TCCA Inspector Recommends Professional Association

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

TCCA Inspector Recommends Professional Association

Post by Widow »

From the May 14th Committee Meeting:

Mr. Paul Carson (Flight Technical Inspector, Certification and Operational Standards, Transport Canada, As an Individual):
Thank you very much.

I'm going to read initially from what I've written. It's a little longer than seven minutes, but I'll cut it short.

I would like to personally thank the steering committee for taking the time to let me appear before you today to express my ideas. It should be made clear that I am here on my own accord, speaking as Citizen Carson, not Inspector Carson, or Captain Carson, or Dr. Carson--all of these euphemisms we attach to ourselves to make it easier for others to deal with us.

It should also be made clear that I personally am a believer in safety first and pretty much everything else second, including profit. I can unequivocally state that I am a supporter of concepts like SMS.

First, what is my background? It includes about 40 years of work experience, 30 of them in aviation; four university degrees, one in aeronautical engineering, including a PhD in applied math; approximately 10,000 hours of flying, all civilian, including for two prime ministers and several CEOs of a couple of Canada's largest corporations. I have been any number of things in my aviation career, including flight safety officer and occupational health and safety officer at a couple of companies. Many years ago I took a course on system safety at the University of Southern California in San Diego, and just recently I took TCCA's course on SMS.

SMS is not a new concept. It has been around in various forms for many years. There are many things about an SMS program that would be highly beneficial. It is certainly a better idea to have everyone in any organization safety conscious instead of vesting that job solely in an individual like me, for example, with minimal staff, as many air operators have done in the past.

Having the onus put on an organization to have them operate within a safety-minded culture is certainly better than operating any other way. However, although the concept of safety in itself can mean very specific things, it is sort of like a religion: you either believe in it or you don't. By that I mean you either believe you can operate safely within the rules and do the job cost effectively or you believe the rules you have been asked to follow are merely suggestions and the only thing that matters is the bottom line. Safety is expensive. Far too many aviation companies believe the regulations are just that, guidelines, and it is okay to bend them to the limit, if not outright break them, as long as nothing goes wrong or you don't get caught.

Hence the subject of my visit. In front of you today is something that I think is missing, in part, in order to make SMS work. And I would like to see it work.

Pilots need a nationwide self-governing, self-regulating professional association to which all professional pilots--and I mean those flying for hire or reward--must belong. In view of the changes presently occurring in the aviation industry with the introduction of SMS--a form of what I like to call “supervised” self-government and self-regulation for the air operator industry--they need it to provide a pilot input to balance company management, government regulators, and clients in the dynamic bargaining process that determines the industry environment. They need it to provide them with real whistle-blowing protection, since they will be the ones under SMS who really know what will be going on in the future, in my opinion. They need it to set standards for technical education required for the various types of aviation jobs, from entry-level commercial pilot to captain of high-performance passenger-carrying jet. They need it to ensure they receive the proper ongoing education to enable them to do each job with confidence and competence as they progress through their careers. Ethics will be taught and examined.

When I first wrote this paper, I talked only about pilots, since I am a pilot, but I would now extend the same concept to licensed maintenance engineers and certificated dispatchers. Also, for the record, I sent my ideas twice through TCCA's issues reporting system, and then in the form of a discussion paper to my current director and to the association to which I belong. So I have tried to communicate with a number of people.

What is missing from SMS is a check and balance system, in my opinion. It is one thing to give supervised self-government and self-regulation to an air operator, to the management, and the owners of a company, but it is an oversight not to give the same thing to the licensed pilots, maintenance engineers, and dispatchers who do the work. For example, without the licensed pilots employed by the company, the company cannot operate. These licensed individuals need their own self-governing, self-regulating association that will provide them the protection they very much need from any unscrupulous employer on those occasions when an employee feels the need to blow the whistle on the company for safety violations. We've had incidents of this in the past, recently in Toronto. This body needs to be the licensing authority for these individuals, not the governing authority, in my opinion.

Other professions have self-regulating associations that influence the environment their members work in, set professional qualification standards, and continue to judge their professional competency. Such professional associations also intervene on behalf of their members or the general public, if necessary, when there are security and safety concerns. Engineers, doctors, and lawyers all have self-regulating associations, as do other professions.

