiring a deep understanding of safety & risk principles and also having experience in the industry, knowledge of aircraft and maintenance operations and I just don't think this guy is qualified or experienced in this respect. If you're an FO, do you expect the Capt to be well qualified and experienced? how about lead engineers or Eng. Mgrs...I don't know of many organisations, if any who would recruit someone who doesn't have the qualifications or experience to do the job...
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's give him a chance. After all how many qualified individuals from O/S would be prepared to take on the stinking swamp of incompetence that is CASA?
That said, I'm not hopeful.
That said, I'm not hopeful.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I give everyone a fair go and will give Mr Carmody a fair go also. I personally think Mike Smith would have been better for the industry, however Mr Carmody will be better for the government possibly. The FAA is run by an Administrator, so why can't CASA?
We should help Mr Carmody weed out the "road blocks" in CASA.
We should help Mr Carmody weed out the "road blocks" in CASA.
That's a hell of a lot of "weeding"!
What other Federal Govt agencies have an "experienced industry operator" at the helm?
Does the banking regulator have an ex-banker? Would any of us think that is a good outcome?
Does the health regulator AHPRA have a Doctor in command? if so why not a Nurse?
Does the Education dept have a Teacher or a school principal?
While it makes sense to us, does it make sense from a best-outcomes-from-public -policy angle?
Does the banking regulator have an ex-banker? Would any of us think that is a good outcome?
Does the health regulator AHPRA have a Doctor in command? if so why not a Nurse?
Does the Education dept have a Teacher or a school principal?
While it makes sense to us, does it make sense from a best-outcomes-from-public -policy angle?
The banking/insurance regulator are all from that sector
The health regulator are all boards filled with their own. The national board has a mixture of people and their website makes a point that they have a bunch of health professionals
The CEO whilst not a medico has been on the WHO.
The Secretary of the Federal Education department was once a teacher it would appear.
I think you all have the job definition wrong - all contracted public servants have one aim, to protect the Minister who appointed them. The previous pilots thought they were running a Civil Aviation Authority; no the new incumbent's qualifications for the job are perfect.
He seems to be a clear thinker though and well across his brief so maybe he can do both jobs...
He seems to be a clear thinker though and well across his brief so maybe he can do both jobs...
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once more, YOU DO NOT WANT THE NZ REGULATIONS. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE FAA.
Worse than CASA.
However their review of the medical requirements for private pilots is a model of clarity and brevity, unlike the amateurish and mushy CASA one which Shane Carmody signed off on.
Worse than CASA.
However their review of the medical requirements for private pilots is a model of clarity and brevity, unlike the amateurish and mushy CASA one which Shane Carmody signed off on.
I see Donald Trump is of the belief the FAA Administrator should be a pilot.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@hiwaytohell its commendable that he is fair and has an open approach to what he does. However, he is responsible, as Director of Safety for Aviation in Australia at a national level; which incorporates public transport, GA, AMO's, ATC, training, CASA etc etc etc....there is a need for a DEEP understanding of safety & risk management and aviation law and principles. Even if he is reasonable and prepared to listen to common sense, how can he possibly formulate opinions or make educated decisions with ZERO aviation or safety experience to fall back upon. If the argument is that he listens to his advisers then they should have cut the middleman out and had one of them in the seat. Introducing such an inherent risk at the core of the national safety authority should be extremely alarming and I doubt there are many safety & risk managers/practitioners that would disagree - remember, introducing risk mitigations and changes should never bring about further risk themselves and in this regard the Aussie public should be concerned. Would you put a fresh PPL without a rating in the left seat of a 747? I think not!
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: ACT
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Shane can manage out the long standing senior lawyer/polcy manager, he may then be able to make Australian aviation great again, provided he takes counsel from the good guys in CASA and experienced and sucessfull industry players.
If he can't, he is doomed from the start. I think he is more than capable of the task.
If he can't, he is doomed from the start. I think he is more than capable of the task.
Carmody is very likely doomed from the very start because it is axiomatic that you cannot manage what you don't understand, and Carmody is not and never has been a pilot.
