ATC Medical??

[Hawkerflyer]

What class of medical does one need to become involved in ATC in Canada??

[avfun]

Class 2

[ScurvyDog]

I know the class 2 medical is required for ATC. Is it required for FSS?

[grimey]

There's a medical required, but it's mickey mouse, and not a Cat-2. I told them I'd had a heart attack as an infant, and had blocked coronary arteries. The CAME opted not to do an EKG, even though there was space for one on the form, and passed me after taking my pulse and noting I had an irregular heartbeat.

They do seem to care about vision and hearing, though.

[Shadowfax]

Cat 2 for ATC.

There is no medical requirement for FSS as they are not licensed or hold any form of legal document. There may be some "employment" type physicals but that is SOP in aviation employment.

[ScurvyDog]

Thx guys. I wasn't sure if the med req were cat2 or if they were lighter. I might have to investigate a little further.

[hydro]

If you can pass a category 1/2/3 medical you shouldn't have a problem with the FSS medical. I may be remembering wrong, but I think auditory/visual differences were negligible. e.g. (ATC had slightly higher vision standards while FSS had slightly higher audio standards). I had also heard of a similar situation to Grimeys about heart issues where you can pass the FSS medical easier than a pilot/ATC medical.

[husky]

There is no practical difference between a CAT 1 and a CAT 2 medical besides the frequency with which they must be renewed...a CAT2 has double the valid period of a CAT 1, ie 2 years, and 1 year after 40 years old.

[W0XOF]

There is a medical requirement for operational FSS. It is performed by a CAME and administered by a third party, every 2 or 3 years (over 40). It's like a modified CAT 2. As for Grimey's experience, that would be a reflection on the CAME and NOT the standard or requirement itself. Pretty poor on the CAME's part.

No different than how most pilots I know have a "preferred" CAME.

[W0XOF]

Cat 2 for ATC.

There is no medical requirement for FSS as they are not licensed or hold any form of legal document. There may be some "employment" type physicals but that is SOP in aviation employment.

Wrong on the legal document comment.

The signed, Site Certification document for a qualified, operational FSS is a legal document and fulfills the requirement for the ATS Operations Certificate held for that site by Nav Canada under the authority of the Transport Minister.

[Shadowfax]

Is this medical recognized by Transport? Does it form part of a "license"?

IF not, whatever.

Not sure how the OP question involved FSS in ANY way shape or form.....

[W0XOF]

Is this medical recognized by Transport? Does it form part of a "license"?

IF not, whatever.

Not sure how the OP question involved FSS in ANY way shape or form.....

Of course it's recognized by Transport. That's why it has to be done by a CAME and verified at every Transport Canada audit, and is attached with the FSS's certification and the units ATS operating certificate.

Doesn't form any part of a license but it affords me and many others a better living than most of the pilots we work who's medicals form part of a license. Is having a license "cool" or something Shadowfax???? If so, "whatever"

Thanks for contributing nothing with your post, and it was a question that was asked if you care to read the whole thread.

[Shadowfax]

Actually it wasn't asked by the OP - it was a secondary Q - maybe the reading comprehension needs some work?

I think "Grimey" summed it up "mickey mouse"???

An employment medical, even if done by a CAME, is still just an employment medical. My Class one also needs a medical - probably more stringent than FSS

[KT111]

Actually it wasn't asked by the OP - it was a secondary Q - maybe the reading comprehension needs some work?

I think "Grimey" summed it up "mickey mouse"???

An employment medical, even if done by a CAME, is still just an employment medical. My Class one also needs a medical - probably more stringent than FSS

The CAT 1 isn't a whole lot more stringent compared to what I've gone through as an FSS they are just a bit more thorough. I haven't had the audio-gram in 3 years, and my eye sight was checked by a nurse in a hallway. No ECG. Doctor sat down with me for 2 minutes, asked me the standard questions on the form, check to see if I could bend over, touch my toes, put my arms back behind my back, etc and sent me on my way.

[W0XOF]

Actually it wasn't asked by the OP - it was a secondary Q - maybe the reading comprehension needs some work?

I think "Grimey" summed it up "mickey mouse"???

An employment medical, even if done by a CAME, is still just an employment medical. My Class one also needs a medical - probably more stringent than FSS

Very good Shadowfax, it was a secondary question. Very impressive! Maybe there's more to getting one of those Class 1's then I ever thought. I bet you must get lot's of chicks carrying that thing around in your wallet too. Lucky you!

