New jobs at TC : Civil Aviation Program Managers

[jeta1]

Notice how there is no requirement whatsoever for experience in aviation, to be a Civil Aviation Program Manager.

[Sasquash]

what a saving from an actual ATPL rated Inspector!!!

Wages differential, annual training, no more 48 hrs to remain "current" !!! Who cares they don't know squat about airplanes anyway !!!

[snoopy]

luckyboy,

Thank you (I think) for nominating us/me for this exciting position, but speaking for myself I can assure you I will never darken the door of Transport Canada unless it is to head a public Inquiry: http://safeskies.ca/mission.html.

Besides, given some inside information and documentation I have recently been made privy to, I now have even more evidence that the upper echelon at Transport Canada operates above the law.

Somehow, though the rank and file at Transport Canada claim they lack the resources to shut down the shoddy operators, the upper bureaucrats sure seem to be able to waste a lot of resources in getting a good operator to comply with policy, by bullying and threatening them (verbally AND in writing) with suspension in order to get their way, instead of changing the laws to meet their policies.

I find it amusing, and somewhat redeeming to know that this can actually come back to bite them in the ass.

Besides, I'd far rather be in an aircraft (heli or fixed/wing) flying, than sitting behind some desk.

Best Regards,
Kirsten B.

[Widow]

I, too, am grateful to be nominated (I need a *paying* job), and thankful that aviation experience is neither required, nor noted as an asset.

However, I doubt I, or Kirsten B, or Cat, would pass the "reliability security clearance".

Just sayin' ...

Kirsten S.

[Cat Driver]

I don't know if my application would even be accepted because if TC would not allow me to operate a flying business or even fly in Canada would they want me working for them?

[SkyWolfe]

Oddly, I actually fit some of those qualifications LOL

Home Depot pays off again!! j/k

[Brewguy]

Notice how there is no requirement whatsoever for experience in aviation, to be a Civil Aviation Program Manager.

And why do you think there should be such a requirement?

Not everybody who works for NASA is an astronaut... A jockey who rides a race horse doesn't need to also be a veterinarian, nor does the bookie taking bets on the race have to have been a jockey.

A job, any job, should require the person to have the right skill set for the tasks associated with the job. Why does every person in every industry think that what they do is so unique? A bureaucratic desk jockey, implementing a 'system' should understand something about how systems work. They should be analytical types, someone who can make sure the parts of the system make logical sense.

They're looking for the same type of people that implement safety and/or quality programs in all sorts of industries ... as they should be. What they need is someone who can recognise when part of an existing system isn't working and recommend that it be changed. They also need to be able to communicate well. Thinking that just because the department has the word 'aviation' in the title, everyone should be a pilot or AME makes no logical sense whatsoever. I'd rather see them hire someone from a similar position with experience in another industry (mining, steel, etc), rather than some washed-up ATPL who can't get a flying job. Have them bring in some practical 'lessons learned' from other industries.

Just my 2 cents.

[Widow]

Hi Neil,

Considering what the job entails,

Conducts audits, quality assurance reviews, and special investigations, regarding the application of departmental policies.

Plans and conducts research/studies on issues related to specialised technical areas, such as safety management reporting and control systems/practices, for the purpose of drafting or recommending changes to existing or new regulations and standards.

Researches, analyses, drafts and recommends procedures and instructions to provide Transport Canada staff with clarification on regulations and standards to assist in delivering services and conducting surveillance of aeronautical activities.

I would have thought that experience with CARS and the AA, at least on some level, would be preferable. As many have said elsewhere, aviation is a unique industry. What works in other industries may not work so well in this one.

Kirsten S.

[armchair]

Thinking that just because the department has the word 'aviation' in the title, everyone should be a pilot or AME makes no logical sense whatsoever.

While you have a defensible argument, I dont think it was implied that only pilots or AME should count as aviation experience. Case in point, most TCCA senior managers now are neither. Aviation experience can come from many different sources, including business, engineering, air traffic control, aviation law, and others.

