facthunter Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 CASA's main aim is to protect ITSELF from threat of litigation. That's why it employs so many lawyers. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 Turbs, why does the existence of CASA protect anyone from litigation? I can imagine that between the RAAus and its insurers, some sort of SMS would be in place anyway. That's been my point Bruce;any issue of the cost of building and maintaining a safety, compliance and enforcement system belongs th the self administering body and their performance is reflected in the insurance premium cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 CASA's main aim is to protect ITSELF from threat of litigation. That's why it employs so many lawyers. Nev How many of the 1,000 employees are lawyers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 They write the stuff we pilots cannot understand, and if you didn't notice the lawyer did more talking that the CEO at the senators inquiry re the Jabiru matter. Their influence is all pervading. That's been well known for years. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 They write the stuff we pilots cannot understand, and if you didn't notice the lawyer did more talking that the CEO at the senators inquiry re the Jabiru matter. Their influence is all pervading. That's been well known for years. Nev If you don't understand, write back to them; the regulations are a dogs breakfast but very few people take the time to tell them. The Senate sequence you are referring to was an estimates committee; the lawyer was also a senior executive, there for the estimates committee as his position dictated. Lawyers draft the regulations, CASA is the regulator, no surprises there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 Interesting that you pitch a tale of the 400 kg gorilla, and the "one-sided Deed"; when you were a board member you just ignored the deed; so that it just so much hot air. Really? Quite an assumption without any knowledge and without merit for a further response. . . . . There's no Big Gorilla running around the Bowen Basin telling mining companies they have to have an SMS; Not the Coal Mines Regulation Act or the Dept of Mines or the Joint Coal Board or the Unions or . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 Really? Quite an assumption without any knowledge and without merit for a further response. No assumption; I refer you to the attached link "Sport Pilot Aviation Handbook 2010, and in particular, Page 24 which refers to checklists "to assist existing or incoming board members understand the responsibilities they are taking on as a board member of a recreational aviation administration organisation." Members might also like to read this handbook and see why CASA have been so agitated with the line RAA were taking. And there is quite a bit of discussion on this site, about the job specifications of board members. (Link to follow - pdf too large) Not the Coal Mines Regulation Act or the Dept of Mines or the Joint Coal Board or the Unions or . . . . Of course, now I remember the character assassination of Ed Herring, and Myles and all the time that 2010 handbook was hanging up there like the sword of Damocles...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 Link for #183 Sport Aviation Self Administration Handbook 2010 Google Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 No assumption; I refer you to the attached link "Sport Pilot Aviation Handbook 2010, and in particular, Page 24 which refers to checklists "to assist existing or incoming board members understand the responsibilities they are taking on as a board member of a recreational aviation administration organisation."Members might also like to read this handbook and see why CASA have been so agitated with the line RAA were taking. And there is quite a bit of discussion on this site, about the job specifications of board members. (Link to follow - pdf too large) My suggestion of "assumption" relates to your suggestion that I ignored the Deed. You were not a party to any correspondence on the Board Forum nor any Board Meeting, nor emails nor phone calls. So it can only be an assumption based on zero facts. One of the reasons RAAus achieved so little against the advisory booklet was that we were so underfunded. RAAus did work delegated by CASA to RAAus for which we were paid about 5% of what it cost. The same CASA responsibilities CASA carried out for GA and fully funded them. In the last 6 years my opposition to the Deed as a completely unbalanced arrangement has been unrelenting. Of course, now I remember the character assassination of Ed Herring, and Myles and all the time that 2010 handbook was hanging up there like the sword of Damocles...... WTF! I was not on the Board at anytime when Ed Herring was on the Exec nor when the nepotism involving Myles was being promoted. Again, Alan you come up with outlandish comments for which you have no capability of any substantiation. Have to say I am very disappointed and way below your usual standard of thoroughness. More like something you would expect from F_T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 For an assessment of the above comments, members might like to read the Self Administration Hanbook, which Don is now referriong to as an "advisory" document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 Should I accept that as an apology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 30, 2016 Share Posted September 30, 2016 F T is f t.. as I would be f h . Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now