Casa big brother out of control

[Guest Howard Hughes]

AFAIK there are a lot of Govt Officials who have a lot more power to enter private property than the police do. Various inspectors (Workcover, livestock, wildlife and fishing, meter readers etc) can enter your land without permission and do what they like as long as it is part of their job and they show identification.

My wife (a government official), can enter your property, seize your computer (or other personal effects) based on suspicion only, all without a warrant, the Police cannot!:ah_oh:

Sadly after the introduction of the DAMP legislation we were no longer allowed to have any alcohol on the premises at all, so no more drinks in the fridge for a quiet one after work. Not a step forward me thinks and no quantifiable benefit to safety!

 

 

[Yenn]

I'me lost. What is SSAA and DAMP?

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Safety sensitive aviation activities. and drug and alcohol management plans fully explained in the link in post 16

 

 

[Ben Longden]

I honestly think this incident needs to be reported formally to CASA.

 

Do it in writing with a copy to RAA.

 

This guy may be a contractor hired to do the job, but he still has to abide by the regulations.

 

mailto:[email protected]

 

Ben

 

Phone 131 757 (local call cost within Australia)

 

Mail GPO Box 2005

 

Canberra ACT 2601

 

CASA Corporate Headquarters

 

16 Furzer Street

 

Phillip ACT 2606

 

CASA Operations Headquarters

 

12 - 14 The Circuit

 

Brisbane Airport, Qld 4007

 

CASA confidential hotline 1800 074 737 If somebody is putting safety at risk - report it!

 

 

[Steve Donald]

hiya, Well the CASA Principle Medical Officer, is making an imediate investigation' it is a shame when an individual does things like this, it drags the whole show down down the tube, concidering the efforts Recreational Pilots and RAAUZ has put into safety and professional flying operations, so lets hope we all encounter some respect next time when a CASA request is made, good relations is paramount for all so we can communicate needs and proceedures, i am sure this was not how CASA wanted things done. Happy flying all.

 

 

[Steve Donald]

hi, our club has made a complaint directly to the PMO but as it is now under investigation i probably should not disclose names ect, however it is great that the process has been actioned.

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

big dog might express a differing opinion

It hasn't met my wife...

 

 

[Ben Longden]

hi, our club has made a complaint directly to the PMO but as it is now under investigation i probably should not disclose names ect, however it is great that the process has been actioned.

Good stuff. If the PMO is the bloke I'm thinking of, he really is a nice guy and will get to the bottom of the matter and have things sorted.

 

Ben

 

 

[Bill Hamilton]

Folks,

 

For anybody who wants to know, the CASA PMOs name is in the CASA web site.

 

The CASA regulations on drugs and alcohol are quite draconian, it will be at your peril if you are not familiar --- study them carefully, the penalties are equally draconian.

 

Remember the alcohol level is set at the minimum reliably detectable level, because zero (0) cannot be tested.

 

Remember, it drugs as well, and some well known illegal drugs are very persistent in the body, as several have found out already, at the cost of their jobs.

 

A positive test (for whatever reason --- including some prescribed medicines that will produce a positive) grounds you immediately. Getting back into the air, or back on the job may well the a lot longer.

 

Not only read the regulations --- the L-A-W law, but also the advisory material --- which constitutes the "acceptable means of compliance" with the law. In addition, there is quite a bit of educational material supplied by CASA.

 

What is happening here mirrors the early days of the security program, when under educated and over enthusiastic inspectors of doubtful intelligence, with an IQ of about their shoe size, damaged a number of aircraft, including at least one broken windscreen on a Jab, and several damaged locked door on parked Cessna --- yanking hard on them, to make certain they were really locked.

 

For those of you rabbiting on about "human rights" and "Privacy Acts", clearly you have been watching to much US TV, there is no Commonwealth Human Rights Act. If you want to appeal the effects of Australian law (State or Commonwealth) to the UN, make certain you have very deep pockets.

 

Any "common law" rights are negated by specific statute law. The various "privacy" acts have very limited functions, and will certainly not prevent the operation of enforcement functions of any other State or Commonwealth statute.

 

All politicians get completely carried away about "air safety", hence not only these rules, but read all about the new "security" rules, as the Minister said: "We face a greatly increased threat to air safety" ( which we demonstrably don't) yadda yadda three new offenses (two of them already in other the Civil Aviation Act -- nothing like doubling up) yadda yadda greatly increased penalties yadda yadda.

