BB, FNQ aviation needs your help
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Starlight,
These issues have and are slowly finding their way into a criminal court, in addition to CASA staff within the TL office sueing each other ( astounding as that in itself may be ), there are atleast two groups from FNQ GA that i know of that are personally taking the Team Leader to court within the next little while.
These issues have and are slowly finding their way into a criminal court, in addition to CASA staff within the TL office sueing each other ( astounding as that in itself may be ), there are atleast two groups from FNQ GA that i know of that are personally taking the Team Leader to court within the next little while.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stinky
If your information is correct then it's great news!
However there is no way the offenders will have the financial resources to compensate their victims.
Malfeascence insurance is not normally taken out by Australian public servants.
(Malfeascence: "wilful or neglectful misconduct by a public official")
Unfortunately it will be established that CASA is vicariously culpable and liable in that it failed to act
on the overwhelming information and factual documented evidence that the local member and the industry conveyed to CASA.
That scenario will implicate numerous people in the higher echelons of CASA,
some who deliberately misled BB by countering the information, and some who also actively protect the offenders.
They now have time to graciously resign, or to start covering their tracks and distancing themselves from their protoges.
If your information is correct then it's great news!
However there is no way the offenders will have the financial resources to compensate their victims.
Malfeascence insurance is not normally taken out by Australian public servants.
(Malfeascence: "wilful or neglectful misconduct by a public official")
Unfortunately it will be established that CASA is vicariously culpable and liable in that it failed to act
on the overwhelming information and factual documented evidence that the local member and the industry conveyed to CASA.
That scenario will implicate numerous people in the higher echelons of CASA,
some who deliberately misled BB by countering the information, and some who also actively protect the offenders.
They now have time to graciously resign, or to start covering their tracks and distancing themselves from their protoges.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd suggest this tactic has nothing to do with compensation, it will cost the CASA individual personally quite a sum to defend charges of malfeacence, which would puts a smile on the face of the individuals within GA that have had wrong done against them.
What will surely happen is that the upper echelons of CASA that have not acted thus far will be forced to act.
That is quite a devisive play that, i guess the operators involved must see it cheaper to attack the problem on their terms, as opposed to defending a show cause and loss of AOC due to a pilots licence not being signed or some other regulation that is made up on the day.
Someone has balls that clang !.
What will surely happen is that the upper echelons of CASA that have not acted thus far will be forced to act.
That is quite a devisive play that, i guess the operators involved must see it cheaper to attack the problem on their terms, as opposed to defending a show cause and loss of AOC due to a pilots licence not being signed or some other regulation that is made up on the day.
Someone has balls that clang !.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHRT
Not just balls that clang,
but the financial wherewithall to legally confront these thugs and bullies.
The legal firm of Wollerman, and their preferred CASA misconduct barrister Langmead,
are a formidable deterrant to the miscreants in CASA.
They do not sell their services cheaply, but if you have been wrongly treated
they are the team that will be most likely to rectify CASA's wrongs
Most GA operators do not have the financial depth to sustain a legal defence
while trying to survive a CASA vendetta.
CASA understand this and are able to string things out until the operator runs out of cash.
Remember that they have probably harmed the business
and interrupted the cash flow of the business while they play their game.
reread Torres' post on UZU, read Phelan's account of OrdAir Charter, read Yanda Airlines and all the others.
Had CASA Townsville carried out due diligence on the two most recent victims prior to their vendettas,
they would have established that those companies were extremely financially viable
and able to afford the right legal team.
The total cost to these two operators is measured in millions,
but compensation is unlikely.
They have however, defended their business against an attack, that outside of aviation,
would have seen the offenders as defendants in a civil court.
This new year promises to be an interesting year, and hopefully justice will be seen to be done.
Yes, there are shonky operators out there who need a bit of a nudge in the right direction,
But there are also good clean, compliant operators who don't deserve what these maggots have done to them.
Now where is the guillotine being set up, and where can I buy front row tickets ?
Not just balls that clang,
but the financial wherewithall to legally confront these thugs and bullies.
The legal firm of Wollerman, and their preferred CASA misconduct barrister Langmead,
are a formidable deterrant to the miscreants in CASA.
