denial of raic pass

[Meatservo]

And NO, I ain,t into using sharpies to practice my noose knots, daggers at ladies heads with blood splatters and drowning scenes. Prefer the great outdoors, bistros that make good sandwiches, campfires, horses, and all of that stuff.

From your lips to god's ears, brother. Sorry for calling you nuts.

[confusedalot]

looks like I'm not the only one with sleep issues but I guess I've got to get over this mindlessness sometime.

No worries mate, if you've ever worked with Aussies, Russians, Americans, Brits, Asians, etc, political correctness, if not frowned upon, is definitely at the bottom of the priority list. had a blast with these guys, no Canada style politically correct hypocrisy in that group, you know where you stand.

I got a thick skin, which is most probably the root cause of my current and now permanent problem here in good old Canada.

Whatever, worse things happen to other people.

[complexintentions]

Political correctness is a cancer. I had a female FO who would bring her own porn into the cockpit. I miss those days.

I sure don't miss the RAIC.

There have been several comments implying that confusedalot has some mental issues. Ironic, because it's Canada that's lost its mind.

I have to say though...if you find Canadian bureaucracy irritating - don't ever leave the country. It's about a billion times worse in most other places on the planet. I read the bitching about the RAIC process and I find myself smiling to myself and going "Awww...isn't that cute! Bless."

[Bajan Pilot]

Boy am I confused, one minute confusedalot, or is it Consufedalot says, 'Consufedalot is an older male driver who is not unionized' then 2 posts later says, 'Yup, that,s about it' implying he is an Air Canada pilot. Then there' this gem, 'And NO, I ain,t into using sharpies to practice my noose knots, daggers at ladies heads with blood splatters and drowning scenes'.

Methinks confusedalot is disturbedalot.

[photofly]

I had a female FO who would bring her own porn into the cockpit. I miss those days.

I bet you do!

[TG]

Boy am I confused, one minute confusedalot, or is it Consufedalot says, 'Consufedalot is an older male driver who is not unionized' then 2 posts later says, 'Yup, that,s about it' implying he is an Air Canada pilot. Then there' this gem, 'And NO, I ain,t into using sharpies to practice my noose knots, daggers at ladies heads with blood splatters and drowning scenes'.

Methinks confusedalot is disturbedalot.

The "And NO, I ain,t into using sharpies to...."
Is confusedalot making reference to this porn drawing thing in cockpit --> Not him!

From what I understand, good for you confusedalot for standing your ground (and Meatservo to dig this out from the topic)
Too bad somebody decided to remove your RAIC in the process. Looks like some kind of a witch hunt where the wrong person has been targeted.
I can understand your anger...

[Meatservo]

Political correctness is a cancer. I had a female FO who would bring her own porn into the cockpit. I miss those days.

Well, you certainly have a point about political correctness. There are Universities now that ban Yoga and sushi because students are offended on the grounds that these things constitute "cultural appropriation".

It's maddening. Some people are too fussy and pretentious and sensitive to be sane.

However, leaving graphic sexual material lying around your workplace in the specific hopes that someone will find it offensive or inappropriate- that makes you an ill-bred lout.

The real "cancer" in Canada is the proliferation of the idea that a lack of manners confers some sort of philosophical "street cred". One would hope that the so-called "professionals" crewing the aeroplanes of our flag carrier could find it inside themselves to behave as gentlemen, at least when they are on duty. There is a time an place for everything, and I don't find anything wrong with the idea that there is different behaviour that is acceptable in the cockpit of an airliner than in a public washroom in the red-light district.

If you can't tell the difference between the stoker's mess and the bridge, you don't belong in the navy. I'm afraid I can't defend the Air Canada porn fiasco on "PC run Amok" grounds.

I don't even really care if all those guys really do up there is take naps and beat off- it's just that they should have kept it to themselves. It's becoming their reputation. Maybe the real "cancer", at least in aviation, is a lack of manners and self-respect.

Still doesn't have anything to do with eligibility for a RAIC pass. If you find out that you accidentally hired Beavis and Butt-head to fly your planes, there's other mechanisms in place to deal with that.

