How to really fix CASA and save the taxpayer millions and millions of dollars by Glen
Thread Starter
How to really fix CASA and save the taxpayer millions and millions of dollars by Glen
Lets assume that the vast majority of people in CASA are capable and well intentioned. Lets also assume that we expect that same ratio, of well intentioned people within CASA, as we do of our military and police force. If we take emotion out of it, CASA has probably achieved that. Many will choke, many will argue, but its at least its probably in the" range". Everyone of them has to work in the same difficult Regulatory environment that we do, and as angry as we are, the truth is They didn't write it! : So how do you fix it, fix it quickly, and save millions.
Im going to put my name to it. I want no part in it. But I am going to own it. I call it the "Glen Buckley Flip" It will never happen obviously, but I reckon it would work.
Get all CASA operational staff (i.e. excluding administrative staff) to print off their job description, and tuck it away in their top pocket
Get everyone of them in a big convention centre, have a few drinks and create a bit of an "atmosphere"
Have a "share the vision" speech and tell them you have a plan for everyone of them that is well intentioned. Nobody will have their pay or conditions changed for three years.
For clarity. The FOIs, FTEs, Safety Advisors, Regional Managers and above will all remain on unchanged pay and conditions for three years if they elect to stay with CASA, other than promotion on merit during that time. Explain to them that the three year project will require them to produce "clear and concise" rules and regulations. If at the end of the three years, they have not achieved that; then the Project has FAILED.
Put the most senior 50% on one side of the convention centre, lined up against the 50% on the other side. Announce that you have a $5,000,0000 one off allocation from the Government to ensure a smooth implementation of change management in the Organisation.
Ask them all to make eye contact with their counterpart on the other side of the room, and smile at each other. Walk across and spend two minutes chatting to each other. Chat warmly and build a relationship. Realise that you are all on the same side, and you are all going to work together going forward in the genuine interest of aviation safety.
Get the band to play a drum roll in the background.
Get them all to pull the job description out of their top pocket and swap with their counterpart. Put the bottom 50% at the top and the top 50% at the bottom. Remind them that no-ones pay is changed.
Remind them they have three years to fix this, and their is no more money available. Call on them to step up and make it work. I bet the bottom 50% would actually take the challenge on , and be enough in touch with reality, that we might just get things done.
And at the end of the three years, see how it went. I reckon the 50% at the coal face put in the top positions, is all it needs!!!!!!!!
Im going to put my name to it. I want no part in it. But I am going to own it. I call it the "Glen Buckley Flip" It will never happen obviously, but I reckon it would work.
Get all CASA operational staff (i.e. excluding administrative staff) to print off their job description, and tuck it away in their top pocket
Get everyone of them in a big convention centre, have a few drinks and create a bit of an "atmosphere"
Have a "share the vision" speech and tell them you have a plan for everyone of them that is well intentioned. Nobody will have their pay or conditions changed for three years.
For clarity. The FOIs, FTEs, Safety Advisors, Regional Managers and above will all remain on unchanged pay and conditions for three years if they elect to stay with CASA, other than promotion on merit during that time. Explain to them that the three year project will require them to produce "clear and concise" rules and regulations. If at the end of the three years, they have not achieved that; then the Project has FAILED.
Put the most senior 50% on one side of the convention centre, lined up against the 50% on the other side. Announce that you have a $5,000,0000 one off allocation from the Government to ensure a smooth implementation of change management in the Organisation.
Ask them all to make eye contact with their counterpart on the other side of the room, and smile at each other. Walk across and spend two minutes chatting to each other. Chat warmly and build a relationship. Realise that you are all on the same side, and you are all going to work together going forward in the genuine interest of aviation safety.
Get the band to play a drum roll in the background.
Get them all to pull the job description out of their top pocket and swap with their counterpart. Put the bottom 50% at the top and the top 50% at the bottom. Remind them that no-ones pay is changed.