They do not sell their services cheaply, but if you have been wrongly treated
they are the team that will be most likely to rectify CASA's wrongs
Most GA operators do not have the financial depth to sustain a legal defence
while trying to survive a CASA vendetta.
CASA understand this and are able to string things out until the operator runs out of cash.
Remember that they have probably harmed the business
and interrupted the cash flow of the business while they play their game.
reread Torres' post on UZU, read Phelan's account of OrdAir Charter, read Yanda Airlines and all the others.
Had CASA Townsville carried out due diligence on the two most recent victims prior to their vendettas,
they would have established that those companies were extremely financially viable
and able to afford the right legal team.
The total cost to these two operators is measured in millions,
but compensation is unlikely.
They have however, defended their business against an attack, that outside of aviation,
would have seen the offenders as defendants in a civil court.
This new year promises to be an interesting year, and hopefully justice will be seen to be done.
Yes, there are shonky operators out there who need a bit of a nudge in the right direction,
But there are also good clean, compliant operators who don't deserve what these maggots have done to them.
Now where is the guillotine being set up, and where can I buy front row tickets ?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At last they're coming forward.
I asked earlier in this post for anyone to comment on misconduct in other offices.
The Crane Air thread describes some of the wilful or neglectful misconduct happening at YSBK.
A pattern of similarity is starting to become obvious,
indictive of a cultural problem within CASA, and not just Townsville.
Why the silence from YBAF ? Aren't it's exploits legendary ?
I've heard rumours of a special website being set up (NOT BY CASA!) where CASA misconduct can be posted,
and, in the correct circumstances, the miscreants identified.
The major benefit of that rumoured website will be that with careful scrutiny,
patterns of misbehaviour could be identified, problem Area Offices could be identified,
and those with a penchant for misconduct could be identified.
Similarities in misbehaviour might indicate that a culture is promoted from above,
either by formal or informal direction and / or encouragement.
BB's recent sackings indicate that this possibility does exist.
BB could make use of this rumoured website as a litmus test of his reform process.
If the reform process is just rhetoric and nothing changes,
then the website may be beneficial to a Royal Commission,
especially if the anecdotal information contained therein can be substantiated
either by hard, factual or documented evidence.
If it can't be, let's hope that it won't be permitted to be posted.
Guaranteeing the anonimty of the reporters
(until subpoena'd by a Royal Commission, where they will be protected),
will be paramount given the vindictive and malicious behaviour seen displayed by several area offices.
I asked earlier in this post for anyone to comment on misconduct in other offices.
The Crane Air thread describes some of the wilful or neglectful misconduct happening at YSBK.
A pattern of similarity is starting to become obvious,
indictive of a cultural problem within CASA, and not just Townsville.
Why the silence from YBAF ? Aren't it's exploits legendary ?
I've heard rumours of a special website being set up (NOT BY CASA!) where CASA misconduct can be posted,
and, in the correct circumstances, the miscreants identified.
The major benefit of that rumoured website will be that with careful scrutiny,
patterns of misbehaviour could be identified, problem Area Offices could be identified,
and those with a penchant for misconduct could be identified.
Similarities in misbehaviour might indicate that a culture is promoted from above,
either by formal or informal direction and / or encouragement.
BB's recent sackings indicate that this possibility does exist.
BB could make use of this rumoured website as a litmus test of his reform process.
If the reform process is just rhetoric and nothing changes,
then the website may be beneficial to a Royal Commission,
especially if the anecdotal information contained therein can be substantiated
either by hard, factual or documented evidence.
If it can't be, let's hope that it won't be permitted to be posted.
Guaranteeing the anonimty of the reporters
(until subpoena'd by a Royal Commission, where they will be protected),
will be paramount given the vindictive and malicious behaviour seen displayed by several area offices.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHR,
You are quite perceptive, that is the ony way we can control the environment, i.e. fight the good fight whilst still having an income.
Cpt Starlight,
I only refer to what i've been subjected to, i feel the problems in essence are not directly systematic, i.e. there is no way BB would want relations between the industry and CASA the way it presently is, so it would stand to reason that LK, JC, CM and GR are not operating in the best interests of CASA.
