What exactly does this mean?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Successful candidates will possess strong communication skills, both verbal and written. Experience working in a flight school environment is considered an asset. Candidates must also be in good standing with Transport Canada with a valid M1 license, be available some evenings and weekends and have the ability to work with minimal supervision.

[Changes in Latitudes]

It means that YOU should probably keep looking for your big break into this business elsewhere.


That was one of those rhetorical questions eh? You're a deep man.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Changes in Latitudes my personal concern is zero as I no longer need worry about what TC may say to a perspective employer as I am retired.

However I can prove that TC can and will sewer you with an employer and you may never even know.

It is the people who depend on aviation who should be concerned that a government agency such as TC can and does violate your rights under the Charter.

When companies openly put this requirement in an add for employees you should be concerned.

Really concerned especially under Harper who it would seem is putting roadblocks up to prevent the population from getting information under the freedom of information act.

[planett]

In my experience, "in good standing" means "paid your dues". For example, "players must be in good standing with Rugby Canada in order to participate" which means club membership and insurance is paid up. In aviation, "paying your dues" means something completely different.(to borrow a Monty Pythonism)

Here I guess it means none of your fines are outstanding, and you are a compliant sort of chap:)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Here I guess it means none of your fines are outstanding, and you are a compliant sort of chap:)

What exactly is a compliant sort of chap?

Do you mean that an employer can approach TC and get information on a persons compliance record and if you owe fines?

[planett]

I'm being cynical, but thats what I was getting at.

Toe the line etc.

[Northern Skies]

"It" means that the company wishes to fill its ranks with sycophantical sheep. When consideration for the concerns of employees is discarded, it is easier to have autocratic management in a company full of "yes" men.

If that remark in the posting makes you think a little, perhaps your resume should be elsewhere.

[Mitch Cronin]

I'd be inclined to say if that remark in the job posting makes you think too hard, maybe you're in the wrong line of work!

., you trash the regulator at every chance and then some! (meaning you invent chances that don't exist!) This field is not one to forgive those who don't toe the line (so to speak)... in fact, as you well know, there are far too many names added to the list of those who didn't every year... and their relatives still grieve...

So perhaps that requirement - stated in a job posting - says that particular employer isn't interested in someone who prefers to go his own way...
They'd like someone who follows the rules maybe, rather than the sort who'd like to go learning the same lessons that others have taught us already, the hard way?

When it comes to rules in aviation, many of 'em exist only after someone else has died to show us the need... "Yes men" in that regard are a good thing. If you really think differently, try grave digging for a living..., or at least something where you can't hurt anyone.

[Rockie]

"It" means that the company wishes to fill its ranks with sycophantical sheep. When consideration for the concerns of employees is discarded, it is easier to have autocratic management in a company full of "yes" men.

If that remark in the posting makes you think a little, perhaps your resume should be elsewhere.

Is it your contention that every pilot not currently battling TC over some issue is a sycophant? Is it also your contention that any company who wishes to hire a pilot not engaged in battle with TC practices autocratic management?

[Hedley]

This field is not one to forgive those who don't toe the line

That's actually a Charter of Rights violation, but in the banana
republic that is Canada, I guess that doesn't count for much

I know a nice fellow - and a great stick - he's still being punished
15 years later after a licence suspension. He did his time, but
because his licence was once suspended, long ago, he has
the problem that he will always be viewed as someone who is
"not in good standing" with Transport.

The hilarious irony of all that, is that what the government is
doing, is completely illegal.

15 years later, he's still being penalized for the same offence
by the Tribunal, who conveniently keeps his name on their
web site, so anyone can google it. That's a blatant violation
of his Charter Rights by the Tribunal, whom many of us have
observed, enjoy a very cozy relationship with Transport.

Personally, I don't think it's a big deal if someone at Transport
has a hard-on for you. Bob Hoover did his rounds in the ring
with his "regulator", and he's a fine man and a superb pilot.

In over 30 years of flying, I have never dinged an aircraft,
but I deal with Enforcement and the Tribunal pretty well
every week. Last week it was Enforcement on Monday,
the Tribunal on Thursday. It's gotten so bad at my airport,
every time someone with the same last name as me flies
an aircraft, Enforcement investigates

A good friend of mine suggested that we equip ourselves
with helmet cameras, and at the end of every flight that
anyone I am related to flies, send an email to Enforcement
with a complete, notarized affadavit describing the flight and
a .wmv video file from the helmet cam.

