Prairie Chicken wrote:I do have a problem with the term 'college'. I would be more comfortable with another term which may be more appropriate to a group without authority over members.
I understand this and it sounds reasonable, even though I'm trying to consider the possibility of the whole thing being positive and that all pilots should try to at least hope it can be positive and supportive.
Since I'm have been missbehaving I will quote this excellent post from loopy. I agree he explained his concerns well and they don't sound extreamly negative.
loopy wrote:I'm a proponent of some sort of organization that answers to professional pilots and is a voice and advocate for those of us who work in this goofy business, which I love.
Having said that my issue is with the term "college". If you consider professions that have colleges, such as doctors and psychologists, they have both colleges and associations. The college regulates the profession and sets the requirements for entry to the profession. The association advocates on behalf of members of the profession, who have been admitted by the college.
The role of the college here is already taken by TC. Say what you will about them that is there role. Yes they are short staffed, yes hey do a tough job, yes...
The associations advocate on behalf of the pros, supporting efforts to change education, continuing education opportunities and suggesting changes to regulations and standards, and supporting individuals that have issues with the college, etc.
In our case that "association" would lobby for improving regulations and standards and supporting pilots and shining on the light on the lousy operators. You could say that is similar to what a pilots association for a given airline, in some cases union, does for the pilot corp of that airline. What we need is a greater voice for the industry as a whole. We are a collective stakeholder in ths industry and need a voice.
TC has had a recent history off spinning of certain divisions, ie NavCanada and the 604/POC program. With increased constraints of staffing and budgets, maybe they will go that way with licensing, but I'm not sure that should be our primary purpose. Having said that they, TC is backtracking and taking back responsibility for 604/POC. I highly doubt they are going to let go of licensing.
Does anyone else have an issue with the term "college"? I'm all for what is being proposed here, but I think our messaging may be wrong, especially as we seek legitimacy as an organization.
Interesting question Beef. I'm not hearing deception. I know the original idea did include some anticipation of delegations from TC which may enable the term College (and may still if that actually came to the table). I do suspect those who have been working on the 'College' project would be reasonably protective of the name but, being a democratic organization, I think the name would be subject to debate if members wished.
PS, edited to add, in case it wasn't clear, I thought Loopy's comments were spot on!
Your comments are correct in assumptions about "Colleges" vs "Associations". Some questions though:
1. Which came first for the other groups, the colleges or the associations?
2. Are the colleges headed up by administrators that have never practiced the profession that they represent?
3. Through attrition, TCCA are replacing pilots with non-pilot administrators. How do you feel about that?
Please don't interpret the above as an attack, I'm just asking.
Tom, good questions.
1. I'm not sure which came first, but know that as of now, in most if not all juristictions, both exist for a lot of "professions".
2. I can do some digging, but I think both organizations are most likely headed by members of that profession, and in both cases, by expert administrators and legal counsel.
3. While I can get that there may be professional "beurocrats" or "administrators" involved with the regulator I think it is a big mistake to not have experienced members of our profession, and other involved professions(ie, AME's and ATC), involved in running the show.
I think everyone is off solving the sort of problems that may have played a part in the Keystone accident. They were on a variety of threads, identifying all sorts of problems, and suggesting some solutions that sounded promising. Unfortunately, I don't think there was any organization, or group or individual that was willing to document those brain-storming sessions & present them to a suitable agency.
Prairie Chicken wrote:I think everyone is off solving the sort of problems that may have played a part in the Keystone accident. They were on a variety of threads, identifying all sorts of problems, and suggesting some solutions that sounded promising. Unfortunately, I don't think there was any organization, or group or individual that was willing to document those brain-storming sessions & present them to a suitable agency.
While you may be “Volunteering to improve the profession, and, its professionalism is a noble and selfless task” and that you may in fact be the “right guy for this and quite capable,” I do have a question for you as to your motivation.
Last year I wrote you a private email in regards my aviation situation of the time, looking for possible help and support from this noble ‘College of Pilots.’ Instead without a reply from you this private email ends up (deleted to avoid further lawsuits) used against me in (deleted to avoid further lawsuits). WTF?
