Falsifying personal records

[4930's]

I have tried to search TC regarding the fines and or ramifications of falsifying personal flight records, with the company's knowledge and encouragement. And no it's not me.

[just curious]

West jet, and some of the elders at Air Canada might offer a more succinct answer. Essentially, Transport giveth and Transport taketh away. Especially when it comes to licences.

[moocow]

Hard to say from reading this article from TC but if the individual is faking flight logs to obtain a license then for sure he/she is in trouble. However, to fake personal record for a job could be consider to gain an advantage.

These are all serious offences that were wilfully and knowingly carried out by the offenders for the purpose of obtaining some degree of personal gain or advantage.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... s-6173.htm

[snoopy]

If you know which reg is being violated, click on the link for Schedule II in "Designated Provisions": http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/r ... htm#103_07 to find out the financial cost. Violations may come under several sub-sections of the CARS - upping the cost. If you are referring to personal records (i.e.) logbook as they pertain to achieving a higher license, the appropriate section will likely be Part IV. If the person in question doesn't actually meet the qualifications for a license or rating, the license or rating can be taken away - with penalty - and the violation entered on their TC file. As far as I know the information kept on file is permanent.

Cheers,
Kirsten B.

[FlyGy]

Ultimately I would think that the pilot is responsible for the log entries, regardless of the pressures put on by the company. Here's the only TC enforcement I can find:

Instructor falsifying a student log:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... e-3968.htm

Here is some info on sanctions.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... 12-457.htm

[Aviatard]

Aeronautics Act 7.3:

7.3 (1) No person shall

(a) knowingly make any false representation for the purpose of obtaining a Canadian aviation document or any privilege accorded thereby;

(b) wilfully destroy any document required under this Part to be kept;

(c) make or cause to be made any false entry in a record required under this Part to be kept with intent to mislead or wilfully omit to make any entry in any such record;

Punishment, individuals

(4) An individual who is convicted of an offence under this Part punishable on summary conviction is liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars and, in the case of an offence referred to in subsection (1), to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or to both fine and imprisonment.

Link here:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... .html#h-27

[Snagmaster E]

I read that it also applies to every incidence of the violation i.e. if you've had 600 flights since the falsification to obtain a license, then you've the potential of 600 violations.

[FlyGy]

I read that it also applies to every incidence of the violation i.e. if you've had 600 flights since the falsification to obtain a license, then you've the potential of 600 violations.

Correct.

12.3.2 Prosecution

In the case of a summary conviction offence involving multiple violations where prosecution is the desirable option, the DOJ shall be advised of Transport Canada's intention to lay charges in respect of each flight conducted in contravention of the regulations; that is, each flight should be set out as a separate count.

[just curious]

Might as well read what it says on Passport and Raic applications as well as employment applications.

That question that asks if you have ever been convicted of an offence for which you have not received a pardon.

Once you read all the helpful advice above, see what your company's policy is regarding legal support in criminal proceedings. If you are working for a rarely mentioned YWG charter company, the answer may disappoint you.

[grimey]

http://canlii.org/eliisa/noteUpSearch.d ... 3&subsec=1

[Panama Jack]

On a separate matter, the violation on June 14, 2008 in the Ontario region is a bizarre one. There must be more to this story.

[Prairie Chicken]

Which one is that PJ?

[Panama Jack]

Which one is that PJ?

Ontario June 14, 2008 CAR 602.96(4) $1,500 monetary penalty

An airline transport pilot flying a Wag-aero Cuby Coupe aircraft arrived at an aerodrome and conducted a low approach and overshoot instead of being at 2,000 feet or above which is required when overflying an aerodrome. The pilot was sanctioned with a $1,500.00 monetary penalty.

 

[Meatservo]

Maybe he blatantly "buzzed" the aerodrome and later tried to use the old "low and over" excuse to try and get out of hot water.

Back on topic, I think that anyone who falsifies personal records, especially where it concerns experience and currency, should be tarred and feathered. Not metaphorically, I mean actually tarred and feathered.

[Colonel Sanders]

falsifies personal records

Metaphysical question time. If you don't log all your flights
in your personal log, is that a "falsification"? I know TC would
go bananas if you forget to make an entry in the Journey Log,
is it the same with a personal log?

My father hasn't made an entry in his personal log for years.

A friend of mine, Garth Wallace, used to make one entry a year
in his personal logbook until he quit flying. Not much point.

[Prairie Chicken]

I agree PJ, without checking the schedules, $1500 sounds like a lot. I suspect the pilot was either a recidivist or there were aggravating circumstances.

[Liquid Charlie]

My father hasn't made an entry in his personal log for years.

While I'm not your father - a very close person to me hasn't made an entry in his log book since 1974 - is still working commercially and had several jobs since then and never needed to produce a log book --

[co-joe]

I'm still curious what happened to the guy who got hired at WS and almost went on line without an ATP. There was talk of possible jail time...

