I vote yes. :ok:


POST NO 4 IS THE FIRST POST FOR THIS THREAD! :ugh:

Tail Wheel

I see CASA as no different to any other government institution, all the way down to Council level.
They are more concerned with job justification (security) than they are about delivering positive outcomes. In the case of JQ, it even appears to me, that they have no safety mechanism for themselves to halt a process they begin when it becomes evident that the outcome will have no benefit to safety. Heck, if you look in the regs there are penalty units applied to most of the stuff. It might have been more appropriate to issue JQ with a fine based penalty. Without hindsight he might have fought it, with hindsight it would have been a better option for all concerned.


I get more and more less proud to be an Aussie everyday when I see this sort of muppetry in motion. I have always felt my vote as basically worthless, with a strong feeling of I make no difference in the greater scheme. Its not just CASA, but every element of our lives is over regulated, over charged, and we are almost powerless to get it fixed, whilst those f*cking it get paid more and more.

I'm not one for jumping on causes, often viewing those driving them as fruitcakes. Pass the custard.

Yes.

mcdonal. I also had the token expired response that Frank got on my first attempt at posting. CASA's IT dept 'working' the thread?

I vote Yay,

Something weird going on as Kharon started the thread but is number 3 on the post list.

And I posted after jas24zzk's second post.

No Confidence. Vote here.
 

Well, the gauntlet has been thrown down, the challenge accepted.

If enough support can be indicated, anonymously, here on Pprune it is proposed that a formal petition be presented to one of our aviation aware Senators for consideration by the Senate.

Petition is HERE
The properly drafted petition will present a No Confidence statement in the Director, Deputy Director and Executive Manger Legal Services; and call for the immediate independent investigation of the complaints raised within the petition.

In our opinion the CASA is not providing Australia with the service required, frivolously wastes vast sums of tax payer money, deceives the Minister and achieves inferior safety outcomes. The negative impact of the ideology and management of the CASA is acting to provide a probable negative safety outcome which will, one day result in a serious accident.

I and many others believe the current ethos of maximum administrative punishment, minimum criminal prosecution and the almost total lack of quantifiable safety outcomes is detrimental to achieving increased, outcome based safety standards.

There are many issues; but radically the pervading 'Culture of Fear', intimidation, mendacity and total lack of accountability has been allowed to become a 'normalised deficiency'.

1000 signatures would be regarded as 'an avalanche of expert opinion'; 5 times that number would ensure the way aviation safety is regulated and managed a matter of national concern.

It should be, but who else apart from the victims of this arrogant, self regulating, self aggrandising, crippled thing we refer to as the 'Safety Authority' would know ?.

Speak now, or forever hold your peace.

Selah.

Please - Understand this.
 

This is a serious attempt to establish that there is real outcry against the CASA.

The message is simple; we the industry (undersigned) have had a 'guts full'.

To take this project to a Senate quality document against a 'monster' is going to take time, money and a modicum of talent.

Show your support or lack thereof; log on, post a simple Yeah or Nay, this will allow the Gods to decide if our claims are worth pursuing.

Your life, your criminal record, your industry.

Your call lads and lasses.

Selah - (big time).

PS; plain enough Jabba, I tried mate. More cryptic crosswords next week. :D http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ies/thumbs.gif

What does "token expired" mean when attempting to answer this post?

Wuzz up Voltaire??
 

Frank - ho ho :D Yeah or Nay Votaire - No Do Be Do.

To do is Voltare, to Be is Hamlet and to Do Be Do is Sinatra. I know, it's an oldie. :D

I and at least five non-prooners scarred by the regulator will
sign.

(If mystified by Voltaire references - his real name was Frank Arouet. Or perhaps Francois? Improbable the living breathing F.A.'s real name is Voltaire . . . . . Unless he took such a shine to the handle with an aerial flavour he legalised it. Like a certain Mr JL Seagull who really is so legally known, living in blissful hippiedom in NE NSW. Old mate and I have met him, seen his deep poll papers .. . Seen him swoop in and snatch up others' fried chips too.)

Petition.
 

YES to that in spades !!!!

As for my Life. Job and income fcuked over by CASA.

As for my criminal record. CASA gave me that too. Had SFA to do about preventing aeroplanes falling from the sky, or anything to do with safety, buts that's the nature of the beast we MUST put to the sword.

As for 'my' industry...and yours. Absolutely worth fighting for, as a vital slice of GAFA infrastructure, our right to fly safely or even be on the tarmac without fear of retribution from some FOI, AWI that has 'sh*t on the liver' for the day.
Our right NOT to fcuked over by power crazy immoral bastards that cant even spell 'integrity', let alone know what it means.
Some plain old fashioned, credible leadership would have helped ?.. but its passed saving now. The use by date is long gone.

We, the aviation people DEMAND common sense, sanity... and democracy to mean something, for the industry we are in, because we enjoy doing what we do. (did)

I'll use the analogy that a CASA bum used to one of my clients ...
Think of xxxxx aeroplane ( insert CASA) as a sh*t heap of a bus that he got (came) off the dump. Would you ride in that?
CASA is that bus. We've been forced to ride in it for far too long.
Its time we all got off... and burnt it.

I will sign it.

I had an interview with a consultant company on behalf of CASA today and part of the discussion was the pilot communities view on CASA, now that is not a question to ask a pilot, but anyway I answered.

The problem is people view CASA just the same as a policeman in either of the following scenario's.