You can think what you would like, but until you know what you are talking about your opinion really doesn't carry much weight. You kinda sound disgruntled, CT'd in the past perhaps?

Maybe you don't read so well, it is a requirement by TC, not Nav Canada under the ATS Operating Certificate. You've probably been long haul trucking all night and your eyes are tired though.

KT111, again, that's a reflection on the CAME.

[yippiekaiyea]

Ouch! THAT's gotta sting!!

Thread took a turn for the worse somewhere a few posts back me thinks??

[Shadowfax]

Can't say I know everything - enlighten me (us)

Training and Competency of Flight Service Specialists

801.09 (1) No holder of an ATS operations certificate who operates a flight service station shall permit a person to act, and no person shall act, as a flight service specialist unless the person

(a) has successfully completed
(amended 2008/01/01; previous version)

(i) training that has been accepted by the Minister in the performance of the functions of a flight service specialist, and
(amended 2008/01/01; previous version)

(ii) a safety-related initial training course on human and organizational factors; and
(amended 2008/01/01; no previous version)

(b) has been certified by the holder of the certificate as being competent to perform those functions.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of a person who, under supervision, acts as a flight service specialist while undergoing
(amended 2002/09/24; previous version)

(a) instruction, training or testing in respect of flight service specialist certification; or

(b) flight service station familiarization in the course of the person's employment.

(3) The holder of an ATS operations certificate who operates a flight service station shall
(amended 2002/09/24; previous version)

(a) maintain, for each person who acts as a flight service specialist, a training record showing the place where and the date on which the person successfully completed the training referred to in paragraph (1)(a); and

(b) at the request of the Minister, provide the Minister with a copy of the training record of any person acting as a flight service specialist at that flight service station.

Don't see any medical restirctions....

[W0XOF]

Hey look, you found it:

Medical reports are also required for holders of Class 1, 2 and 4 licences and for all licences with a condition code "C". It is not legal to drive with an expired licence.

Sorry, that's not it.

Training and Competency of Flight Service Specialists

801.09 (1) No holder of an ATS operations certificate who operates a flight service station shall permit a person to act, and no person shall act, as a flight service specialist unless the person

Section 2

(b) has been certified by the holder of the certificate as being competent to perform those functions.

com·pe·tent (kmp-tnt)
adj.
1. Properly or sufficiently qualified; capable
2. Adequate for the purpose
3. Law Legally qualified or fit to perform an act.

If an FSS fails to satisfy the medical requirements, they are no longer competent to perform the functions of an FSS under the ATS operating certificate issued by the Transport minister. Specialists have and do medical out.

As you have pointed out, all these requirements have to be met to act as a Flight Service Specialist under the Minister of Transport's ATS operating certificate. Now since the medical isn't specifically mentioned, neither are the specifics to training in order to obtain FSS certification. Are you now going to say that Transport Canada doesn't recognize the training for FSS certification? I never said that the medical was in CAR's, I said it was recognized by Transport Canada, as the medical forms part of the Training and Competency of a Flight Service Specialist. Which YOU found in CAR's btw.

Oh and if you didn't know, the medical requirement was implemented by Transport Canada when TC ran Canada's ATS and was inherited by Nav Canada in 1996 with the ANS Modernization plan. Transport came up with the requirement, not Nav Canada.

Keep on trucking.

[Shadowfax]

Sigh - s t r eee t c h....

So by that logic, techs must also be medically fit to service an ILS?

(2) No person shall perform a function related to the installation, maintenance or operation of any aeronautical telecommunications equipment unless the person has successfully completed training in the performance of that function and has been certified by the operator of the aeronautical telecommunications system as being competent to perform that function.

What you are talking about is an EMPLOYMENT MEDICAL! Even secretary's can be released from employment for not meeting "medical requirements". ALL manner of jobs have bona fide medical requirements - that is NOT the same as having an aviation "medical".

