Carry-On Baggage Requirements

[R0T0R]

Freewheel, if you keep this up you are going to catch up with Elvis for number of posts. Thanks for the enlightenment. I didn't realize how brutal dealing with TC could be.

 

R

[Freewheel]

Freewheel, if you keep this up you are going to catch up with Elvis for number of posts. Thanks for the enlightenment. I didn't realize how brutal dealing with TC could be.

R

I am pretty sure Elvis' record is safe at over 11000 posts; since joining in 2006 I have posted 243 times. Looks like I might pass him for number of "likes" soon though...LOL

[Skidz]

I don't think anyone is ever going to catch up to Elvis. Especially now that he's retired...

[Freewheel]

Response received November 13, 2013 from Shawn O'connor Transport Canada Enforcement Ontario Region with regards to Transport Canada Air Services Directorate cabin loading practices (previous correspondence posted on page 18 and 19):

 

The Department is in receipt of your concerns and will be following up with the operator directly. It is not Departmental practice to comment on the conduct of our operators with third parties and as such, it would be inappropriate to comment on the matter further.

>

> Thank you for voicing your concerns.

>

> Shawn

[Freewheel]

I guess I'll have to ask Kerry Mckenzie of Pacific Region Enforcement for his opinion. I beleive he is the one who has reviewed Bradley Friesen's Grey Cup Video (and others) for violations.

 

It seems like he may be more willing to discuss compliance requirements than his Ontario Counterpart. Among other possible non-compliances, Grey Cup restraint with a seat belt and by passengers was discussed and apparently he saw no non-compliances...

 

 

Reply to Mr. O'connor (Nov 13/ 13). No response.

 

Mr. O'Connor,

 

I respect your position with regards to discussing other operators operations.

 

We will continue to voice our concerns. We feel there may be a violation to CARs 103.01(2). TC is not applying the rules as written in our opinion. CARAC should be consulted if TC wishes to apply new standards and or regs. We feel this increases the overall risk to our operations, employees and passengers.

 

Are you able to comment on general questions about the regulatory requirements of 602.86 (or any requirements for 702/703 Heli ops)? Or is it indeed the case that we literally need to report ourselves to enforcement to receive a response from you? This has suggested to us by more than one TC inspector...

[Freewheel]

Violations to CARs 602.86?

 

[nobul]

Looks like something strapped to the aft facing seat in this shot? How dare they!

[Cambox]

20 pages is too much for me to read. How many have actually been affected by this or has it become making a mountain out of a mole hill?

[Freewheel]

20 pages is too much for me to read. How many have actually been affected by this or has it become making a mountain out of a mole hill?

I guess if you don't care about how you are compliant with CARs to begin with, it doesn't have much affect...until someone questions how you were loaded after someone gets hurt or you have an accident.

 

You are right about one thing: while high ranking TC officials have claimed that our operations are non-compliant and that willful non- compliance is widespread throughout our sector, they never seem to follow through with corrective actions or enforcement. It seems they are all bark and no bite. We continue to operate in the same fashion as we did prior to these claims and findings. I think most taxpayers and passengers should see this as a problem that is a little bigger than a mole hill...

 

Illegitimate findings create confusion as to what is legal or safe which is a safety concern. In some cases we have seen our competitors implement procedures that increased risk because they choose not to second guess the expertise of TC.

 

i can say one thing with confidence:,had we operated as suggested by TC in several instances over the past few years, it's safe to say we would be out of business...how's that for affect?

[Cambox]

I guess if you don't care about how you are compliant with CARs to begin with, it doesn't have much affect...until someone questions how you were loaded after someone gets hurt or you have an accident.

 

You are right about one thing: while high ranking TC officials have claimed that our operations are non-compliant and that willful non- compliance is widespread throughout our sector, they never seem to follow through with corrective actions or enforcement. It seems they are all bark and no bite. We continue to operate in the same fashion as we did prior to these claims and findings. I think most taxpayers and passengers should see this as a problem that is a little bigger than a mole hill...

 

Illegitimate findings create confusion as to what is legal or safe which is a safety concern. In some cases we have seen our competitors implement procedures that increased risk because they choose not to second guess the expertise of TC.

 

i can say one thing with confidence:,had we operated as suggested by TC in several instances over the past few years, it's safe to say we would be out of business...how's that for affect?

 

I'm not picking on you, but I wonder if TC is? That's why I was wondering how many others were getting the same hassle?

It sounds like an over zealous inspector on a one time quest, and now he/she doesn't know how to back down gracefully?