As LK is the leader, he sets the tempo, this is where i feel the problem is, if someone new was on the scene as the leader, as in part the new AM is doing, changes will be seen.
There has always been discrepancies within the legislation, but these problems have been overcome by a fair and level hand by, lets say the leader, unfortunately this has not been happening since the present person has been in this position.
You are quite perceptive, that is the ony way we can control the environment, i.e. fight the good fight whilst still having an income.
Cpt Starlight,
I only refer to what i've been subjected to, i feel the problems in essence are not directly systematic, i.e. there is no way BB would want relations between the industry and CASA the way it presently is, so it would stand to reason that LK, JC, CM and GR are not operating in the best interests of CASA.
As LK is the leader, he sets the tempo, this is where i feel the problem is, if someone new was on the scene as the leader, as in part the new AM is doing, changes will be seen.
There has always been discrepancies within the legislation, but these problems have been overcome by a fair and level hand by, lets say the leader, unfortunately this has not been happening since the present person has been in this position.
Check Attitude
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stink Finger
Your observation regarding the leader setting the tempo is very true,
a certain style of unethical behaviour has been allowed to develop in the FNQ area office.
This was probably a result of the T/L not being effectively managed due to the instability caused by transience at the Area Manager level
(and the strong possibility that this transience may have been generated by the T/L).
It is apparent that the T/L enforced his culture on his team.
Initially some FOI's quite rightfully rejected the unethical behaviour (it was also out of phase with BB's reform directives).
At this point, divide and conquer was seen to be effective.
Three FOI's were bastardised and made an example of.
Of the remaining team, two FOI's succumbed and followed the dictates of the T/L.
(under duress and for reasons of self preservation)
Another two, Pinnochio and Rum, were driven by ambition and career aspirations to accept unquestioned, the unethical behaviour.
Pinnochio, "Yes My Illustrious Leader", even initiated his own style of unethical behaviour and so impressed the T/L by this initiative
that he was promoted ahead of his senior, Rum, who had started to fall out of favour anyway.
And sadly, all of this behaviour made a mockery of CASA's published service charter,
Minister Anderson's epistle to Byron and CASA
and Byron's own attempts to try to reform the rogue element within CASA.
By their actions, this inner circle has blatantly defied Minister Anderson, Bruce Byron and the new Area Manager.
What will it take to do what must be done, to make a Public Example of the four rogues of the inner circle?
That they must be sacked is beyond question.
So who is going to tie the bell around the cat's neck?
Anderson thought Byron was going to fix it.
Byron thought the new AM was going to fix it.
The new AM has been left holding the can, and a lot of the misconduct occurred before his appointment,
although he was aware of the problems.
LHRT
I agree with Stinky that you are quite perceptive in your assessment.
Capt Starlight
The proposed industry website that will publish documented instances of misconduct should answer most of your concerns.
As it will also publish details of the miscreants it will assist BB, CASA and the industry.
It will therefore be of be of great benefit in achieving the reforms desired by the Minister, by Bruce Byron and the industry.
Now lets all hurry up and be patient, the new AM has a lot of work to do, starting with four sackings to reinforce BB's message.
Your observation regarding the leader setting the tempo is very true,
a certain style of unethical behaviour has been allowed to develop in the FNQ area office.
This was probably a result of the T/L not being effectively managed due to the instability caused by transience at the Area Manager level
(and the strong possibility that this transience may have been generated by the T/L).
It is apparent that the T/L enforced his culture on his team.
Initially some FOI's quite rightfully rejected the unethical behaviour (it was also out of phase with BB's reform directives).
At this point, divide and conquer was seen to be effective.
Three FOI's were bastardised and made an example of.
Of the remaining team, two FOI's succumbed and followed the dictates of the T/L.
(under duress and for reasons of self preservation)
Another two, Pinnochio and Rum, were driven by ambition and career aspirations to accept unquestioned, the unethical behaviour.
Pinnochio, "Yes My Illustrious Leader", even initiated his own style of unethical behaviour and so impressed the T/L by this initiative
that he was promoted ahead of his senior, Rum, who had started to fall out of favour anyway.
