Carry-On Baggage Requirements

[Freewheel]

We all know that come may, dozens of machines from out west will fly (to my region ) for free and sit on spec at Dryden and Sudbury OMNR fire headquarters hoping to get hired ahead of local operators. Although I understand that there may be a few less of you after this winter. It has been a tough year for all of us. Flying around for free can really bite you in the ***.

 

This is exactly why this is a federal jurisdiction. The regulation is the same for all of us, no matter where you live in Canada. We will do what needs to be done to ensure that we are able to compete fairly.

 

Lets not forget about the obvious safety issues that arise because of this BS.

[Freewheel]

As a matter of fact, the OMNR will need to hire out of province machines if Ontario operators adopt these extreme interpretations. We won't be able to conduct the operations they require from us.....

 

It's always nice when your own province gives you the shaft. Must be because of Provincial economy is doing so well...

 

Oh that's right...the province is almost bankrupt and pretty much all development has come to screeching halt (ring of fire etc) . Well done beaurocrats.

 

When times are good, Expedition group of companies employs 150+ full time employees in a town of 5500 people in northern Ontario. That makes us the largest employer in town. These other divisions and companies are all spinoff from the parent helicopter company that we started in 1999 with 1 longranger. We now operate 13 aircraft and employ 25 pilots and 10 + aircraft maintenance engineers.

The helicopter company alone has revenues of 20 million a year when busy.

 

These days we have scaled back to about 75-100 total employees through layoffs.

 

If I try to follow these new unjustified rules. We might as well close the doors.

 

Explain that to the families of our employees!

 

As stated, this is not a game. This us our livelihood.

[Freewheel]

Some forum members have PM'd me expressing that maybe we should move our main base "out west" and we wouldn't heavy to deal with TC Ontario...funny thing is...we already are looking at moving west. How would you like another operator with 13 more helicopters in your back yard.?

 

My brother and I are proud that we are from northern Ontario, and even more proud about the fact we are able to provide a required service to the people of Northern Ontario. We also think we run a reputable and safe company. We are an open book and we are being completely truth full here. On that same note, I can't say I am proud to say I am from Ontario these days and we aren't going down with the ship.

 

Once again Ontario...we'll done. You seem quite competent at driving industry out.

[Freewheel]

It seems that a report to enforcement warrants the same response as a Report through CAIRS; they just kick the issue back to the region (and ultimately the same person we were dealing with to begin with). How does that function effectively?

 

Response from enforcement received November 8, 2013 (at least they responded in a reasonable amount if time for a change):

 

Mr. Calaiezzi,

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

Mr. Lemieux is aware of the issues you have raised and will ensure follow up is done.

 

Regards,

 

 

Shawn O’Connor

Regional Manager/Gestionnaire régional

Aviation Enforcement /Application de la loi en aviation

[Freewheel]

Response to Enforcement Nov 8, 2013:

 

Mr. O'Connor,

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

Are you saying that you agree with Mr. Lemieux's regulatory interpretation of 602.86. (1)? To be honest, I have little faith in Mr. Lemieux.

 

As a stakeholder who is reporting an issue (which according up your own policies you are trying to promote). I have 1 question for you:

 

1) Are there non-compliances in the pictures and videos I submitted to you? Yes or no.

 

As stated, we have dozens of non-compliances to report ( based on Mr. Lemieux's interpretation) involving dozens of operators from all regions.

 

We will report to the appropriate regional enforcement offices and the appropriate director of operations.

 

Have a nice weekend,

 

Chad Calaiezzi

[Freewheel]

Exert from a recent private message I received from a member of this forum from BC:

 

We recently had our POI at our base with their 407. I brought up the issue about cabin safety that you were discussing in this post. They said that they would never enforce the rules that their eastern counterparts were trying with you...end of story.

The next day we were checking out the 407 on the ramp and guess what was strapped in the backseat...a life raft. Their exact words were that it wouldnt do them much good in the boot.

[Freewheel]

It appears a Canadian Helicopter pilot has already taken TC to the Tribunal on charges against 602.86 (1) in 2000:

http://www.tatc.gc.ca/decision/decision.php?lang=eng&dc_id=397#dd_id-398

 

 

 

 

[Freewheel]

Case was overturned on appeal August 2001. The Minister failed to prove the pilot contravened 602.86(1):

 

http://www.tatc.gc.ca/decision/decision.php?lang=eng&dc_id=397#dd_id-1372

[Winnie]

Unsure if the appeal was allowed due to poor presentation by TC or what...

 

Good on Mr. Lederman tho!

[Skidz]

As I read it, the initial enforcement action was undertaken by Prairie region inspectors (against a machine under Pacific region oversight). The hearing was held in Regina (Prairie region hq) and upheld. The appeal was heard in Vancouver (Pacific region) and overturned. Hmmm...