If that is any example of how you propose to operate this college to help pilots; you can count me out and will never get my support again!
I have reviewed my notes. You sent your initial note to an email I use for PM's from this site. I responded to your note on or about Jan 14, 2012, just over six months ago and one day after first receiving your message.
My response was sent to the email you provided in the initial contact.
In the subsequent response you sent, you mentioned that in error you had sent the initial note from an unsecured email address and asked that any further correspondence should be sent to the newly provided address. I responded to that note from my College account and agreed that all further correspondence would be sent to the newly provided email. That was the last note I sent you, on Jan 15, 2012, two days after you first made contact.
I will be completely transparent and honest here. I did forward the content (not the email address) of your initial note to the College's Vice President and Treasurer to get their reaction and feedback. I can personally vouch for them that they would NEVER send your note anywhere that it should not be sent. Nor did I forward your email anywhere else. I suspect the error occurred when I replied to your first email at the unsecured address.
The nature of your story was indeed disturbing and upsetting. The topics discussed contained both industrial / labour / workers compensation issues- which would be outside the scope of the College- and professional conduct issues which would be inside the scope of a fully implemented College.
I do vividly recall reminding you that the College in its present form would be little help- however your story would serve as reminder as to why an organization such as the College should be implemented. I continue with that sentiment.
Respectfully,
Tom Machum
If you wish to pursue this further, you have my College email address. This is not the place for further discussion.
**Edit- when I first wrote this post, I thought my initial email response to you had been deleted. I have since found it and edited the text above to reflect that.
Nephilim, If you are having some sort of a problem dealing with this, WHY would you not deal with it in a private manner? WHY bring up, what is so obviously something between the two of you on an open forum of questionable maturity?
Same question for TomM...WHY attempt to deal with this in any way, shape or form on a public forum??? You want to appear to be "professional"??? WTF??? Air your laundry privately. Your dealings with Nephilim are between the two of you. Give your head a shake!
Can we all expect dealings with this "pipe dream" of yours to be aired here, for all to see, and comment on? C'MON Man!
Doc wrote:Nephilim, If you are having some sort of a problem dealing with this, WHY would you not deal with it in a private manner? WHY bring up, what is so obviously something between the two of you on an open forum of questionable maturity?
Agreed 100% Doc!
Same question for TomM...WHY attempt to deal with this in any way, shape or form on a public forum??? You want to appear to be "professional"??? WTF??? Air your laundry privately. Your dealings with Nephilim are between the two of you. Give your head a shake!
This is where I disagree Doc. Tom M was challenged publicly (which should have been done privately) and I believe he answered the attack professionally. Then he had the class and common sense to ask Nephilim if he had any further things to discuss, to please contact him at his private email, and this wasnt the appropriate place to discuss this any further. I think Tom M needed to address the personal attack publicly, as it was published publicly. I would have been concerned had he not addressed it at all. I think Tom M handled this professionally and even admitted he shared Nephilim`s email with a trusted board member. To me thats how it should be. What exactly did he do wrong in answering this personal attack as he did Doc?
Can we all expect dealings with this "pipe dream" of yours to be aired here, for all to see, and comment on? C'MON Man!
Approx 24,000 CPL`s in Canada....all he needs is 1/3 to support the "pipe dream" and voila...its reality. I wouldnt be so sure this is a pipe dream my friend.
Cheers & Fly safe as always. FTB
As someone who understands the need of a professional association/college, and have followed this thread with much interest, I have lost a lot of faith in those currently involved with regards to how this was handled, and I know that I am not alone in these sentiments. It does not matter if Tom was 'called out' in public or private, any response should have been privately dealt with - look at how companies approach AvCanada when they have an issue with something said on the forums.
Further - as to sharing the original email with others - if you were asked to not share the details; that was another trust that you broke - plain and simple. If you had felt that these people could help, then you should have suggested that first.
As I mentioned before, there is certainly a need to get all Canadian pilots organized; but it is not going to be a simple thing to do, and instances like this only serve to further shoot that association in the foot before it gets going.