Anyone who wishes to practise one of these professions must satisfy the standards set by the association and must be a member in good standing. These associations also discipline members who have failed to meet the obligations and responsibilities of their profession. No one gets a free ride.

Regarding common interests, many professional pilots—again, those who use their licence to fly for hire or reward—have no opportunity to belong to any association. I'm aware of only three major trade associations for pilots in Canada: the Canadian Federal Pilots Association, for pilots employed by the federal Department of Transport, to which I belong; the Air Line Pilots Association, Canada, ALPA Canada, for pilots employed by various regional airlines; and the Air Canada Pilots Association, ACPA, for a grand total of approximately 4,000 pilots.

The last time I checked, over 19,000 aviation licences, belonging to commercial and airline transport pilots, are in force in Canada, enabling their holders to offer their services as professional pilots. The vast majority of professional Canadian pilots, who work as flight instructors, bush pilots, charter pilots, corporate pilots, agricultural spray pilots, air ambulance pilots, or any other of the many varieties of flying jobs in aviation, have no professional association.

I could go on at length; I'm limited in my time here.

For those who belong to a professional association, say, regarding the law.... If you read this section on education, you'll understand a lot more about where I'm coming from because this forms a lot of it. It's a couple of pages, and I have to skip over to a section entitled, “Other Functions”. If you read that, then you'll appreciate the next comment.

I dealt at length with knowledge and licensing as a responsibility of the proposed professional pilots association, because I feel it is the foundation upon which any claim to professionalism must be made. That's essential. However, besides knowledge and licensing, the professional pilots association would take responsibility for representing pilots and providing specialist assistance—say, in accident investigation—and for encouraging and even sponsoring research into airframe, engine, and system design, and into the civic aspects of aviation personnel management and interpersonal behaviour, something that today we call the human factors.

Another important function would be presenting the pilots' point of view as a group on proposed legislative changes, as part of the consultation process with industry owners and operators. Company management is judged by whether they show a profit at the end of the year. While pilots are by no means immune to the profit motive, they are also aware that the high salaries they may earn mean little when you arrive first at the scene of an accident.

Membership in a professional pilots association must be mandatory for all pilots who fly for hire or reward, just as professional engineers must belong to their provincial professional association if they are paid for their services as engineers. Such professional membership must be a legal, regulatory requirement with no waivers or exceptions possible. Voluntary membership in a professional association would not be sufficient.


In conclusion, to accomplish the changes I have suggested will take organization, experience dealing with government, and certainly familiarity with the aviation industry, at the very least. The existing pilots trade associations could act as the nucleus around which a professional association, such as I have outlined above, could grow.

A professional association also needs legal status. We must have a federal professional pilots act, or something similar, to give the association legal existence and the powers it will need.

As well, federal empowerment will address our obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The remaining requirements would be hard work and some dedication.

Thank you for listening.

Full transcript available here: http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteePu ... &COM=10462
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
W0X0F
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:00 am
Location: Right of the Rocks

Post by W0X0F »

Bingo!

Widow, there are few with a clearer insight as to what is wrong with this industry than you.

Transport Canada needs to get out of aviation licencing. I firmly believe that the professional association is the only way to go.

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 02&start=0

Doctor, engineers, liars oops I meant lawyers, hell even golfers have their own self regulating association that is far more effective than what we professional pilots have. And as your article pointed out, a check and balance is what is required. SMS is great for the operators but the employees also need an advocate. TC is useless so they may as well be gone entirely.
---------- ADS -----------
 
snaproll20
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:50 pm

Post by snaproll20 »

Yes, BINGO!!!!

The need for a professional pilot association has come up many times.
Unfortunately, the driving force has always been money, ergo, a UNION.
What Paul Carson suggests is not a union, but an association, that, properly constituted, can go a long way to improving things for all the pilots.

Right on!!!

However...........the COMPANIES still stand alone. In the face of wrongful conduct by TCCA, if the company goes down, the pilots are out of jobs, so I still feel that such an association should be mandatory for companies too. I am therefore repeating my call for an Ombudsman for all aviation companies in Canada. (Thus removing the mandatory inclusion and the opportunity to opt out.)This would include the rights of pilots if their company chose to protect them. I still see this as a win-win for everyone in an environment when any Inspector's personal view is paramount and protected by legions of lawyers, no matter how wrong he/she may be.