And sadly, all of this behaviour made a mockery of CASA's published service charter,
Minister Anderson's epistle to Byron and CASA
and Byron's own attempts to try to reform the rogue element within CASA.
By their actions, this inner circle has blatantly defied Minister Anderson, Bruce Byron and the new Area Manager.
What will it take to do what must be done, to make a Public Example of the four rogues of the inner circle?
That they must be sacked is beyond question.
So who is going to tie the bell around the cat's neck?
Anderson thought Byron was going to fix it.
Byron thought the new AM was going to fix it.
The new AM has been left holding the can, and a lot of the misconduct occurred before his appointment,
although he was aware of the problems.
LHRT
I agree with Stinky that you are quite perceptive in your assessment.
Capt Starlight
The proposed industry website that will publish documented instances of misconduct should answer most of your concerns.
As it will also publish details of the miscreants it will assist BB, CASA and the industry.
It will therefore be of be of great benefit in achieving the reforms desired by the Minister, by Bruce Byron and the industry.
Now lets all hurry up and be patient, the new AM has a lot of work to do, starting with four sackings to reinforce BB's message.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mainframe
Mate, you're well intentioned but sorry, you're a dreamer.
Nothing is going to happen, a waiting game is in place, inactivity will lead to disinterest,
the issues will evaporate, no one will be disciplined, no changes will take place.
To do anything is an admission that there was a problem.
Problems ? What problems?
Where?
Get the picture ?
As for the website, another dream, sorry.
It can't be allowed to happen.
Mate, you're well intentioned but sorry, you're a dreamer.
Nothing is going to happen, a waiting game is in place, inactivity will lead to disinterest,
the issues will evaporate, no one will be disciplined, no changes will take place.
To do anything is an admission that there was a problem.
Problems ? What problems?
Where?
Get the picture ?
As for the website, another dream, sorry.
It can't be allowed to happen.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Starlight,
This thread has achieved inpart what was intented, BB is definately aware, as are our 4 friends, most importantly the AM is aware, he has apparently contacted a number of those involved, which is a very positive sign.
If the AM is who I hope he is, it will take a little while but will happen, if he has come from management in the Dep of Transport to CASA, he's building a Resume', association with a failure of this nature can have one of two outcomes, the end of the AM's career "or" another tick in the box on the way to the next, probably higher paid government job with the blessing of a gratefull and alleviated BB.
Good luck Mr AM.
This thread has achieved inpart what was intented, BB is definately aware, as are our 4 friends, most importantly the AM is aware, he has apparently contacted a number of those involved, which is a very positive sign.
If the AM is who I hope he is, it will take a little while but will happen, if he has come from management in the Dep of Transport to CASA, he's building a Resume', association with a failure of this nature can have one of two outcomes, the end of the AM's career "or" another tick in the box on the way to the next, probably higher paid government job with the blessing of a gratefull and alleviated BB.
Good luck Mr AM.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stink Finger
What you suggest certainly makes sense.
However, although four sackings are needed,
only two of the offenders have committed criminal offences in pursuit of their sport. (We're talking documented evidence).
The other two are just guilty of misconduct and unethical behaviour including dishonesty.
That behaviour does not warrant sacking, just counselling.
Remember that the two who must be sacked embarked on a deliberate plan,
the other two only complied for reasons of self preservation,
even though they have made absolute pr#*ks of themselves.
A faint possibility exists that, under proper management and close supervision, they may become credible FOI's.
However, not in the FNQ region, they may have learnt their lesson,
but they need another greatly distanced office in which to reform their behaviour and rebuild trust, confidence and respect.
They also need to understandd that in future they should blow the whistle if co-erced into dirty tricks again.
I'm sure BB will take into account their history and will listen to them if they do become whistle blowers.
The new AM is definitely doing something,
heard a rumour that one of the bastardised is probably being relocated to Cairns,
where he will be most welcomed by the industry there. He is a straight shooter,
and has deserved trust, confidence and respect from the industry.
Another one has resigned and moved to NZ and the other still languishes awaiting a career decision.
As to the new AM, it has already been discussed on proon,
he was handpicked for the most troublesome post in CASA and most likely brought outstanding management skills with him.
He needed to be outstanding to counter the culture and fix it.