[complexintentions]

The problem is, your idea of what constitutes manners is purely subjective, and "manners" themselves are always shifting based on context and environment. One of the worst ideas being foisted on the increasingly dumbed-down masses is that everyone has some "right" to not be offended. We now have an entire culture dedicated to finding ways to be outraged. It's probably a sign that modern society has things too easy, that we need to invent new things to complain about.

I just did a flight to AMS. Your attempt to link the red light district, to someone leaving torn-out pics of nudie pics in a flight deck - which is most certainly not designed to be a public area - is the type of hysterical rhetoric used to inflate things beyond all proportion. Yes, leaving naked pics as they did is juvenile, not appropriate, and needed to stop. I don't think anyone's arguing it's ok, even as I lament a time when people had vastly thicker skins. But the over-reaction to the whole thing was so over the top you'd have to stop and read carefully to make sure it wasn't satire. But then I often have a hard time telling the difference between CBC.com and The Onion.

It's becoming their reputation.

Whose? AC pilots? Pilots in general? What nonsense.

Maybe the real "cancer", at least in aviation, is a lack of manners and self-respect.

That is a societal issue. Hardly limited to aviation.

Agreed that it has nothing to do with the RAIC.

[Meatservo]

I generally don't have a lot of patience for the current climate of entitled outrage to everything either. I just can't agree that the issue in question is as trivial as you consider it to be. I don't think there's anything subjective about manners in this case, particularly since we are not talking about innocent "old-school" behaviour- we are talking about behaviour that persisted for the sole purpose of annoying and offending others. I too felt like I was reading "The Onion" but for different reasons than you did. The people I associate with don't behave like this.

[Herschell]

I'm curious if anyone may know how a minor customs infraction (failure to declare legal consumer goods <$1000) from a few years ago would impact the approval of a RAIC. They indicate on their standards website that "any contravention of a provision set out in section 160 of the Customs Act" will be considered as decision-making criteria during the application process.

Can anyone please shed some light on this for those of us who regrettably find ourselves in this situation? Again, please remember this is not referring to criminal charges, but rather to minor customs violations. Thank you in advance

[cncpc]

I'm curious if anyone may know how a minor customs infraction (failure to declare legal consumer goods <$1000) from a few years ago would impact the approval of a RAIC. They indicate on their standards website that "any contravention of a provision set out in section 160 of the Customs Act" will be considered as decision-making criteria during the application process.

Can anyone please shed some light on this for those of us who regrettably find ourselves in this situation? Again, please remember this is not referring to criminal charges, but rather to minor customs violations. Thank you in advance

The governing legislation states that it is there to ensure the security of air transport. A reasonable person would believe that meant the process was meant to deny access to restricted areas to persons on which there was a possibility approaching a probability that granting a pass to that person would pose a risk to the SAFETY of air transport. What has happened is that the bureaucrats have expanded this to include that criminal and customs infractions cannot be carried out through the granting of a pass to that person. It has become a garden variety criminal law enforcement tool, run by people without legislative authority, against people who do not pose a threat to aircraft and airports. But who still are denied employment or lose it if they already have it.

This poor judgment thing all comes from this cracker woman in charge. I forget her name, but it isn't a political position. It is a bureaucratic initiative that comes from God only knows what reasoning, other than that of a police state.

Practically everybody, no EVERYBODY, who gets on an airplane in this country has done something that this woman can arbitrarily deem to demonstrate "poor judgment". Why restrict it to airline personnel, why not require everyone who passes through security to have the judgment test of this bitch. Christ, I remember the zone final back in 82 against Sandy MacDonald in the PG Curling Club. Had to draw full four to win the zone, called the sweepers off halfway down, then got them back on at the hogline. Came up a quarter inch short. Poor judgment? I guess so. Hopefully there is no record of it.

The conduct of the Federal Court has been disgraceful in all of this. Rubberstamping a police state and the decisions of someone worried that there might be an angry exchange on board a flight. For a number of reasons, it is time to get rid of the Federal Court. Simple rubberstampers for the government.

