We need help

[Check Pilot]

Retirement Age

55 is about the minimum. 35 years of service or age 60 is normal.
Pension is based on years of service. 2% per year of service based on an average of your best 6 years of salary. For example 30 years of service results in a 60% pension which is indexed to the cost of living each year.

Military Leave- yes, no, maybe

That's one I do not know the answer to. Sorry. I don't know of anyone doing that right now. We did have one guy that worked for the reserves part time a few years back but I'm not sure if the Department allows it anymore.


Rough training program for basic CAI3

CAI3's don't usually get hired off the street in the Regions. There is very few of those left in the Regions. HQ in Ottawa have CAI3 positions and are sometimes be hired "off the street." The training program is not "rough" as you put it but it is thorough and usually takes about a year to fulfil all the minimum requirements.


Ditto for someone about to become POI for a 703/704 place

POI's are appointed, as I might put it, "gently". No one gets tossed into a POI job without being pretty well prepared for the job. That can take a year or so before getting thrown into the fray and there is plenty of mentoring before hand. It usually starts with just a few Company's at the beginning and increases as experience builds.


Training courses or requirement for someone who wants to climb the ladder and become a CAI IV

CAI 4 positions are normally a supervisor position. Those positions don't come in off the "street". The position (as are all CAI applications) appointments are based on merit, which means there are competitions held where the best candidate qualifies.

Check Pilots in the Department- Recurrent course in the Industry or CF ICP School?

The ACP courses are normally done by Industry and very occasionally we do hold one "in house". I'd love to see our new Inspectors sent to the ICP course in CYWG but that has not been the practice for quite a while now.

Now that Rides are on ACP's how many rides a year is that gonna be?

I was doing about 30 rides a month in 1980. Now I'm lucky if I get to do 25 actual rides a year. Mostly it's monitoring industry ACP's instead.


TC training on say Citation or Twin Otter- FlightSafety or in house

Citation training is done at our dedicated training facility in Ottawa. Initial training takes 3 weeks and the recurrent "4 day course" that most industry folks get at FliteSafety or Simuflite is jammed into 2 fun filled weeks.

The Twin Otter and King Air simulator training is contracted to industry such as FliteSafety although we use our own instructors and check pilots. Ground training is done by our Aircraft Services Branch.

[just curious]

My '' friend" is old. "He" was thinking of the upward end for retirement.

The training program is not "rough" as you put it but it is thorough and usually takes about a year to fulfil all the minimum requirements.

Sorry, wrong terminology. I wasn't thinking forced marches and obstacle courses. I was wondering what courses would my "friend" expect to complete over a year. Auditing, I expect, and the proper way of saying " Hi I'm from Ottawa and here to help you", but what else?

[CD]

...never mind...

[Prairie Chicken]

I think I should comment on the structure. The CAI-02 is the working level, and the entry level. They top out at about 100 K/year after all bonuses & allowances. The CAI-03 used to be the supervisory level but there aren’t many of them left anymore. The CAI-04 is now the supervisory level. The CAI-05 is the managerial level. They top out at about 115 K I think, after bonuses, etc. That’s one of the problems in the organization as I see it. Managers spend all their time putting out fires & fighting the beaurocratic BS, all for about 8 K more after taxes. Not worth it in my books, but some think so.

Check Pilot addressed retirement age. Of course you can go earlier than 55. If you go before 50 you can get your pension money out & put it into a retirement plan. After 50 it is locked in until you take a pension from it. But, there are penalties if you draw down on the pension before 55, or I think it’s 30 years. The pension is a nice thing though--full benefits plus indexing.

Re training, I don’t recall what positions are available in PNR but I thought one was in Enforcement. The comments here are for a CBA inspector. Some training is generic to each inspector, like the DOIT course. Other training is directly applicable to the division the inspector has been hired into. E.g., Aerodromes & ANS inspectors get training on aerodrome standards & approach, Enforcement on legal & investigative issues, GA on licence requirements & issues, etc.

Someone asked about advancement. Once in, you may then apply on positions for which you meet the requirements. Again, requirements are set by the manager & vary from division to division. Don't forget the bilingual thing in some regions, and it is mandatory for any supervisor in most regions.

[CD]

...never mind...

[Prairie Chicken]

More info on the pension plan may be found at pensionandbenefits.gc.ca for those who care.

[CD]

...never mind...

[SeptRepair]

Hey thanks CD for the links, pretty informative. One question I have, is what do the Steps mean in the pay scale chart? Does a person go up a step after every year of employment in the category? For example is a step 6 CAI-2 the payscale after 6 years employment with Transport ?

[Prairie Chicken]

You asked

what do the Steps mean in the pay scale chart? Does a person go up a step after every year of employment in the category? For example is a step 6 CAI-2 the payscale after 6 years employment with Transport ?

Yes, you go up one step every year on your anniversary date until you reach the top of the scale. Management may offer a new entry a salary anywhere on the scale, and you go up from there. Also, if you were, for example, at the top of the CAI-02 scale & won a CAI-03 competition, you'd go to the the CAI-03 scale that was greater than what you were making as a 2.

Once you hit the top of the scale there are no more pay increases other than through collective bargaining.

[Carrier]

The application deadline has passed so let’s hope enough suitable applications came in. It takes a fully staffed workforce to push all those pencils, operate all those rubber stamps, dream up more ways to extract revenue from the victims, and expand the TC empire.

It will probably be many months before any applicant is actually offered a position. Those who have applied, and interested observers, might like to ponder on a few more points before any job offer arrives.