And yes, if he achieves what it was that he was tasked to do,
he has an assured career ahead of him and the rewards that go with it.
What you suggest certainly makes sense.
However, although four sackings are needed,
only two of the offenders have committed criminal offences in pursuit of their sport. (We're talking documented evidence).
The other two are just guilty of misconduct and unethical behaviour including dishonesty.
That behaviour does not warrant sacking, just counselling.
Remember that the two who must be sacked embarked on a deliberate plan,
the other two only complied for reasons of self preservation,
even though they have made absolute pr#*ks of themselves.
A faint possibility exists that, under proper management and close supervision, they may become credible FOI's.
However, not in the FNQ region, they may have learnt their lesson,
but they need another greatly distanced office in which to reform their behaviour and rebuild trust, confidence and respect.
They also need to understandd that in future they should blow the whistle if co-erced into dirty tricks again.
I'm sure BB will take into account their history and will listen to them if they do become whistle blowers.
The new AM is definitely doing something,
heard a rumour that one of the bastardised is probably being relocated to Cairns,
where he will be most welcomed by the industry there. He is a straight shooter,
and has deserved trust, confidence and respect from the industry.
Another one has resigned and moved to NZ and the other still languishes awaiting a career decision.
As to the new AM, it has already been discussed on proon,
he was handpicked for the most troublesome post in CASA and most likely brought outstanding management skills with him.
He needed to be outstanding to counter the culture and fix it.
And yes, if he achieves what it was that he was tasked to do,
he has an assured career ahead of him and the rewards that go with it.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Starlight,
quote:However, although four sackings are needed
and
quote:Remember that the two who must be sacked embarked on a deliberate plan,
the other two only complied for reasons of self preservation,
Contradiction ???
quote:However, although four sackings are needed
and
quote:Remember that the two who must be sacked embarked on a deliberate plan,
the other two only complied for reasons of self preservation,
Contradiction ???
The significant conclusion of the Skehill report was that the evidence did not support the allegations that had been raised.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff
The Skehill report was predicted to be a whitewash before it was finally presented.
This supposedly "independant" report was compiled by a legal firm retained by CASA, hardly independant.
It is no coincidence that the reporter is reputedly known as "The Whitewash".
The simple facts are that the T/L severely bastardised three of his own staff and at least two operators.
Significantly, none of the bastardised or their legal representatives were included in "the investigation".
Only the offender and the NQ area office were "investigated".
The outcome, after asking the offenders if they had done wrong,
was predictably, that there was no problem with the conduct of the T/L and inter alia, the NQAO.
This is a repeat of the process where earlier one of the bastardised operators reportedly presented BB
with damning, cold, hard, indexed and documented evidence, which was then given to the offender to investigate himself.
Somehow this is not all that different to asking the Police Commissioner to investigate allegations of corruption
regarding himself and his senior staff.
And you suggest doing the healthy thing and move on.
Probably not a bad idea, the stench of the rotting corpses is overpowering.
LHRT
No contradiction, just considering the legislation and process regarding unfair dismissal.
Two offenders can be proven (in a court) to have deliberately committed offences. Sackable.
The other two are simply guilty of misconduct and the legislation indicates counselling at least three times. not sackable.
Again, no contradiction, four need sacking, but grounds only exist to sack two at this time.
The Skehill report was predicted to be a whitewash before it was finally presented.
This supposedly "independant" report was compiled by a legal firm retained by CASA, hardly independant.
It is no coincidence that the reporter is reputedly known as "The Whitewash".
The simple facts are that the T/L severely bastardised three of his own staff and at least two operators.
Significantly, none of the bastardised or their legal representatives were included in "the investigation".
Only the offender and the NQ area office were "investigated".
The outcome, after asking the offenders if they had done wrong,
was predictably, that there was no problem with the conduct of the T/L and inter alia, the NQAO.
This is a repeat of the process where earlier one of the bastardised operators reportedly presented BB
with damning, cold, hard, indexed and documented evidence, which was then given to the offender to investigate himself.
Somehow this is not all that different to asking the Police Commissioner to investigate allegations of corruption
regarding himself and his senior staff.
And you suggest doing the healthy thing and move on.
