CASA- Alcohol and other Drugs Survey
 

I conducted the CASA Alcohol and other drugs survey online this evening.

This has to be amongst the most poorly written surveys that I have ever seen. I suspect that CASA have gotten a third grader- and not a high achieving one- to write the damned thing.

I was forced to answer 'no' to questions when in reality it was more appropriate for me to answer 'not applicable'. Here are a few examples of poorly worded questions. They apply equally to the alcohol questions but I've only highlighted the drugs questions as follows.

Given that I haven't used any of the listed drugs in the last 12 months I'm looking for a 'not applicable' type response. It doesn't exist and so the only answer is 'yes' or 'no' to the list. So if I answer 'no' then it appears that I may have done them but found that I actually COULD cut down on them. This is not accurate and would go some way to invalidating a test result.

Answer 'yes' or 'no'. Again there is no 'not applicable'. No they haven't spoken to me about it because I hide it really well or 'no' they haven't spoken to me because I simply don't do them. The answer is the latter. No one has spoken to me because I don't do them. Had the question asked me 'have you done any of these drugs' yes/no and THEN asked me had anyone spoken to me then it would have been a far more valid question.

How about 'none of the above'? The survey did let me past this point without answering this question but it's still a poorly worded question.

If I say a 'bit below' then does that mean the rest of my colleagues are all high as kites and I'm a little less so or does that mean that my colleagues do some and I do none. What if I answer 'about the same' because I suspect that none of us actually do drugs.

If I answer 'none' does this mean that I just came to work under the influence? That is certainly the implication. How about 'I don't do drugs' response?

Yes or no to this one? No I haven't because I get away with it or no because I just don't do it?

As you can see, the survey is quite poor. I completed it but I believe the questions are so poor as to invalidate any useful conclusions. I hope that CASA didn't expend money on getting a professional company to do this- they need their money back if they did. If they didn't expend money and did it in house then it certainly shows.

What a crock!

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Yes? No?

They should have run a trial so that they could validate the questions. They obviously didn't, or used inappropriate target audience.

To think that our money would be wasted by inappropriately worded survey:ugh:

Obivously put together by the same amateurs that put together the recent AsA survey. :ugh:

Sounds like the phone survey I was asked to do on pilot shortages. Questions were limited to proving a preconceived result. Questions on - would you employ women or indigenous etc but nothing allowing opinion or relating to the real reasons.

This is a test that is given to asses if a drug user is a drug addict. It is word for word as about 50 others available on the internet. (Google is your friend) It's plagiarism plain and simple.

I cant wait for "contractors" (said little Hitlers) to burst into your hanger demanding you take a breath test and a cheek swab. Or worse still flagging you down in the run up bay.

I just cant see how the random testing of private pilots will work. How the hell can these guys pull this off safely and if someone is intoxicated and they see them in the run up bay whats to stop them just taxi past line up and blast off. Hay there pissed i dont think they are going to care they didn't do a run up. Will these contractors be insured correctly to be air side anyway. If you chop one to bits who will pay. (for your bulk strip that is)

Also i guess the way i read it it's an end to the weekend air side hanger bbq and beers. They can get you on the way out of the air side gate if you over .02 your busted even if you had no intention on flying or had some beers with the boys after the days operations.

and again all this from one event at Hamilton Island where sadly some people lost there lives but the report never blamed the night before's alcohol or drug use they said it may have been a contributing factor. The fact is the poor guy had an engine fail. In a very heavy single with water on one side and a mountain on the other. Hangover or not i would not guarantee that any pilot could get out of a situation like that.

Where is the evidence that this money spent will save lives in private aviation. It could be much better spent in countless ways. If we had pissed pilots shooting up in the runup bay and pulling cones on down wind crashing every second day then i could understand it.
But we dont.

GO EASY ON THOSE POPPY SEED BUNS KIDS.

I would suggest that the survey was not put together by a 3rd grader but by someone trying to manufacture an outcome for what the department wants to implement as policy. :ok:

Educational video worth viewing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhN1...eature=related

KEG

I did it a few weeks ago.....and later in the survey there are windows of opportunity to make comments, I politely informed them of the issue. I bet I wont win a GPS or whatever it was:{

J:ok:

Well said matt. Funny how the aviation industry is singled out here. If i have a beer after work and get breath tested (Tests run 24/7) and blow over .02, i obviously have a drinking problem or an intention to fly/taxi/conduct maintenance on an aircraft, and therefore am compromising the safety of an operation. We all know how small an industry we are in, and that in the extremely rare event someone has a drug addiction or becomes an alcoholic, their employer is among the first to know and the individual will be dealt with accordingly. This will only serve to deter more people from becoming a pilot/engineer/ATC. Anyone read 1984 or Brave new world lately?:ugh:

me
 

I did it for the chance to win the GPS.... Who cares, it was a total load of crap though and if you weren't a drug user then it was hard to answer properly. Hope I get the GPS though :rolleyes::D:D:D

CASA...what a joke of an organization! This is just more bureaucratic waffle from an organization doing the bidding of the airlines.