Carson quotes the number of unionized pilots to active 'pro' pilots and it seems to me that the same kind of ratio exists for companies that do belong to associations. Similarly, these organizations typically look after the larger companies and the smaller ones are still at the mercy of TCCA, without a voice other than expensive appearances at the Tribunal and civil court. Many small companies will not pay the dues for associations because their interests are not espoused by the associations.

I recently heard about someone who has suffered financial losses due to TCCA inefficiencies and clumsy application of the rules. It is really quite disgusting that such high-handedness and uncaring attitudes exist when TCCA themselves cause the problem all the way through.

But, what else would I expect?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Post by Hedley »

I recently heard about someone who has suffered financial losses due to TCCA inefficiencies and clumsy application of the rules
That's putting it extremely politely. I'm sure if you added up what Transport has cost me, it would be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Hedley on Sun May 27, 2007 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

Finally someone is suggesting a workable means to maintain a safety standard.

One more thing needs to be done if and when this suggestion were to become reality.

A fair and complete investigation into the way TCCA has been mismanaged by the present top TCCA managers who are nothing less than low level criminals in their methods.

Those found guilty must be put in jail to in a small way bring some closure for the people they have destroyed by their dishonest and crooked use of their positions in TCCA.

I have some credible evidence of lawlessness in TCCA that should slam the prison doors on a couple of their top people....

...hell I wold love to go and stare through the bars at them just to reinforce that there is still rule of law in Canada.....but it ain't gonna happen because the fix is in to deep
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
User avatar
kzcvtm
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:05 am
Location: North of CYKZ

Post by kzcvtm »

Even though I don't have my commercial license yet, I have to agree with Widow's posting. The thing is, I see all those who are wanting for an association but no one is attempting to even start such an enterprise.

We have many, experienced, knowlegable people on this board who would be an excellent executive board for such an organization - ie CatDriver, Widow, Hedley, etc. This would simply be the beginning.

We would have to look at the association as a whole, identify what we need to accomplish vis a vis a proper action plan that will benefit ALL pilots across the country. We would also require the backing of other established associations and best of all, some support from the Federal Government leaders and their cabinet members as well as other Members of Parliament.

With support from those areas, we could become a powerful force, and maybe then change will be allowed to happen. As it stands now, TC is far too powerful. A grassroots approach should start now, and build towards a strong voice for all pilots - whether or not they work commercially or are simply weekend pilots for recreation.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Post by Widow »

Perhaps the formation of a petition, such as the one I've created for my "cause", would be an effective means of conveying to the government the support for this idea?

I know that a group on this board had begun the formulation of such an association in the past, perhaps we/you could call on that information for use in a presentation to submit with a petition?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
carholme
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 430
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:29 am

Post by carholme »

I believe in associations and what they can do for various groups in the industry. However at this time, I do not agree with the TC inspector who testified at the hearings. TC have never asked any of us what we thought of the idea of an association and here he is at the table putting forth an agenda which smacks of lobbying.

The pool of money available for the licensing transition will cloud the ideals of any group or association who would look at taking over any of the tasks of our government agencies.

Our company is in a fight against the initiatives of Bill C-6 regarding SMS, especially for 703. We have also submitted claims against TC and their actions under present management and accused them of being "enablers" of many of the present difficulties in Canadian Aviation. Their inspectorate is becoming a group of accountants performing audits rather than an accountable regulator who should be getting back to it's roots of being actively involved in Canadain aviation, rather than it's present arms length, big stick.

The regulator must be in control of government licensing as a function of government which represents to the rest of the world, the standard of our system. The statement that we have the safest sysytem in the world is laughable at the moment but it is what we should be able to attain. We are so busy talking about the culture of safety under SMS, we forget how long it is going to take that cultural change to happen and again, we do not believe that you can mandate that kind of change and expect results in the short term. What needs to happen first, is that industry needs to apply some thinking to it's present problems and get back to some sound foundation with the regulator before we can move ahead with other lofty goals.