While Carmody obviously has superb public service management skills, which are not to be sneered at, that alone is not enough. The reason you need both skill sets is because at some point early in his tenure, Carmody will be called on to chair a meeting involving both legal, administrative and technical issues, at that time experts will argue their positions and Carmody will be called upon to adjudicate. With no first hand experience, Carmody will not be able to smell the BS, not a whiff, while everyone else around the table can. At that point he is finished. How do I know this? it happened to me as a group general manager of an IT organisation. There is nothing worse than the feeling that your subordinates are talking about subjects of which you have not the slightest knowledge.
Of course I am talking from the perspective of someone who believes "success" for the DAS means a thriving aviation industry in terms of jobs, investment and growth. I think Carmody's appointment indicates that the Government, Infrastructure Department and the Minister define "success" as preventing Aviation from being any embarrassment to the Federal Government or distraction from their other policy pursuits, hence I do not expect Carmody to actually reform anything at all, although if he is sufficiently artful, beneficial change may appear to have been achieved through a smoke and mirrors show.
To put that another way, Carmody is another "safe pair of hands" who can be trusted to maintain the status quo.
While Carmody obviously has superb public service management skills, which are not to be sneered at, that alone is not enough. The reason you need both skill sets is because at some point early in his tenure, Carmody will be called on to chair a meeting involving both legal, administrative and technical issues, at that time experts will argue their positions and Carmody will be called upon to adjudicate. With no first hand experience, Carmody will not be able to smell the BS, not a whiff, while everyone else around the table can. At that point he is finished. How do I know this? it happened to me as a group general manager of an IT organisation. There is nothing worse than the feeling that your subordinates are talking about subjects of which you have not the slightest knowledge.
Of course I am talking from the perspective of someone who believes "success" for the DAS means a thriving aviation industry in terms of jobs, investment and growth. I think Carmody's appointment indicates that the Government, Infrastructure Department and the Minister define "success" as preventing Aviation from being any embarrassment to the Federal Government or distraction from their other policy pursuits, hence I do not expect Carmody to actually reform anything at all, although if he is sufficiently artful, beneficial change may appear to have been achieved through a smoke and mirrors show.
To put that another way, Carmody is another "safe pair of hands" who can be trusted to maintain the status quo.
Last edited by Sunfish; 14th Jun 2017 at 03:02.
The man is an imbecile and anything he says I would be inclined to do the opposite. So Trump is an aviation expert now is he???
IMHO, there is no reason why the authority should not be headed by a Pilot, but there is also no reason why that should be essential. Pilots bring many skills to the table, so do engineers but just being a Pilot or an Engineer is not a guarantee of the ability to run a large authority with legal responsibility like the FAA or CASA.
The answer to all those questions is yes!!
The banking/insurance regulator are all from that sector
The health regulator are all boards filled with their own. The national board has a mixture of people and their website makes a point that they have a bunch of health professionals
The CEO whilst not a medico has been on the WHO.
The Secretary of the Federal Education department was once a teacher it would appear.
The banking/insurance regulator are all from that sector
The health regulator are all boards filled with their own. The national board has a mixture of people and their website makes a point that they have a bunch of health professionals
The CEO whilst not a medico has been on the WHO.
The Secretary of the Federal Education department was once a teacher it would appear.
I would not want someone with that experience alone in charge of something like the FAA - the same as I would not want them to be CEO of an airline, without any other experience at all. We have seen how badly in the past pilots and engineers and other 'specialists' have done at running airlines. I'm sure many have done OK but coming to that sort of job or any high level non-specialist role like that with only the skills of an aviator (or a ground manager for that matter) is not a guarantee of success.
Besides, if that is Trump's philosophy, why has he put a billionaire with zero education background in charge of the Education Dept. and a serial violator and complainer and hater of the EPA in charge of the EPA, with no scientific background. These all go against his line that a pilot should be in charge of the FAA.
The man is a fool who tweets and makes comments without thinking.
Covfefe.