Probably not a bad idea, the stench of the rotting corpses is overpowering.
LHRT
No contradiction, just considering the legislation and process regarding unfair dismissal.
Two offenders can be proven (in a court) to have deliberately committed offences. Sackable.
The other two are simply guilty of misconduct and the legislation indicates counselling at least three times. not sackable.
Again, no contradiction, four need sacking, but grounds only exist to sack two at this time.
Check Attitude
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff
Can we be assured that the report was "an objective assessment of ALL the facts?
Any possibility in the rumour that the agrieved may not have been included in the investigation?
Just curious.
Can we be assured that the report was "an objective assessment of ALL the facts?
Any possibility in the rumour that the agrieved may not have been included in the investigation?
Just curious.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skehills input was and is a travesty.
One of the bastardised, lets call him the banjo player, was confronted by the leader, with the AM as a witness, the leader alleged that banjo player had spoken to two CP's, one from TL and the other from CS, and had spoken out about the leader and passed commercially sensitive material to these two CP's.
I know for a fact that neither of these CP's had this conversation with the banjo player "or" were contacted at any time to answer questions to these allegations made by the leader at the banjo player by any of the mentioned ( skehill, leader, AM ).
This is another situation where the leader makes allegations/charges that can damage the other entity/person without even seeing the inside of a court and to be seen as what they are, a vidictive creton causing a great amount of harm, for what, his own ego.
As someone who knows these particular CP's, i can assure you this did not happen, in addition there is no way either of these two CP's would confide in the leader in any way shape or form, this was also white washed by Skehill. BB, if you don't believe me, either yourself or DA contact the banjo player and ask him first hand.
When the word hit the street that there was an investigation commisioned, these CP's and a couple other manangement types from other companies contacted Skehills office in CB and were asked to leave a name and number , not one of them received a return call.
None of the industry members were contacted by either Skehill or his associates re this.
How many people here contacted Skehill, to no reply ?.
One of the bastardised, lets call him the banjo player, was confronted by the leader, with the AM as a witness, the leader alleged that banjo player had spoken to two CP's, one from TL and the other from CS, and had spoken out about the leader and passed commercially sensitive material to these two CP's.
I know for a fact that neither of these CP's had this conversation with the banjo player "or" were contacted at any time to answer questions to these allegations made by the leader at the banjo player by any of the mentioned ( skehill, leader, AM ).
This is another situation where the leader makes allegations/charges that can damage the other entity/person without even seeing the inside of a court and to be seen as what they are, a vidictive creton causing a great amount of harm, for what, his own ego.
As someone who knows these particular CP's, i can assure you this did not happen, in addition there is no way either of these two CP's would confide in the leader in any way shape or form, this was also white washed by Skehill. BB, if you don't believe me, either yourself or DA contact the banjo player and ask him first hand.
When the word hit the street that there was an investigation commisioned, these CP's and a couple other manangement types from other companies contacted Skehills office in CB and were asked to leave a name and number , not one of them received a return call.
None of the industry members were contacted by either Skehill or his associates re this.
How many people here contacted Skehill, to no reply ?.
If the "simple facts" are as described by Captain Starlight and the other accusers on this forum, it follows that various criminal offences and civil wrongs have been committed.
There's nothing and nobody stopping the accusers from giving all the "simple facts" to the police, and there's nothing and nobody stopping the accusers from filing a statement of claim setting out those "simple facts" to a court.
It's why the police and courts are there.
So far as I am aware, no prosecutions have been launched, and no statements of claim have been filed.
It seems to me that there are only 2 explanations for that outcome. Either:
- the "simple facts" aren't quite so simple or factual as the accusers earnestly believe or would have us believe; and/or
- the accusers are masochists who enjoy the pain of making valid complaints to an organisation which the accusers don't trust to do a proper investigation.
If the accusers:
- don't want to accept the outcomes of an investigation by an organisation to which they have complained; and
- don't want to complain to police or make a claim in court, or having done so, get told their "simple facts" do not to establish any offence or cause of action,
that's their problem and no one else's.
There's nothing and nobody stopping the accusers from giving all the "simple facts" to the police, and there's nothing and nobody stopping the accusers from filing a statement of claim setting out those "simple facts" to a court.