Remind them they have three years to fix this, and their is no more money available. Call on them to step up and make it work. I bet the bottom 50% would actually take the challenge on , and be enough in touch with reality, that we might just get things done.
And at the end of the three years, see how it went. I reckon the 50% at the coal face put in the top positions, is all it needs!!!!!!!!
Get a few A380's, load all the CASA staff in them and send them exchange program to New Zealand for the 3 years, tell them to do nothing while in there.
Give the New Zealand CAA guys $1,000,000 and say copy your system here, then have the remaining 2.5 years having a holiday.
After the 3 years and the CASA guys return - tell them to do nothing.
Give the New Zealand CAA guys $1,000,000 and say copy your system here, then have the remaining 2.5 years having a holiday.
After the 3 years and the CASA guys return - tell them to do nothing.
Glen, simply shoot all the bast@rds in CASA. Ring the FAA. Get them to include Australia in their jurisdiction and dump our ****e regulatory mess for simply. FAR's. @ AIM's. Change the imperial stuff (Vis etc) as required to metric. then off you go.
Need to be cognisant of the fact that other federal government departments also have a very strong influence on how the cogs within CASA turn, plenty of very good people within CASA who are powerless to change the systemic faults of the organisation. Sadly a large majority of the good people who have tried to change CASA from within the ranks without any success have simply got frustrated and when back into industry - I am one of them. Having said this, in reflection CASA was a good organisation to work, albeit with their problems.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Above the 23.5 parallel Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bend alot
It doesn't matter whose Regulations you adopt, by the time they get through Office of Legal Drafting (OLD), they will not resemble what was presented in the first place, so your coveted NZ Rules would look and smell the same as the current CASR's. This is out of CASA's hands, as ALL Commonwealth Legislation is drafted by OLD, this was enacted by Parliament about 7 Prime Ministers ago, so in the last 7 years.
It doesn't matter whose Regulations you adopt, by the time they get through Office of Legal Drafting (OLD), they will not resemble what was presented in the first place, so your coveted NZ Rules would look and smell the same as the current CASR's. This is out of CASA's hands, as ALL Commonwealth Legislation is drafted by OLD, this was enacted by Parliament about 7 Prime Ministers ago, so in the last 7 years.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney Harbour
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't we all sign a petition "Vote of no confidence" in our regulator and send it to ICAO? Could they not strip CASA of it's powers and put in a Caretaker Regulator?
Just a thought.
DB
Just a thought.
DB
DB
ICAO is NOT a regulator and has no power over State regulators. CASA is established and has its authority under the Civil Aviation Act established by the Australian government.ICAO only establishes a body of standards for regulators to adopt, or not. The standards are developed by representatives from the State regulators and are then published by ICAO. Australia isrepresented on most of the ICAOPanelsthat develop the standards.
ICAO is NOT a regulator and has no power over State regulators. CASA is established and has its authority under the Civil Aviation Act established by the Australian government.ICAO only establishes a body of standards for regulators to adopt, or not. The standards are developed by representatives from the State regulators and are then published by ICAO. Australia isrepresented on most of the ICAOPanelsthat develop the standards.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Above the 23.5 parallel Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the link to the ICAO website, where you can check out each country's ICAO score, you can even compare them against another country. https://www.icao.int/safety/Pages/USOAP-Results.aspx
Bend alot
It doesn't matter whose Regulations you adopt, by the time they get through Office of Legal Drafting (OLD), they will not resemble what was presented in the first place, so your coveted NZ Rules would look and smell the same as the current CASR's. This is out of CASA's hands, as ALL Commonwealth Legislation is drafted by OLD, this was enacted by Parliament about 7 Prime Ministers ago, so in the last 7 years.
It doesn't matter whose Regulations you adopt, by the time they get through Office of Legal Drafting (OLD), they will not resemble what was presented in the first place, so your coveted NZ Rules would look and smell the same as the current CASR's. This is out of CASA's hands, as ALL Commonwealth Legislation is drafted by OLD, this was enacted by Parliament about 7 Prime Ministers ago, so in the last 7 years.