Now, what did I do, to deserve this kind of "attention"
from Transport? I was told by a highly respected pilot
that there are simply too many shiny airplanes in my hangar.

He's got a point. If I was old, bald, fat and quite badly flew
a creaky 172 with peeling paint, one must wonder if
I would get as much attention. Doubtful.

I am sure that when the shiny airplanes are gone, so
will all the attention from Transport.

Oh well.

[Mitch Cronin]

Ya sure. It's the shiny airplanes. That's the ticket.

[Rockie]

I think it's because he's never dinged an airplane, and we can all expect our harrassment letters in the mail shortly.

[Hedley]

Where did I use the word "harassment" in my posting, Rockie?

As to the theory of "shiny airplanes" (which isn't mine, btw)
let's do a litmus test:

Mitch, Rockie, how many expensive, shiny airplanes do you
personally own and fly?

Hm.

All while the subprime mortage scandal was being perpetrated,
the government ignored it, and instead attacked Martha Stewart
and Conrad Black.

Hm.

[Rockie]

I personally have never owned any. Even my beat up 10 year old car isn't shiny. Next I'm hoping you'll tell us why that's significant.

[Mitch Cronin]

Mitch, Rockie, how many expensive, shiny airplanes do you
personally own and fly?

Wow. None Hedley. Not a single one. The only thing that resembled a silver spoon anywhere near my mouth when I was born was just a pair of forceps.
I've had to earn every last scrap I've ever got near... Every flight I ever flew was earned driving taxi on the streets in Toronto, when I stopped driving cab I stopped flying and went to fixing, 'cause that's all I could do. ...no Daddy-bail-me-out anywhere nearby.

None of which is at all relevant to the discussion! Sorry Hedley, but it's just too un-believeable that TC watches you like a hawk (as you've claimed) simply because of your nice little airplane collection... I rather think it's got something to do with your behaviour.... which likely has something to do with that silver spoon.... which means it might have been a relevant question in the first place, after all... huh! How 'bout that!?

[Hedley]

What silver spoon? I sure hope you're better at diagnosing
problems as a mechanic than you are at understanding what's
going on here

I went to University on a merit-awared scholarship, and have
done quite well since then. I earned every penny I have - I
did not inherit a nickle.

Your venomous class envy, however misdirected, is quite
informative about you, though.

And Rockie, I'd have to agree with you that you're just not
important enough to bother attacking (like Bob Hoover,
Martha Stewart, Conrad Black, et al).

Further reading on the topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome

I must admit, at first I didn't really think much of
the "too many shiny airplanes in one hangar" theory,
but you know, the more I read here, the more it
makes sense.

[Mitch Cronin]

... and that you don't see that "merit-awared scholarship" as something of a silver spoon speaks volumes about you.

I envy your money alright, but not your "class" at all.

[Hedley]

I envy your money

A little honesty. The "too many shiny airplanes"
theory is looking more and more reasonable.

Your resentful remarks re: "merit-awared scholarship"
are interesting. The scholarship was awarded to
the student who achieved the highest marks as
a result of their own hard work. Please explain how
that has anything to do with a f_cking "silver spoon".

I spent four sweaty hours last night after work, hand
polishing a metal fuselage on an antique aircraft to a
blinding, reflective finish. My hands were black with
oxide, and I was filthy when I was done. You were
probably watching TV.

Is that shiny aircraft another "silver spoon"?

[mcrit]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/regse ... ydA468.htm

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/regse ... ydA418.htm
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc/200 ... ca422.html

Well, here's some more reading. Let's let people decide for themselves when it comes to Hed.

[Hedley]

Who cares about that nonsense? Maybe a lawyer would.

It's not exactly a secret that Transport doesn't like me

[Chuck Ellsworth]

When I posted on this subject I knew that there would be this kind of replies to a simple question.

Why is it that there are a few here who are so blind to what they read that they do not have the IQ to actually read something and make an intelligent examination of what they have just read.