[Colonel Sanders]

Before your time, but there was a guy at Canadian - merged
with AC - who forged his ATPL and flew the line for years
before he was caught. He just couldn't get past the writtens.

[Meatservo]

I think, in answer to your "metaphysical" question, that NOT logging flights might, strictly speaking, be "falsifying" your log if you then presented your log as an accurate depiction of your current status. Like if you presented an incomplete logbook and then said, "Look at me, I have not exceeded my duty hours this month", or "..so you see, your honour, as my logbook clearly indicates that I was NOT flying on the 23rd, it could not possibly have been me who dropped leaflets on the Prime Minister's residence".

And so on. But I see no real moral problem with not filling out your logbook. I am bad for that myself. I find it boring.


But I think a far greater offense is committed by the person who pretends to be able to do something or be as experienced at something that in reality he is not. We have a moral obligation to be competent when we take passengers in our planes, or fly our planes over peoples' houses. We have an obligation to other pilots to compete fairly for desireable positions, too. We have decided to participate in a system that requires certain benchmark achievements or levels of achievement in order to be considered competent, and since these benchmarks are often pretty minimalistic in the first place, I think it's pretty reprehensible to lie about them. I think, if someone lied about being good at something, and then killed people trying to do it and screwing up, that person is worse than a liar, he is a murderer. Maybe I'm being severe, but I hate time-liars. I take my responsibilities very seriously and have troubled myself to gain as much genuine qualification as I can in order to do my job. People who lie are basically telling the rest of us that our experience is bullshit and we've all been taking ourselves too seriously. I hate that. I would not forgive a liar who hurt people.

[Masters Off]

At the same time, I've heard of guys who have faked up to 500 hours straight (in a row), others who've made up 50, 100 here or there to get what they want, and finally some that add that magical 0.1 or 0.2 at the end of each flight.

The worst part is that these are guys that fly beside you every day. Some of those are military, others fly 702, 3, 4, 5. Although the main thought is that they're dangerous, unqualified, in fact many of them are safe, reliable pilots. Although I am totally against the practice, as many of us are...I've noted that many of the people do it not for licences, but for jobs. What's worse, I've heard of one that beat the ATPL hour requirement. Shows that the all powerful TC didn't even catch it. The scariest part was to hear the ideas of 250 hour guys, realizing they could do the same thing. The stories repeat, every day.

And it's not that hard...take a personal log, write what you wish, take a journey log (private aircraft) write the same thing. Be semi-logical in your hour list...and who can prove you wrong? The question is not how to stop the people from doing it, but rather how to create more checks and balances in the system.

Just like money, a high percentage use it properly, doesn't mean there's not countermeasures. So why are there none/not enough in our system?

[bluenote]

So let's say Transport Canada find out that one of Canada's major airline pilot falsified his log book back in the early 90's to gain a rating and beef up his multi engine time can this pilot today be charged with each violation after that screw up and be fined for every violation even though it has been 20 years since he did it?

thanks

[Meatservo]

He should be punished in some way. Tarred and feathered is my vote. Or fined in the amount equal to the pay he drew until the date at which he became actually eligible for the job he had. That would be poetic justice at least. I don't care if he is "safe and reliable", there was probably someone who actually deserved that job who is now junior to that liar.

[Colonel Sanders]

take a personal log, write what you wish, take a journey log (private aircraft) write the same thing

Although this is theoretically possible, I really doubt it
happens as often as you portray. It is extremely rare
to find a private aircraft with a recording tachometer
that reads significantly less than the journey log time,
unless it was found to be defective (reading low) and
was replaced with new.

Generally what happens with private aircraft is that
entries all-too-frequently aren't made in the journey log,
I suspect to keep the airframe and engine hours artificially
low. Not many people talk about this practice, obviously!

I suppose what you could do is over 6 months, write in 500
hrs of bogus time that you didn't fly into a private aircraft
journey log and then replace the tachometer, claiming it
was defective. That would be very hard to prove, if the
airport it was based out of was uncontrolled, and you
claimed you used mogas in it, etc.

However that 500 hrs would really devalue the aircraft, especially
since during that time there were no 50/100/200 hour inspection
performed - who wants to buy an engine that went 500 hours
between oil changes?

I supposed you could also make bogus maintenance entries
with bogus parts changes, etc. But I think we're delving into
outright paranoia. This kind of grand conspiracy is extremely
rare, despite the insistence of people in this thread that it
happens all the time.

I suspect bogus time in personal logs is mostly completely
unsupported by the journey logs, and they are just hoping
that no one ever gets the two together.

[Masters Off]

And that comes down to the simple answer Colonel, that TC doesn't have the money, man power or time to look in depth to Journey logs and to do the investigating work. As far as I've gathered they take it as far as extremely bogus or stupid flights put in the personal log, i.e. logging IMC time in pure VFR weather (searching the GFAs, etc.) or logging in situations where they're not allowed, etc.

TC is not a police service or an investigating service when it comes to the CPL, ATPL, etc. They want you to get your licence/rating just as much as you want to get it. I find it unfortunate we have to even discuss this.