A: Small country town, local copper pulls you over for a few k's over, or answering a phone or something that in the circumstances was not dangerous, but against a rule. He says, young Jaba, that might be OK and safe here but in a school zone or somewhere else not so. How about you be more careful, if I see you do it again you might get a ticket. OK? Now scoot and be more careful. And by the way whats with that crack in your windscreen?

B: Big city copper, same infringement, copper books you, nasty tone, and then books you for a windscreen crak that happend 5k up the road because a truck illegally had an uncovered load, and then you get really pi$$ed.

So tel me which version do you see being the one likely to produce a better safety outcome? how would country copper have handled situation B, an educational talking to, and telling you to get mick the mechanic in town to replace your windscreen, and by the way I will talk to Troy the Truckie about covering his loads.

Now how does industry view CASA? Its a no brainer.

They need a major marketing makeover but first they need to improve their product.

Is it time? damn right it is. My vote "YES".
The aviation industry in Australia is being
slowly strangled by regulation. Unless there is
dramatic change it will continue to decline into oblivion.
Simple comparisons of the shear volume of Australian
regulations against comparable 1st world countries where aviation
is healthily growing, against safety outcomes here and there
would indicate that the way we are doing things is NOT
producing the desired results, just heaping regulatory cost
upon regulatory cost for no tangible result.

wtf is up with the database? I posted after thornbird

I'll vote yes also. Jaba's hit it spot on

The time stamp fairy is working overtime - posted at 0835 EDST

My vote is Yes!

Bump
 

Data Base ????

My vote is a big YES

My vote is a resounding YES

Who has forgotten the rotten mess of CASA in Far Nth Qld, subsequently cleaned up by Byron?

What sort of inept area manager allowed the misconduct to re emerge, worse than ever?

It's not just North Qld, there are several area offices through out Australia embracing the Manual of Standards for Dirty Tricks.

I vote yes , after seeing what CASA did to GAAP with no industry consultation and negative outcomes in regard to operational safety / simplicity and efficiency

Yes, the way CASA is going we will need an endorsment to have a pee. :ugh:

A robust YES
 

In true bureaucratic wank speach I vote a resounding, robust, overarching YES. This truly malfeasant mob of misfits is a total trainwreck that needs to be cleared if Australian aviation is to move forward.The history of this mob alone tells you that their system is not working.
Some of the reasons that they receive my vote of no confidence is;

• The inability to either maintain, oversight or implement a workable aviation rule set. The fact that they are yet to finish rewriting the regs after 23 years of trying proves that they simply cannot do it. Somebody needs to be able to do it, and these nupty's can't, so it is time to introduce a regulatory body that can do it.
• Bullying of industry - Mistreatment of individual people and oragnisations. The allegations of malfeasance and palpable treatment of innocent individuals is beyond reproach.As has been mentioned earlier, some minor broom work has taken place over the years but the systemic problems remain, and have done so for decades.
• Nepotism and inconsistencies.
• Incompetence.
• Waste of taxpayer money. How is it that the executives earn bonuses? This is a non profit regulator, how can a bonus be paid to executives? Not to mention Chairmans Lounge memberships and business class travel. Is this not breaking the golden rule of 'the line in the sand' between regulator and industry? How can you provide unbiased oversight when receiving perks from an operator?
• Out of touch - Many of the executives need to collect their pensions and head off to retirement villa's. They have spent decades out of touch with reality and industry, they have no idea what the real aviation world is about, all they understand is how to locate the next feed trough and bury their snouts into it. Management should serve a 3 year term similar to a political term, except at the end of 3 years it is a gaurenteed replacement. Some of these CASA indviduals have spent almost an entrie working life there, how the hell would or could they be able to provide an effective service when they havent ever stepped foot into the real world. It is time to replace them with current/fresh industry capable people.
• Smoke and mirrors - The continual smoke and mirror carnival needs to be gutted. Shuffling of money, resources, projects from one location to another to keep ahead of the government's eye (if they are watching) has been going on for decades. Wasteage of money on incompleted projects either improperly managed, never finsihed or 'shelved' is atrocious.
• NO ACCOUNTABILITY - A lack of a fair or just appeal system for those who are prosecuted, often unjustly. If CASA are found to be unjust or unfair in their actions they receive a get out of jail free card. Nobody gets punished, nobody wears accountability, nobody is 'asked to explain'. Then you have an ethics commitee made up from internal senior executives. This is possibly one of the most unethical processes I have ever heard of. It is as workable as having a team of oil executives investigating price fixing !!They have the absolute freedom and permision to pursue an operator or individual at any expense without any justification or recourse. The use of taxpayer funds without reasonable use is a disgrace.
• Inconsistent application or understanding of rules and regulations - Why does one field office have a different 'take' or understanding of a rule, reg or process, compared to another office? How can this be? Again, systemic issues that remain unmitigated.
• Finally, my favourite - INTENT. What a load of sh#t. Lawyer a#sholes allowed to write something in a manner so that it can be used either for or against you, at their discretion. Absolut crap. INTENT NEEDS TO BE ROMOVED, as it is abused habitually. E.G If you were speeding and got caught going over the set speed limit it is not 'intent', the speed limit is not oepn to twisted interpretation. Either you WERE speeding or you WEREN'T.

I could list countless examples of deficiencies but simply do not have the time. There is enough knowledge internally and externally within the Australian aviation fraternity to conclusively back the fact that we do not have confidence in CASA, or in a Minister that is completely disconnected and living between cloud cuckoo land and a trough.