The sexual life of the camel
#81
Avmed threatens DAMEs with possible liability? -  Dodgy

Heard some disturbing tales about the following issue coming out of Avmed, from Oz Flying -  Undecided :

Quote:[Image: medicals_getty_images.jpg]




CASA warns DAMEs about Medical Assessments
17 August 2018

Outgoing CASA Principal Medical Officer Michael Drane has warned Designated Aviation Medical Examiners (DAME) that they may be subject to liability issues should their assessment be legally challenged.

Writing in his August newsletter to DAMEs, Drane said that although there had not been issues with DAME-assessed medicals so far, DAMEs needed to take care when assessing candidates for aviation medicals. 

"There have been 475 [DAME-assessed medicals] completed since March, and most have been fine," Drane said. "However, please remember to follow the CASA eLearning guidance and Clinical Practice Guidelines to ensure you include sufficient information when making your assessment and record it clearly.

"It’s important that you clearly note the basis for your decision and whether further monitoring is required. Remember there’s a reason certain reports are requested and your decision needs to stand up to scrutiny in settings such as the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).

"Decisions failing in these areas may present medicolegal liabilities for the assessing doctor."

Up until 3 April this year, most DAMEs would perform the examination for a medical certificate, but CASA would assess the results and issue the certificate based on the DAME report. Only those examiners designated as a DAME2 would assess and issue the certificate themselves.

Under reforms instigated by CASA Director of Aviation Safety Shane Carmody this year, all DAMEs can now do the assessment themselves, but still have the option to refer the candidate to CASA if they wish.


Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...x2gowDU.99


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
#82
Embuggerance thru rumour & innuendo?  Dodgy  

From Ironsider in the Oz today... Wink  

Quote:Pilot blames CASA for licence loss
[Image: ee966a2a66989f0fd99fb1a2b34e1214]ROBYN IRONSIDE
A Qantas pilot is suing the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for defamation for sharing damaging ‘anonymous complaint’.




A Qantas pilot is suing the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for defamation over a damaging “anonymous complaint” that was shared with management and other senior pilots, leading to his ­licence being suspended.

Nathaniel Whitehall, 49, who is a second officer on Qantas A380s, filed the claim in the District Court of NSW on Friday, naming CASA as the respondent.

Mr Whitehall claims a neighbour with whom he clashed used CASA’s confidential and anonymous ­online ­reporting system to make a series of complaints in May, July and ­August last year.

The complaint claimed Mr Whitehall had a mental health condition and likened him to the pilot of the Germanwings aircraft that was deliberately crashed into the French Alps in 2015, killing all 150 people on board.

As a second officer, Mr Whitehall would never be in the cockpit alone on an A380 and is not permitted to fly under 10,000 feet.

Mr Whitehall alleges his pilot’s licence was suspended by CASA in October without him being given the opportunity to defend himself or prove the accusations made by his neighbour were false.

He applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to have his suspension overturned but a hearing is yet to be held.

Mr Whitehall also claims in documents submitted to the court that CASA “published the reports in their entirety to the ­applicant’s employer, Qantas Airways Limited”.

“By reason of the publication of the matters complained of, (Mr Whitehall) has been injured in his credit, character, reputation and profession and has been brought into public disrepute, professional disrepute, scandal, odium and contempt,” the claim said.

“(Mr Whitehall) claims general damages, together with interest, for consolation, reparation and vindication, and special damages for the loss of income in his profession as an airline pilot.”

In a letter to opposition transport spokesman Anthony Albanese, seen by The Australian, Mr Whitehall said he worked very hard to achieve a “spot” in Qantas, “which is quite literally the pinnacle of aviation”.

“I have not done anything wrong. I have worked hard at Qantas. My Qantas record is ­unimpeachable,” he writes.

A CASA spokesman said the authority would not comment on the medical fitness of individuals or cases in which it may be a party.

Regarding the confidential and anonymous reporting system, the spokesman said that following the Germanwings tragedy, CASA had streamlined the process for handling reports of safety concerns ­involving pilots.

“These processes include making contact with the person who is the subject of a report, with a CASA medical officer normally telephoning the individual involved,” he said.

“Depending on the circumstances and in the interests of ­safety, CASA may initiate certain action on a precautionary basis.”

The CASA spokesman said if action were taken to vary, suspend or cancel a person’s medical certificate or any other authorisation, the individual involved would be formally notified.

CASA has launched legal ­action to force Mr Whitehall to ­return copies of the “confidential complaints” relating to him, on the basis that he was not entitled to have them.

Mr Whitehall denies any wrongdoing.

A Qantas spokesman said the defamation action did not directly involve the airline and the company did not comment on individual employee matters.


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
#83
Dear oh dear, a potential German Wings fruitcake working for Qantas? Surely Miniscule Dutton would be eagerly introducing some draconinan security standards upon which Qantas must act? An additional AMS Inspector in the jump seat for each flight? Retinal scams, bipolar tests and testees squeezed before each flight? Perhaps a CAsA FOI in the jump seat for each flight? Or is the Rat just being treated with special gloves?

I wonder who checks the complaints made against the mental health of CAsA staff? I’ve never heard of a CAsA employee getting punted for being a complete fruitcake, and there has been many nut jobs working there over the years!!

As for the pilot in question and the allegations made by his neighbour, if the allegations aren’t true and the rumours being spread are vexatious then the best way to deal with a piece of shit neighbour like that involves $500 and a baseball bat. Problem fixed.

As for CAsA wanting their paperwork returned, tell them to jam it up there ass. I’m sure the paperwork has since been ‘lost’, or copies have been returned.

TICK TOCK
Reply
#84
‘We’ decided to take a hand in this rubber; the tale above is a shameful episode, so ‘we’ signed up. This sort of thing has been going on for far too long and very clearly defines the attitude of and stance taken by the CASA.; while reflecting the fear engendered by the ever present threat and cost of a defence to disprove the allegations. It is up to the prosecution to make the case, and prove it – beyond reasonable doubt. Without ‘evidence’ to support the claim – it’s bullshit.

Can the neighbour or even the demi-gods of CASA prove, beyond doubt, with evidence solid enough to sway the court that this guy is, or ever has been a ‘risk’?

An unqualified ‘say-so’ and the mans life is destroyed. His work is questioned, his home life becomes focussed on ‘the case’ and his reputation, despite winning will never be quite the same. It is wrong.

No more to say - but 'we' are paying attention.

[Image: environmental-issues-mob-angry_mob-solar...n3_low.jpg]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)