 

If you actually look at the new sercurity "rules" ---- observe how many of them are actually aimed at not inconveniencing an airline, and so costing money --- where a badly time humorous remark, with no intent to commit what "a reasonable man" would call a crime, becomes a criminal act.

 

Again remember, it is not just the cost of the fine, if you rack up a conviction under any of these rules --- but the limitations you will face if you attempt to travel to many countries, starting with Canada and the US.

 

Regards,

 

 

[kaz3g]

Hi everyone

 

Sounds like this lad has had a fit of the grandeurs and a documented complaint accompanied by the contact details of all the witnesses should be sent to CASA Ops. That gives them the opportunity to respond.

 

If satisfaction isn't obtained by way of an explanation and apology, then the complaint should be sent to the Commonwealth Ombudsman <www.ombudsman.gov.au> and Attorney-General and the somewhat invisible Minister.

 

A few thoughts to assist, however:

 

A badge is ordinarily not sufficient to identify an officer of the Crown and his authority - there should be an identification card with photograph of the bearer;

 

An authorised person may make requirements of persons to undergo breath tests, etc and it is an offence to refuse to do so. Better therefore to comply and bitch like mad afterwards than take the risk;

 

The person tested must be airside, in a hangar, in vicinity of aircraft etc to create the nexus with aviation. So the question is whether those tested were in a club house outside the fence restricting access airside, for example. In a hangar is obviously problematical;

 

The person claiming to be from CASA was probably not trespassing. There is an implied licence to enter private property and trespass does not occur until the person has been directed to leave it and refuses.

 

If the person was lawfully exercising his powers there is prima facie no breach of privacy if he records personal details of those tested. A breach of privacy under commonwealth law does not carry a pecuniary sanction as best as I recall. Failure to provide those details would enliven an arrest power;

 

If he wasn't lawfully exercising those powers and then decided to exercise a power of arrest because one of those present refused to provide details, the only legal recourse is for damages against him personally as the vicarious liability of the Crown is limited to lawful conduct by the officer (stinks, doesn't it?);

 

Irrespective of whether he had the legal power to do what he allegedly did, the officer was apparently appallingly unprofessional and this should cause the wrath of his superiors to descend upon his head.

 

Was he drunk or under the influence of drugs?

 

kaz

 

 

[kaz3g]

i just had a quick look at the regs on this and it seems that the test may only be conducted on an approved or registed airfield or building attached to or used for a ssaa. might have missed something or misinterpreted it. so come on all you bush lawers how do you read ithttp://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/099/099casr.pdf

Hi Ozzie

 

In addition to certified/registered aerodromes, testing is also covered in any situation which involves:

 

(b) calculation of the position of freight, baggage, passengers and fuel on

 

aircraft; and

 

© the manufacture or maintenance of any of the following:

 

(i) aircraft;

 

(ii) aeronautical products;

 

(iii) aviation radionavigation products;

 

(iv) aviation telecommunication products; and

 

(d) the certification of maintenance of a kind mentioned in paragraph ©;

 

and

 

(e) the fuelling and maintenance of vehicles that will be used to fuel aircraft

 

on aerodrome testing areas; and

 

(g) activities undertaken by a member of the crew of an aircraft in the course

 

of the person’s duties as a crew member; and

 

(h) the loading and unloading of trolleys containing baggage for loading onto

 

aircraft and the driving of such trolleys.....

 

The legislation does not further limit the testing power and it therefore applies on private airfields such as the one mentioned in this thread.

 

How many of us have gone back to our parked aeroplane to unload our bags at the end of a hot day AND after we have had a couple of coldies at the club? Or gone out to tie it down?

 

What are aeronautical products and what constitutes their maintenance? How about putting fresh batteries in the GPS at the clubhouse while having a quiet drink? How far does it go, you ask? How long is a piece of string?

 

QUESTION: Why did the powers-that-be decide it worth sending 2 Commonwealth Protective Services Officers to Griffiths on the Saturday of the Anzac weekend and 4 AFP Police on the Sunday and Monday? Aircraft security and BAC tests were their focus. This was the weekend of the AAAA Fly-in. How many drunken terrorists have you seen using Austers to bomb their victims?

