CBC's Fifth Estate to explore air safety - Sept. 25th

[Highflyinpilot]

That report burns me up inside .
Tax dollars at work......Yeah right



Thats all I can say.

[Changes in Latitudes]

There were never any " Good old days " as far as TC shutting down bad operators in the over fifty years I was in the industry.

However the good days will only come to fruition when the pilots and engineers refuse to cut corners and refuse to work for the outlaw companies.

It is a sort of SMS enforced by people who want to do it right by their actions and that does not require any paper work to make it work because the paper work is already done in the Aernautics Act and the CAR's.

I couldn't agree more.

The onus is on us, the worker bees, to keep the ship going straight, not to sit and wait for Transport Canada to tell us to "Safen Up!". We've had 100 years to figure out how not to run airplanes into solid objects; how much more babysitting from Transport do we need? Yes, the small shady operators are always going to be there to pressure the impressionable into unsafe conditions. They've been there without SMS and they'll be there WITH SMS. Recall the pre-SMS world. Was TC out there shutting down every shifty operator? The worst ones thrived and flew under the radar until it bit them, same scenario will hold true with SMS. Guess whose turn it is to step up and put a stop to it? OURS. I refused unsafe conditions at 500 hours, and the guy behind me needs to keep that trend going, it's her/his job as a PROFESSIONAL. REFUSE THE WORK.

The 5th Estate, like always, overlooked the entire story in efforts to portray a FOX-type, scare you into-watching-more, tv program. Constant shots of AC and Westjet followed by "People are going to die". There were some excellent facts given there and it could have served as an excellent educator for the general public as to the true situation of our ailing industry. However, in my opinion, and in the opinion of the less aviation-savvy audience that I viewed this program with, it was lost to pure media sensationalism.

I quite enjoyed the reference to aircraft being operated by inexperienced pilots in Canada. It took me 10 years of earned stick and rudder, hard knock education before I got to the 705 world. My same experience would have landed me an airline slot in the US 5-6 years earlier, and even less with the right paperwork (or purchasing power) in the EU. Can someone tell of all these unemployed 500 hour wonders where the inexperienced pilot work is that so plagues our industry? I always thought it involved a broom of some sort.

[highlander]

I was rather disappointed with the whole story.

For one thing: the story seemed disjointed- One minute we're talking about security screening and the next about crash investigations. Yes, they all fall under TC but I think the story needed a bit more structure for the non-aviation types. I think we had 2 stories here not one.

1) Nothing was mentioned about CATSA and its role in airport security screening. Even if it falls under TC there was little or no mention of it.

2) The story about the Transat passenger/ airport employee taking a bag through without screening was weak and lacked any proof or substance to it.

3) SMS was very briefly mentioned but even the term (to the best of my knowledge) was never brought forward with a simple explanation (if there is such thing)

[Widow]

For everyone who thought the Fifth Estate didn't do enough, please see this thread: The Walrus: Fly at your own risk

[ywgflyboy]

Makes me sick.... Too bad nothing will happen until a plane blows up with government ministers on it.

[Hot Fuel]

When it comes to safety the airline industry has always been a fly-fix-fly mentality, its never been very pro-active. SMS is an effort to change the common mind set that safety is the companies responsibility.

[Widow]

SMS is an effort to change the common mind set that safety is the companies responsibility.

From the top down and bottoms up, as someone so aptly put it to me recently. Why doesn't same apply to TC management? Put your own house in order first. Lead by example.

Just how well does TC's own "non-punitive reporting system" work?

[Cat Driver]

Just how well does TC's own "non-punitive reporting system" work?

It is almost 100% effective widow.

Very few TC employees risk losing their jobs and pensions by going against their top management.

Which accounts for the unaccountability of TC's top management they have almost created the perfect circle.

[Widow]

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/20091019562 ... e-new-laws

Editorial: Whisteblowers afraid to speak despite new laws

By Glenn Kauth | Publication Date: Monday, 19 October 2009

In a recent documentary, CBC’s The Fifth Estate highlighted yet more problems with Canada’s record on enforcing airport safety rules.

The story stemmed from a student’s discovery of a computer memory stick in a coffee shop. On it were warnings from a government security inspector that officials are compromising public safety in favour of “profit and convenience.”

But besides shedding light on a safety issue that would disturb most Canadians, the report drew attention to yet another problem in our laws: the lack of adequate protection for whistleblowers who report wrongdoing.
That’s because the inspector who issued the warnings wouldn’t talk about them.

He feared reprisals for what he had done and told reporter Hana Gartner that he knew of other government employees who had suffered badly for coming forward with problems. In the end, he instructed her never to call him again.

His reaction isn’t surprising, of course, but it is troublesome given both the gravity of the safety issue at hand as well as the fact that the federal government was supposed to have addressed the reticence of whistleblowers to come forward in the wake of the sponsorship scandal several years ago.

Obviously, changes by the former Liberal government to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act and later amendments to it under the Conservatives’ Federal Accountability Act aimed at making it easier for bureaucrats to report problems haven’t worked.

In assessing the legislation, in fact, the organization FAIR (Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform), includes this warning to government employees on its web site: “Public servants who are considering making a disclosure under the new legislation should first pause and make sure that they fully understand how it works before they entrust their fate to this deeply flawed process.”

Among the problems, according to FAIR, is that the legislation doesn’t provide ironclad protection for workers who report wrongdoing. So, if they feel they’ve suffered retaliation for their actions by a manager, for example, they can make a complaint to the public sector integrity commissioner, Christiane Ouimet.

She may then start an investigation but, FAIR says, procedures for doing so are problematic for three reasons: employees have just 60 days to file a complaint; they have little legal support compared to the government; and they face the onus of proving their problems at work were the result of retaliation. In other countries, laws provide for a reverse onus that requires the employer to show the adverse treatment wasn’t due to whistleblowing.

The Conservatives, of course, can justly argue that their Federal Accountability Act brought in useful reforms. But the reaction by the airport security inspector shows government employees are still very fearful of reporting wrongdoing.

Canadians deserve better. That would require changes to our laws, but until the public speaks up, we’ll depend on lost memory sticks in coffee shops to find out what’s really going on within our government.

— Glenn Kauth

[Sidebar]

until the public speaks up, we’ll depend on lost memory sticks in coffee shops to find out what’s really going on within our government.
— Glenn Kauth

Seems like a big coincidence that a journalism student found the "lost" memory stick! I wonder how many more memory sticks will get "lost."