It is well known that there is job security with governments. In the past few months we have heard of many companies going bust or downsizing and tens of thousands of employees becoming unemployed or facing reduced incomes. Has anyone heard of any governments planning to downsize their operations or reduce costs? Worse still is that this job security apparently even applies at TC in cases of incompetence, dereliction of duty or even corruption. There have been instances of such mentioned on these pages and some of the apparent culprits have even been named. The lack of any legal actions for defamation indicates that those named accept that what was posted is true! However, they are still employed at TC.
Should job security extend to cover such behaviour and do any applicants seriously want to work in such an apparently unethical environment?

One of the posters above who apparently already works for TC states: “I'm starting to get really annoyed at guys with way too much money that go and buy aviation business's and then don't understand the way it needs to be run.”
Shouldn’t those who live in glasshouses not throw stones? Every efficiency study of government that I have seen indicates that it always costs the government at least 25% more than the private sector to provide a supposedly similar service that performance-wise is actually inferior to private sector standards. All that matters is following the correct procedures in the manual. That way the government employee will not be to blame no matter how big a financial loss or mess is created. No need to worry about customers taking their business to the competition across the street. No need to worry about cut-backs or TC going out of business as a result. There is no bottom line at TC. It will never go bust and the taxpayers and captive users will continue to pay excessive amounts for uneconomically delivered and delayed necessary functions, never mind the unnecessary add-ons. Do any applicants seriously want to work in such a soul-destroying environment?

In fairness to the few, I must mention that there are some decent government employees, who are very much a minority. They are as equally frustrated as their customers at not being able to perform in a competent and cost-effective manner. They usually end up achieving the equivalent of job satisfaction and creativity in activities away from work, such as hobbies, or return to the private sector before two years are up.
Why two years? In 1983 a former Royal Trust regional manager in Vancouver indicated that he would never employ anyone who had been in the armed forces or the public service for more than two years. His view was that anyone who had been there for more than two years had become comfortable with those standards, attitudes and way of operating and would no longer be able to function effectively in the competitive private sector!

Anyone expecting change will be disappointed. The advertised positions will attract AND RETAIN people who will fit in with those who are already there - the culprits!

[Cat Driver]

Carrier this is a real difficult subject to address, as you will note I was the first to answer in this thread.

My first reaction was to agree with Check Pilot for the simple reason the regulator desperately needs good people who will work with the industry to maintain a high quality of service to the public.

Unfortunately it is impossible under the present management.

The Director General Transport Canada came to my house several years ago to in his words " Bring closure to these issues. " these issues being abuse of authority by several TC inspectors backed up by and approved by Merlin Preuss and Dave Nowzek.

I agreed to him being in charge of a full investigation into my allegations against several of TCCA's employees.

He agreed to my terms.

The terms were simple:

If my allegations were proven to be true he would assure that three issues would be fufilled.

(1) Merlin Preuss and Dave Nowzek would be removed from their positions in TCCA.

(2) The industry would be informed of what had happened and why these people were removed from their positions.

(3) I would be paid $250,000.00 tax free for damages to my company, my family and me.

Approximately six months later the investigation was complete and all my allegations were proven to be true.

To this day nothing has changed, both Preuss and Nowzek are still doing what they do....running their offices like common street criminals.

I have not received one penny compensation..but the coc.sukers did make life so difficult for me I was forced to spend the last years of my career working overseas.

Nothing will change until a Federal inquiry overseen by people with integrity is held and the present top management in TCCA is removed and if possible put in jail.

When the inquiry is held I hope they subpoena me because I have some evidence that will make it easy for the inquiry to convict these people of abuse of power and being morally corrupt.

Then TCCA could be a job to be desired.

[CD]

...never mind...

[CD]

...never mind...

[snoopy]

The following statement from the Statement of Merit clearly illustrates why the aviation industry is on a spiral dive into a very smelly toilet:

"The future Transport Canada is building towards is one where industry operates at the maximum level of delegation possible, with the flexibility to meet safety requirements in the most cost-efficient manner."

Has anyone ever actually seen a maintenance inspector inspect maintenance?! Any audit/inspection I've ever been privy to was focused strictly on the paperwork.

"f) Technical Knowledge
The ideal candidate will have the technical knowledge required to perform in the following situations:
Evaluating the Maintenance and/or Manufacturing of aircraft and conformance to the Canadian Aviation Regulations (including related documents);"

I'm not even going to go near the Personal Suitability requirements...



Kirsten B.

[Cat Driver]

I'm not even going to go near the Personal Suitability requirements...

I will.

Demonstrate integrity and objectivity when confronting or being confronted with challenging situations;
Negotiate mutually acceptable solutions by actively trying to understand the positions of others;
Deal with everyone in an open, fair, honest and respectful manner.

To bad they did not have that criteria in place when they hired the present Regional Director Civil Aviation, Pacific Region.

Especially the bit highlighted in red.

[Dr. Mcillicuddy]

evining snoop, would like to see someday a transport insp. that knew his ass from a hole in the ground, By the way do you have a newhound. ex .kenora.

[snoopy]

Yes I do... and she has a cat! LOL...cats can be hell...ok ok... he's kinda cute...
PM sent...
Kirsten B.

[CD]

You know, you're right. There is no sense in posting job openings with the Department of Transport here 'cuz there has been plenty of discussion elsewhere on AvCanada about the lack of professionalism among some of the members of the forum. Surely, the last thing that the government would need is some of the members here actually applying and being hired.

So, never mind...

[Hornblower]

Woah there CD, that's almost an opinion ...

[Widow]

I rather like the idea of Transport being "infiltrated" by a few AvCanadian characters. A little integrity from the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner first though, perhaps.