 

kaz

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Answer: possibly because griffith has a reputation for burying problems under orange trees and thought they better have back up. Possibly needed the overtime.

 

who knows. Paranoia breeds weird people especially when the govt throws money at anyone who can show they have a tool to fight against percieved terrorisim.

 

 

[Powerin]

QUESTION: Why did the powers-that-be decide it worth sending 2 Commonwealth Protective Services Officers to Griffiths on the Saturday of the Anzac weekend and 4 AFP Police on the Sunday and Monday? Aircraft security and BAC tests were their focus. This was the weekend of the AAAA Fly-in. How many drunken terrorists have you seen using Austers to bomb their victims?

I think it doesn't matter. Politicians need to be seen to be addressing a problem. Whether the law actually achieves anything is irrevelant....as long as it looks like it does.

 

Reminds me of the time a number of years back when Victoria had a spate of car accidents only one of which was on the Hume Highway (a dual lane freeway). There was no evidence at all that the one on the Hume was caused by speed. There was an announcement that the govt was fighting the Victorian road toll and the nonsensical solution was to immediately drop the speed limit on the Hume from 110km/h to 100! Who knows how much it cost to change all the signage etc on 300km of road. It was quietly changed back to 110 a year (?) or so later.

 

The point is...they just wanted to be seen to do something. I think it's the same with airport/aircraft security etc. How do you fight that sort of mentality??

 

 

[Guest eland2705]

Almost a dopey as the "Security individual" who singled out a QANTAS Captain in full uniform, flight bag and official looking clipboard for a complete pat down, drug/explosives swab test in front of >bazillion passengers on the concourse of a major airport (hasten to add NOT in Oz).

 

The "SI" then got all tense and testy when said Captain mentioned that if he really wanted to pull a plane full of passengers out of the sky all he needed to do was put in a hefty boot of right rudder on takeoff! (true story - i know someone who had a girl friend who was related to someone who thought they saw it happen)

 

It takes all kinds! Put someone in a uniform of sorts and tell them they have a little authority. Works every time!

 

 

[The Wolf]

Almost a dopey as the "Security individual" who singled out a QANTAS Captain in full uniform, flight bag and official looking clipboard for a complete pat down, drug/explosives swab test in front of >bazillion passengers on the concourse of a major airport (hasten to add NOT in Oz).

So what you are saying is that a pilot would never attempt to smuggle drugs across a border? Who said any explosives on him would have been to blow up the plane? Is it not possible he may have attempted to take fireworks or the like across a border? One of them goes off in the cockpit and incapacitates both pilots?

 

Sounds like a smart and well trained security force to me.

 

 

[turboplanner]

There used to be a saying "Give a man a badge, and a blazer with his name on it and he'll take on the world".

 

However, the bizarre thing about this thread is that no one appears to be supporting the idea of making sure we cut down on the potential for drunks and drug sniffers to kill themselves, or kill innocent people.

 

What has been discussed here is a poorly trained, poorly skilled person who mucked up a check - hardly a potential killer of the same order as some of the others we put up with.

 

 

[Guest eland2705]

Valid point Turbo!

 

I think that the complaint is not what these inspectors are doing, but the way in which it was carried out.

 

I honestly believe that people in general have no issue with the need for security and for DNA (Drugs 'n Alcohol) Testing, but more with the way that they are carried out by a few, out of control, individuals who are on a power trip.

 

I work out of Point cook where security is controlled by the RAAF. The few times that I have been checked, either for my ID not being visible or for being somewhere I shouldn't have been they always been polite and curtious, whilst being effective in getting their message across. (Rank doesn't come into it either, as the SP was a Leading Aircraftsman, one bent stripe, and I wear three)

 

 

[Steve Donald]

Valid point Turbo!I think that the complaint is not what these inspectors are doing, but the way in which it was carried out.

 

I honestly believe that people in general have no issue with the need for security and for DNA (Drugs 'n Alcohol) Testing, but more with the way that they are carried out by a few, out of control, individuals who are on a power trip.