We need a strong TC working in conjunction with industry to meet a higher standard but the regulator must also be accountable to meet a high standard as well. We do need an office of Ombudsman that can provide the neccessary third party arbitration in areas of disagreement between the regulator and industry or individual operators or license holders.

Associations for various groups will inevitably prove to be at loggerheads with each other as they strive to demand better conditions for their representatives and may tend to act in a selfish manner rather than a unified response from industry. There are too many complexities in the short term. We should be getting our feet back on the ground first.

This forum shows the diverse opinions of pilots, engineers, flight attendants, operators, AMOs etc., and should provide an understanding of what difficulties associations for these groups will encounter.

Let associations do what they are supposed to do, represent their members but leave the licensing and regulation to the agency which has always held that function, TC.

Our fight, in our opinion should be to get TC back to a position of transparency and integrity. That is our responsibility. We have talked to many operators across the country who have suffered under TC recently but who are not going to join the fight because they do not want TC coming down on them. That is a rather sad indictment of ourselves when after all, it is our industry, not theirs.

Regards

carholme
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

Reading through all the testimony from the two TC inspectors I noted a very wide gap in how each saw TCCA.

One inspector who is no longer at TCCA was quite critical of the inner workings of TCCA.

The other inspector saw TCCA as almost next to God in its adherrance to fair and just oversite and I gathered he never ever saw anything wrong with TCCA's upper management.

Why such a disparity in opinions?

Who is one expected to believe when we see such a wide gap in how different TCCA inspectors see the inner workings of the regulator?
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Flying Nutcracker
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:14 pm

Post by Flying Nutcracker »

Cat,

I wish I had read this before I made my statements in the other thread, because this guy is obviously more in tune with reality than so many others, including myself I guess. This has made my views more in line with what you have said in the past, not that I have disagreed with you, and I see the real need for representation. I am however still of the opinion that with the right approach to certain issues, SMS alone can go a long way.

The problem, like others have pointed out, is how do we establish an association without the obstacles of finances? That should be the key to success, in my mind. Don't expect it to happen overnight... but with the right minded people, and persistency, I can see it happen down the road.

Thank you for posting this, Cat! And again, my apologies!

FN
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

Nutcracker:

( Writing that word makes me tense :mrgreen: )

I have not been in an airplane now since April 29/06 when I walked off the flight deck of a MD11 that I jump seated home on from Amsterdam when I retired from flying for a living, and I am spending far to much time posting on avcanada because aviation has been my life and aviation safety has been my main driving force for decades.

At one time in my career I had considered getting a law degree and specalize in aviation, however I ended up staying in flying and learning how to swim through the legal channels by doing.

One thing has stood out crystal clear in my forays into the legal side of aviation and that is there is a high bar to step over when trying to deal with any government agency for the simple reason that they have legions of lawyers to throw crow bars in your spokes to stop you from getting even close to a fair and just resolution of any issue that may reflect badly on their performance.

Thus we have what we see today, lots of noise and smoke and mirrors with no clear avenue to our end goal, ensuring the higest level of safety possible and still have a functional profitable industry.

During my legal battle with TCCA in the Air West Airlines case I came to a conclusion that one way to police the industry ( and without policing it can not function legally. ) is to form an association of chief pilots.

A chief pilot has the power ( or should have ) to police his flight operations as he/she is the hands on federally appointed person who has the power to ensure that the law is abided by in the flight operations of the company that they are appointed to by the regulator.

In the Air West case I proved that to be a fact when I brought TCCA in front of a federal court to answer as to why they would not back me in ensuring that the airline was operated according to law.

Once the court ruled in my favour it occured to me that if all chief pilots belonged to an association they would have far more power to ensure that the flight operations were conducted in a safe and legal manner and being an association it would be a no brainer to police renegade chief pilots within the industry and remove them.

Anyhow my idea never really went anywhere and now that I am finally out of aviation as an occupation I wish I had put more energy into trying to really make that concept work.

Hindsite is great isn't it?

Also I have to be a bear for punishment as I just never seem to be able to just say fu.k it, it isn't my problem.....but of course it is because I'm at heart still an aviator and it hurts me to see so many accidents that may have been prevented with more stringent oversite and a more professional mindset from management.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”