[Herschell]

So you're telling me that they are likely to deny a RAIC pass based on a very minor customs infraction, but are willing to look the other way for a DUI conviction? I know old ladies and very decent people who have joked/boasted of crossing the border with some merchandise and not getting caught. Is this the system we now live in? This makes no sense..

[North Shore]

Apply, and wait and see, is the best advice..

[Herschell]

I wouldn't say it's the best advice when big financial decisions are being made that will affect the wellbeing of others. I'm just trying to be prudent, that is all. I would say there's such a thing as calculated risk.

[cncpc]

So you're telling me that they are likely to deny a RAIC pass based on a very minor customs infraction, but are willing to look the other way for a DUI conviction? I know old ladies and very decent people who have joked/boasted of crossing the border with some merchandise and not getting caught. Is this the system we now live in? This makes no sense..

I wonder if Justin Trudeau, who admits smoking a joint in the precincts of Parliament, would be denied a RAIC pass? What is his security clearance, an admitted criminal law offender.

And I sort of like Justin.

[EPR]

cncpc...And I sort of like Justin.

I have never heard or seen anyone to admit this publicly, quick get the socks and bars of soap!

[Tanker299]

…..

[yycinformer]

I'd agree they're the worst at YYC. I moved to YYC from another country and gave them my police letter (from said country) that I also gave to the department of immigration for my PRC. These assclowns told me I couldn't use it because it wasn't dated currently. I told them I got it right before I left the country and have been in Canada ever since. Said they needed a current one...if I've been in Canada since the letter was dated, why the hell would they need a "current" one and where do they expect me (or anyone) to get one from? I don't know about anyone else but I don't have a flying carpet or teleportation machine to just go get another original and current document.

[Herschell]

I'm curious if anyone may know how a minor customs infraction (failure to declare legal consumer goods <$1000) from a few years ago would impact the approval of a RAIC. They indicate on their standards website that "any contravention of a provision set out in section 160 of the Customs Act" will be considered as decision-making criteria during the application process.

Can anyone please shed some light on this for those of us who regrettably find ourselves in this situation? Again, please remember this is not referring to criminal charges, but rather to minor customs violations. Thank you in advance

Any others who may be able to provide some info on this? Thank you!

[Herschell]

^Any word from anyone as of yet? Kind Regards

[confusedalot]

Herschell,

It's really hard to say, for the following reasons.

This stuff goes to what is termed an "advisory body". The advisory body consists of low level public servants who have the subjective authority to make a decision. We are not talking about judges or senior cops, plain low level public servants.

This body is hard to figure, on the one hand, they let convicted criminals go, on the other, they remove passes because some rcmp intelligence report says that the father of a girl was seen at the funeral with a suspected gang member.

This is the real Canada. nice façade, not so nice root system.

You can google "transportation security clearance" and you will find their actual policy. It is typical government speak though.

[Puc]

What I understand from reading this thread is that reasons for denial can be something one might consider quite insignificant. Which has me wondering how far back and how in-depth does the background check go? I've never had any interaction with law enforcement agencies, other then requesting a criminal background check for employment purposes, and quite recently reporting my van being stolen. However, I did get expelled from high school when I was 16 years old for getting my fisticuffs on with a fellow student on school grounds. There was no police involved but I'm sure there is a record of it at the Toronto Catholic school board or maybe worse like Ontario ministry of education?
As for living abroad do they only look back at the last 5 years? Getting a criminal record check from about a half a dozen EU countries where I lived (and worked in some), for a total of 3 years, might be quite costly and time-consuming.
Any input would be much appreciated.

[confusedalot]

Puc,

I personally feel that it is unlikely you would have a problem with the high school issue, unless some rocket scientist at the school board decided to inform the police services without you knowing about it. I don't want to speculate more since I have heard and read of some goofy outcomes with no nexus to aviation safety that led to revocations.

As far as the 5 year history thing, they are firm on that.

Cheers,

[Puc]

Thanks for the reply confusedalot.
I guess I'll just have to keep my fingers crossed when the time comes. It will be well over 5 years since I've lived outside of Canada by the time I finish my flight training, so I suppose won't have to go through all the hassle of obtaining criminal records and trying to remember street addresses that I can't even pronounce.