They wouldn't know safety if it came and bit them on the arse.

If they gave a stuff about trying to stop pilots flying around in an impaired state, they would do a serious rewrite of CAO 48, instead of granting the airlines exemptions to operate even further beyond the current regs.

I wonder if any of these clowns has actually sat on a flightdeck at 3am on a 2 pilot 'back of the clock' sector from asia to oz. One guy is snoring his head off on 'controlled rest', and the other guy is sitting there so out of it, he may as well have had 6 schooners and a joint!

Get real CASA...you are not fooling anyone. :mad:

Good to see you back up in the air KEG.

Op mush have gone well. No drugs there hay.

Now you think you would be a target of such testing with a name like KEG.

Suuure thing.

PS Give CASA Safety Promotion a call and let them know mate. They are interested in feedback on stuff like this.

No guarantees, but a controlled ditching (as illustrated recently in Torres Straight) generally has a greater chance of a successful outcome than an uncontrolled collision with terrain.

Dr :8

FTDK:
Im sure you are correct much better to go in anywhere level then upside down. Why second guess the deceased. The point was wasting our time and money with drug and alcohol testing because of one accident which was not even proven to be because of drugs or alcohol.

You could have a huge 3 day bender. Then dont drink for 15 hours and blow .00 but the fact of the mater is you may be way to hungover / fatigued to fly. The testers will not be able to test for this. But is closer to the facts of this accident then the pilot downing 4 schooners and going flying and crashing which there is still no evidence that this has ever happened in Australia. ATSB made a recommendation and for some bizar reason this seems to be the one they chose to act on. Not the 100's of others that would prevent problems. It was all about a media beat up 4 years ago.

Matt

Valid point, however consider this.......

If you fly a plane, RAA grasshopper to A380, its all about a responsible lifestyle and a sensible attitude.

Now this is just my opinion, but the guy in the prang at Hammo, might just not have been living the responsible lifestyle. As evidenced by the report anyway. And I am not second guessing the deceased either.

If you play up like an old lawn mower you have no place in aviation, motorsport, truck driving...........driving anything!

J:ok:

Jab:
Thats not the point i am trying to make. What i think is an issue is the Random Drug and Alcohol testing is a waste of taxpayers money. When breath testing was introduced on the road there were studies and statistic that if you stopped people drink driving lives would be saved. It was clear cut. I just dont believe there are that many pilots that go out get pissed take drugs and fly.

And i dont think there are any stats to make a case that people fly intoxicated. I would say after the first year of testing they will know that to.

I agree, however with an apparent shortage of pilots it is alot easier that those least responsible individuals pass through the system or get into flying larger aircraft at a younger age when they haven't fully matured.(before all the younger guys make a fuss i'm talking about a select few). Its amazing how young kids these days actually start taking drugs and there is a reason why you pay alot more for car insurance if your under 25. Back to to thread the questionaire is a joke and CASA should focus on other issues such as fatigue otherwise they might actually have to give us drugs to stay awake on the flight deck :}

A possible solution: When I was doing some contract work for an oil company, the said company used to breath test us before every flight.

Hey Keg, just tell them it's a three stubby trip to work!

I suppose CASA will have a fee for you to pee in the bottle and a fee to handle your pee as well, no doubt more paperwork and costs to the industry.

Pilot "whats your job in Casa", Casa person replies "piss collector"

CASA recently asked me to participate in these questionairres.

I politely replied that formal requests can be made in writing with the understanding that any time required for my participation will be at a cost of $180 per hour.:ok:

I figure, if they can charge me that much to sit around photo copiers with cups of tea in hand, I can charge it back for a change.:E

Funniliy enough, I have not been contacted regarding the silly thing although Ill bet Im the first one tested for everything.....:bored:

Haha!! Onya MHS!!

Did you also mention that for you to actually print off the answers and send them back would be a $65 answer issue fee?:E