So for the slow witted like Mitch Cronin allow me to carefully outline my original question by explaining what I posted and why.

First:

The question was posed around this.

Candidates must also be in good standing with Transport Canada with a valid M1 license,

That was clipped from an add for AME's here on Avcanada.

Second:

I asked the question to get people to ask themselves how any company can make that part of their requirements for employment, by wording it in that manner they are indicating that there is now a requirement that any mechanic working in the aviation business in Canada must " Be in good standing " with Transport Canada.

Now may I ask just how does one prove they are in good standing with Transport Canada?
*****************************************************************

Mitch Cronin, you never miss a chance to put the knife in me every chance you get do you?

I'd be inclined to say if that remark in the job posting makes you think too hard, maybe you're in the wrong line of work!

And conversely if that remark in that add did not make you wonder how you prove you are in good standing with TC Mitch then I guess they need people like you who are myopic, not to mention ignorant of your rights under Canadas Charter of Rights which forbids TC from giving out personal information about anyone to any company.

., you trash the regulator at every chance and then some! (meaning you invent chances that don't exist!) This field is not one to forgive those who don't toe the line (so to speak)... in fact, as you well know, there are far too many names added to the list of those who didn't every year... and their relatives still grieve...

So perhaps that requirement - stated in a job posting - says that particular employer isn't interested in someone who prefers to go his own way...
They'd like someone who follows the rules maybe, rather than the sort who'd like to go learning the same lessons that others have taught us already, the hard way?

When it comes to rules in aviation, many of 'em exist only after someone else has died to show us the need... "Yes men" in that regard are a good thing. If you really think differently, try grave digging for a living..., or at least something where you can't hurt anyone.

Mitch once again during my career I left a record of compliance to the rules and a record of safety both in flying and fixing that every member of the aviation community would be wise to copy.

I am now retired and have no intention of ever applying for work anywhere, your comments are not only way off base they show an individual who likes to make untrue and ignorant statements about people they know nothing about because if you knew me and my record with TC you wouldn't make yourself look so stupid on a public forum.

. .

[Mitch Cronin]

Look Hedley, I'm just a schmuck on the internet, no need to get your shorts knotted up, I'm not here to piss you off... But much of what I've seen from you in this forum indicates to me you're a poor little rich kid with too many toys. I don't have any way of knowing what the truth is, but that TC is on your ass all the time is just another clue that lends credence to that theory... Just as your assessment of me could be way off the mark, I recognize that I too could be wrong.

The "too many shiny airplanes"
theory is looking more and more reasonable.

Ok, so you're suggesting it's jealousy that makes them ride you... again, based on what I see of you here, I think it's probably more like your attitude and your behaviour.

In any case, how does any of that relate to the job posting question?

[Hedley]

you're a poor little rich kid with too many toys

That's hilarious. I bust my ass while you sit on yours, and you
resent the results of my labour, and your laziness.

but that TC is on your ass all the time is just another clue
that lends credence to that theory

Amazing. According to you, "too many shiny airplanes" must
therefore be a violation of the Canadian Aviation regulations -
otherwise why would Transport investigate all the time? There
is clearly no safety issue.

Please can you refer me to the "too many shiny airplanes"
regulation in the CARs? Or is it the Aeronautics Act?

Exactly what is it about my attitude that violates the CARs?
Can you refer me to a specific CAR that my attitude violates?

[MrWings]

There is something going on between the lines here that isn't being said. What exactly is going on to have TC harassing you?

Not paying your medical fees? Performing your own maintenance illegally? Operating a chisel charter? Flying aircraft without an annual inspection? Continually breaking Air Regs?

I'd guess that any of those would not put you in good standing with TC. Agreed?

Now you might justify what you are doing. But remember, David Koresh and Warren Jeffs both believed they were being harrassed as well.

[Mitch Cronin]

.... look at the damn post right above mine will ya... maybe I was talkin' to him for some of that eh?... hmmm, who's the slow witted one here, y'old crud?

I'm not twisting a knife, I'm smacking your noggin' with that one comment to you... You're on it all the time and you often don't seem to give any thought to the influence you may have on lesser experienced minds (that's a polite way of avoiding reminding you again that you're a crusty old curmudgeon)

But go ahead and berate me by name if that works for you.