 

I work out of Point cook where security is controlled by the RAAF. The few times that I have been checked, either for my ID not being visible or for being somewhere I shouldn't have been they always been polite and curtious, whilst being effective in getting their message across. (Rank doesn't come into it either, as the SP was a Leading Aircraftsman, one bent stripe, and I wear three)

HIYA YOU ARE absolutely correct, we were in no way sujesting the testing is wrong, on the contrary we think that this is a good safety program for all, however we objected to the agressive conduct of this twit, if he was a prison officer testing prisoners he would have been in big trouble with his boss, same as the Police code of conduct , be respectful of the public ect, CASA has spent a lot of time building good relations with airmen and this can be so damageing, remember it wasn't that many years ago pilots lost their lives in a few incidents due to them being fearfull to ask for help ie radar assist or lost, and died for it, now CASA encourage you to ask, they understand humans will make mistakes, fact, so lets hope they get rid of any twits like this.

 

 

[sfGnome]

...they've always been polite and courteous, whilst being effective in getting their message across. (Rank doesn't come into it either, as the SP was a Leading Aircraftsman, one bent stripe, and I wear three)

Ah, well that might account for why they were so courteous...

 

 

[Guest eland2705]

not WGCDR mate, SGT!

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

CASA survey on Drug & Alcohol testing

 

Have your say on this issue! CASA sent me a letter informing me that they are conducting a survey "12 months on". Go to Survey to give them your opinion on Drug & Alcohol regulations and testing. A paper version is available from [email protected] or 03 9905 1900. Information in confidence - the report will not attribute individual comments - only summarise results.

 

Sue

 

 

[winsor68]

Thanks for that line... I just hope Casa listens to the results of the survey.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

I did the survey (link is back a couple of posts) - was supposed to be 20 mins but turned out to be more like 5min. The survey is a tick & flick about what they test for, what you have used, what you think is the most dangerous, has the D&A testing changed the way you / others use drugs & alcohol. There is a section for comments in which I did a rant and an invitation to join the focus groups in August to be held throughout the land.

 

So go to it and tell them what you think!

 

Sue

 

 

[Bill Hamilton]

However, the bizarre thing about this thread is that no one appears to be supporting the idea of making sure we cut down on the potential for drunks and drug sniffers to kill themselves, or kill innocent people.

Turbo,The fact is, aviation wise, it is a non-problem.

 

From the reports I have seen, of the many thousands of tests conducted, there have only been a handful of positives, plus a number of false positives. Re. pilots, as far as I can see, none of the positives were as a result of a drugs or alcohol problem. The positives included some who had been using over the counter products that contain codeine. World wide, there has been a huge over-reaction to a non-problem, but once the bureaucratic empire builders get a start, they are hard to stop. There never was a demonstrated problem, the results worldwide have established what we all said in the first place ---- but once the legislation is in place ----!!!!!

 

Re. the aggressive searches of airline technical crews in front of passengers, so as to cause the crews the maximum of embarrassment, delay and aggravation, UK airports are famous for this sort of behavior by the security nazis. I have had first hand experience.

 

Beware the new Australian "security" rules, making joking remarks about security procedures is to become a serious offence.

 

Regards,

 

 

[turboplanner]

The Victorian Road Toll has been reduced from a little under 1200/year to around 350/year over about a 30 year period.

 

At the beginning of that period rhetoric was replaced by research, and two facts came to the surface:

 

In most fatalities the person was no longer in the car, or had suffered severe injuries by being thrown into the windscreen etc.

 

In 50% of the fatalities the driver was drunk.

 

Governments acted on these clear indicators by introducing Seat Belt and blood alcohol legislation, and in both cases the death toll sharply declined.

 

In motor vehicles more recent Monash University research showed that in a study of 3400 fatalities in NSW, Victoria and WA drugs were found in 25% of cases and alcohol was found in 29% of cases (possibly with some of these overlapping).

 

This is the link to the report, and you'll find more on State Gov websites

 

http://www.monash.edu.au/cemo/roadsafety/abstracts_and_papers/089/road_safety_meeting_paper.pdf

 

These are the sort of people who, after a minor accident will get out and belt you with a tyre lever, and they are on the increase.

 

Demographically, pilots will be different, and I would expect to find the ferals who sit on their **** and smoke hash all day missing, to be replaced by those who can afford designer drugs, but people being people, I would expect to find a percentage taking the controls of aircraft.

 

Maybe the percentage of drugs in fatalities will not be 25%, but I suspect it will be over 10%

 

I bet 100% of the people reading this would not want to have the lives of family members taken by a drug affected pilot, and if that's the case the question is really how best to clear them out.