What's funny is your reaction. I don't think it's cool to have a doc do that thing - do you? Check out the ATC requirements - notice how UN-VAGUE they are (no BS interpratation required):

Prohibitions

402.04 (1) No person shall act as an air traffic controller or exercise the privileges of an air traffic controller licence unless
(amended 2010/02/02; previous version)

(a) the person holds an air traffic controller licence endorsed with a rating appropriate to the privileges being exercised and with the appropriate operational location;
(amended 2010/02/02; previous version)

(b) the licence is valid;
(amended 2010/02/02; previous version)

(c) the person holds a valid Category 1 or 2 medical certificate; and
(amended 2010/02/02; previous version)

(d) the person can produce the licence and certificate when exercising those privileges.
(amended 2010/02/02; previous version)

It's important to note that TC introduced the FSS "medical requiremnt" pre NC. And what was TC back them - the answer is "the employer"! Don't confuse this with any type of "aviation medical requirment" - not even close to being the same criteria. ATC and pilots have had "medicals" since first inception.

The whole "operating certiicate" argument is a stretch at best. Reality is FSS are not license holders or "medical holders" or any similar such "holders' of any legal document. What you are talking about are employement medicals - PERIOD

[W0XOF]

Shadowfax:

Apparently you have a problem reading text. The ignorant comment about the Technologists confirms that. As I have already stated, the FSS medical forms part of the certification. Fail the medical, pulled out of operations, not certified to work operational until the medical is past. The medical is mandatory to work operational. All operational staff in Operations has to have a medical. The Techs don't have a medical, not part of their certification. From what you are saying then, is that Nav Canada is being discriminatory, employment medicals for one part of a group but none for whole groups. Half the employees in Nav Canada must have medicals and the other half don't? Give your head a shake.

Yes there is legal documentation and yes it is recognized by TC whether you like/believe it or not. I have been with TC/NC for the last 16 years, specifically FSS. I can tell you that I do know what I am talking about. Where does your expertise in the world of FSS come from?

If Nav Canada could, they would have us perform medicals on each other at the shift change briefing just to save money. It costs them in the range of $105,000 every 2.5 years on average. Or why not get rid of them all together. Non Op staff don't have them after all.

Anyhow, no sense arguing apples with someone who only knows oranges. I haven't argued air brakes with you, not even once.

And that is because I don't know what I'm talking about..................just like you.

[natej]

FSS get medical's too, just without the EKG.

[Shadowfax]

Seriously?

You make the connection between "competent" in CARS 801.09 to mean "medically competent" but yet that same phrase for servicing telecom equipment somehow doesn't mean "medically competent" in your mind?

The CARS are very clear for every license holder yet somehow we should believe the absolute and total lack of medical mention in 801.09 is an oversight to be interprated as a legal requirement because your employer makes you undergo an "employement medical". Show us a direct CARS reference where you have to be medically fit to legally perform you function. There isn't one - unlike the ATC or pilot requirment.

I don't doubt for one minute you have to have a "medical" to continue your employement - it's just not a TC recognized standard. That means your employer - not the regulator - can do as they see fit. For the actual license holders, the employer has nothing to do with the actual medical requirements. See the difference? BTW I also hold a CAT 1 - honk honk.

[W0XOF]

You keep referring to CAR's and license requirements. That wasn't the question you posted (I realize it was just an ignorant statement, and not really a question since you don't understand and don't care to) that I have been answering.
"Is this medical recognized by Transport?" and the comment "......or hold any form of legal document."

Yes and yes, no matter what you think. Since you won't state your knowledge and/or experience of the FSS certification but only that you have a Cat 1, I am still certain you are not qualified nor knowledgeable enough to make an informed comment. The certification has ALWAYS formed part of the TC (the regulator) audits which we routinely get, which does include the medicals. NOT an employers requirement.

Thanks for your opinions though. Enough wasted time.

[Shadowfax]

At least we agree on wasted time.

To close this useless debate off, I have not seen one shred of evidence to support your claim other than your opinion. In fact, you have failed to provide anything tangible to support it. On a lark I went surfing to see what else I could find - this is interesting (from your Union agreement and publically available) :

9.02 The Company shall provide the Union with the Flight Service Specialist
Medical Guidelines and ensure that the job description and medical
standards form part of the Flight Service Specialist Medical profile.
9.03 The Company agrees not to amend the Medical Guidelines without
meaningful consultation with the Union.

Pretty much confirms everything I've said. Your employer controls the "medical guidelines" not TC = employment medical.

[W0XOF]

Thanks again for your uninformed thoughts.