It's why the police and courts are there.
So far as I am aware, no prosecutions have been launched, and no statements of claim have been filed.
It seems to me that there are only 2 explanations for that outcome. Either:
- the "simple facts" aren't quite so simple or factual as the accusers earnestly believe or would have us believe; and/or
- the accusers are masochists who enjoy the pain of making valid complaints to an organisation which the accusers don't trust to do a proper investigation.
If the accusers:
- don't want to accept the outcomes of an investigation by an organisation to which they have complained; and
- don't want to complain to police or make a claim in court, or having done so, get told their "simple facts" do not to establish any offence or cause of action,
that's their problem and no one else's.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creamie
Never underestimate the collective will of a bureaucracy to protect itself, one of the best was the Qld Police Service in the late 70's early 80's.
My personal belief is that there is something wrong with CASA Tvl, however as you point out, very few of the 'simple facts' are ever put forward as evidence.
Add that to the 'fact' that some posters here seem to struggle with reality and spend a lot of their time bagging some part of GA or another and I am hardly surprised that CASA ignores the proffered conjecture.
Unless we, collectively, get over the splitered backstabbing (as exemplified the 'air america' thread, the BPI thread and the varied attacks on AOPA by failed ex-board members) how is CASA expected to take GA seriously.
Were I a CASA bureaucrat I would simply post something here, splinter whatever group was threatening my reign (CASA, RAA, AUSAC, ASFA .... whatever) and carry on my merry way.
Max
Never underestimate the collective will of a bureaucracy to protect itself, one of the best was the Qld Police Service in the late 70's early 80's.
My personal belief is that there is something wrong with CASA Tvl, however as you point out, very few of the 'simple facts' are ever put forward as evidence.
Add that to the 'fact' that some posters here seem to struggle with reality and spend a lot of their time bagging some part of GA or another and I am hardly surprised that CASA ignores the proffered conjecture.
Unless we, collectively, get over the splitered backstabbing (as exemplified the 'air america' thread, the BPI thread and the varied attacks on AOPA by failed ex-board members) how is CASA expected to take GA seriously.
Were I a CASA bureaucrat I would simply post something here, splinter whatever group was threatening my reign (CASA, RAA, AUSAC, ASFA .... whatever) and carry on my merry way.
Max
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cream Puff
The Skehill Report established that there was no problem with the conduct of the Townsville office.
Therefore there is no problem, was no problem and in future will be no problem.
As for your suggested stance of an individual or small company
taking on the might and financial resource of the Australian Government,
possibly may not be a practical or realistic task.
I doubt that a precedent could be found in anyone successfully sueing a CASA official.
I also doubt that CASA's staff are totally free from members who may be guilty of misconduct.
I will refrain temporarily from further posts and retreat to the sidelines and wait for evidence of sincerity
in the handling of the misconduct that Skehill established didn't actually happen in the Townsville Office.
It seems that in your view, the numerous trips to Canberra, the hundreds of thousands spent on legal counsel,
the castigation of CASA by the AAT,
were all just a silly misunderstanding about problems Skehill established had no basis in fact.
I'm going to lay down and rest for a while, but remember,
The Truth is out there, and history confirms that the Truth usually prevails.
The Skehill Report established that there was no problem with the conduct of the Townsville office.
Therefore there is no problem, was no problem and in future will be no problem.
As for your suggested stance of an individual or small company
taking on the might and financial resource of the Australian Government,
possibly may not be a practical or realistic task.
I doubt that a precedent could be found in anyone successfully sueing a CASA official.
I also doubt that CASA's staff are totally free from members who may be guilty of misconduct.
I will refrain temporarily from further posts and retreat to the sidelines and wait for evidence of sincerity
in the handling of the misconduct that Skehill established didn't actually happen in the Townsville Office.
It seems that in your view, the numerous trips to Canberra, the hundreds of thousands spent on legal counsel,
the castigation of CASA by the AAT,
were all just a silly misunderstanding about problems Skehill established had no basis in fact.
I'm going to lay down and rest for a while, but remember,
The Truth is out there, and history confirms that the Truth usually prevails.