Simply NOT correct, from someone who has worked from withing the the system.
The CASA legislation is as CASA (the client) wants it. Persons in CASA will tell you otherwise, they are not telling the truth, probably because many of them don't understand the system, as you don't.
.
Have a look at CASR 21-25 (except for the recent sodding around by CASA) that is how "the client", at the time, wanted it.
There is plenty of examples of Cth legislation that is plain (as we understand it) English.
Have a look at the Corporation Act 2001 ---- or have a look at some environmental legislation, where large slabs of legislation from other countries have been adopted by reference, a practice that has been going on since Federation.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Above the 23.5 parallel Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leadsled,
You don't know who I am and you are wrong on so many fronts. You consistently demean those who don't agree with your views, you actually agreed in one of previous posts quoting the same thing. You could have written your response without adding " probably because many of them don't understand the system, as you don't."
Pprune freezes because Leadsled says something positive. Tittle pup!!!
You don't know who I am and you are wrong on so many fronts. You consistently demean those who don't agree with your views, you actually agreed in one of previous posts quoting the same thing. You could have written your response without adding " probably because many of them don't understand the system, as you don't."
Pprune freezes because Leadsled says something positive. Tittle pup!!!
Sorry to be so negative but..... all aviationists in the Land of Oz should know by now that CAsA the free range and lawful state unto itself, the great money and time waster is IRREPARABLE in its current form.
Since Governments are ignorant of , and happy to have CAsA as 'firewall' in the event of a major accident, why change things?
So it is, and will be ever thus.
And those that wish to continue flying will just have to put up with the BS, shelfware extrodinaire. inconsistencies, cronyism and corruption, unethical and immoral thinking of the bureaucratic class, who are after all keeping us the ignorant av-peasantry and the population at large "safe" for falling aeroplanes and bad headlines.
Since Governments are ignorant of , and happy to have CAsA as 'firewall' in the event of a major accident, why change things?
So it is, and will be ever thus.
And those that wish to continue flying will just have to put up with the BS, shelfware extrodinaire. inconsistencies, cronyism and corruption, unethical and immoral thinking of the bureaucratic class, who are after all keeping us the ignorant av-peasantry and the population at large "safe" for falling aeroplanes and bad headlines.
To 'change' things within CASA would simply imply that such things were done incorrectly in the past. The horror !
However a major fatal RPT accident with a CASA AOC holder may take such decisions out of their hands.
However a major fatal RPT accident with a CASA AOC holder may take such decisions out of their hands.
Leadsled,
You don't know who I am and you are wrong on so many fronts. You consistently demean those who don't agree with your views, you actually agreed in one of previous posts quoting the same thing. You could have written your response without adding " probably because many of them don't understand the system, as you don't."
You don't know who I am and you are wrong on so many fronts. You consistently demean those who don't agree with your views, you actually agreed in one of previous posts quoting the same thing. You could have written your response without adding " probably because many of them don't understand the system, as you don't."
About the one thing you have correct is that I don't know who you are, a matter of total irrelevance.
Instead of wailing about my style, why don't you address the facts, instead of more assertions.
The fact is, whether you like it or understand it, the CARs/CASRs style is the "CASA House Style", for want of a better description, and not mandated by the Cth. Office of Parliamentary Council now, any more than when every regulation went through AGs OLD.
At its core, the CASA policy is: "Aviation law is for lawyers and judges, for the safe conviction of pilots and engineers" ---- to quote a former very senior CASA lawyer. Usability or understandability by participants in aviation is/was no regarded as important, just a 99%+ conviction rate for those targeted.
Tootle pip!!
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,969
Received 95 Likes
on
55 Posts
Aviation law is for lawyers and judges, for the safe conviction of pilots and engineers" ---- to quote a former very senior CASA lawyer.