[Brewguy]

Fair enough. My point is more that TC often equates 'aviation experience' with a license of some sort. I agree, one can certainly have aviation experience and not be an ATPL or AME. I've spent many years involved with both Air Cadets and CASARA; and some of the people I've worked with in those organizations have a vast level of relevant experience, despite only being a private pilot, gliding instructor etc. as well as others with no license of any kind.

I've known a few search coordinators who had no flight experience, but were experts at other aspects of SAR.

I do have to disagree with Kirsten on one point though, and that's about the aviation industry being 'unique'. Okay, I suppose technically each and every industry, heck each and every business is unique in some way. But in reality, if you've worked in a variety of sectors, you'll find each is not so unique after all. Best practices from one industry often carry over well into others.

I still believe a policy & procedures type person, with safety / quality / project / operations management experience in another sector could easily fit the bill here. For a person who can read & understand law, the Aeronautics Act & CARs are not that difficult to learn.

The biggest problem I think we currently face, is that so many of the (ATPL/AME) background people at TC think they understand these regs, but actually misinterpret them badly. I'd much rather have a paralegal (as an example) do an audit, and compare what they've ticked off on a checklist to a reg they can actually interpret correctly.

Look at engineering as an example. Engineers have to go into a wide variety of different industries and do highly technical things... it doesn't necessarily matter that they do not have 100% expertise in that industry; They know what is applicable to their specific task.

[Old fella]

I, too, am grateful to be nominated (I need a *paying* job), and thankful that aviation experience is neither required, nor noted as an asset.

However, I doubt I, or Kirsten B, or Cat, would pass the "reliability security clearance".

Just sayin' ...

Kirsten S.

Suppose I can speak with some experience - I was there. I am an old fool now and was a young fool then. I passed the "reliability/enhansed security clearance" as as the saying goes" if i can , anybody can".

I am sure it won't be an issue for you and on a more serious note(from what I have seen with TC Aviation and it personel), you would indeed be a good candidate, not at the CAI level cause of no licence qualifications(am I correct), but certainly at the various GT levels such as posted..

[snaproll20]

Well said, Snoopy. Go gettem!!!
You certainly raised my curiosity. We all know the previous DGA was of questionable character but proof is great stuff!
(Not to say that what Cat Driver, myself and others have is not valid.)

neil is right, you do not have to be a pilot or know the CARS to study a system, but by golly, as Widow says, it sure helps in a unique industry.

This hiring advertisement reinforces the rumours about clip-board-toting know-nothings running around firing off suspension notices for non-compliance.....of exactly WHAT?

I can see some of the crooks chortling as the good safe companies get shut down for not stamping the date on an SMS report response, thus demonstrating non-compliance with something not quite defined.

Ah well. Maas tequila Jose, por favor. So glad to be retired.

[Brewguy]

Ah well. Maas tequila Jose, por favor.

On that, I think we can all agree!

[Hedley]

Why don't they just hire a bunch of MBA's fresh
out of school, with no knowledge of the industry
at all?

(snort)

[CD]

Why don't they just hire a bunch of MBA's fresh
out of school, with no knowledge of the industry
at all?

Didn't Air Canada already scoop those?

There are pilot positions available too:

Civil Aviation Safety Inspector - 5 positions; Locations include the GTA, Hamilton, Ottawa, Sudbury, Thunder Bay
Engineering Test Pilot - 1 position; Ottawa

Other positions are posted here:

Job Opportunities - Department of Transport

[hairdo]

See, if they hire someone outside of aviation, then the big boys on top can tell them to do stuff that no AME/Pilot/aviation experienced person would do. Why? Because they have no idea what is right and wrong, just what the big man says. So, they are more pliable, able to be molded into more crooked idiots, all without them knowing it. I think TC has a great plan (from their point of view, not mine) to not require aviation experience, because now they will be able to perpetuate their regime, and for less $$$!