... hm that was enough

Dansflight said:
Legal Advise for Airman. -8500 form. & submitting information to FAA.
Click to expand...
If you have a question, it helps if you ask the question.

Are you looking for medical certification advice, or legal advice? You're not going to get good legal advice without hiring a lawyer.
 
Last edited:
Dansflight said:
That depends. If you understand the working and enforcement philosophy of FAA. A lawyer is not needed unless a suit needs to be filed.
FAA publishes their enforcement practices and what they can and cannot do. When it comes to medical there are many things and medical procedures not written anywhere.
This is why when suits are filed usually its on the basis that the agency its being Capricious.
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with the AME guide?

You registered for POA to share this nugget with us? Then delete your original post? Umm...welcome, I guess.
 
Dansflight, there's simply no way to respond to your post as scattered as it is. Before the Pilot's Bill of Rights (Public Law 112 - 153) was codified in 2012 things were a lot worse. Now there are rules the FAA has to follow and avenues of appealing when a pilot is the subject of enforcement action, whether an administrative action or criminal charges in an indictment by a grand jury and subsequent prosecution. They generally have proof of the need for enforcement action.

It would be helpful if you could cite an example of the "capricious" actions you claim are happening.
 
Dansflight said:
It used to be that FAA had the burden of proof, that has change to now the airman has burden to prove that whatever FAA alleges didn't happen.
Alot of what FAA does its actually unconstitutional. Nothing ever changes because pilot never want to stick together to make reform happen.
Back in the day TWA's union was trying to promote an aviation reform bill, only 1/5th of the pilot group volunteered to get involve, the rest did not want to get involved.
Same thing happened when National, and Eastern attempted to work with congress, the pilot group didn't want their names made public.....
Click to expand...

Never was that way.
 
Not so Private TCABM.
This feels more like an angry Democratic Convention. gapilotswtf.jpg
 
TCABM said:
That says a lot about you . Professional or personal side?
Click to expand...
At some point it gets hard to separate the two. Knowledge is knowledge. To use a non-aviation example, I was in court one day waiting my turn and watched a criminal assault trial in which the defendant represented himself. His cross examination of the victim was brilliant. "How could you identify me? You can't identify me! Your back was turned when I hit you!" Was that the lawyer or nonlawyer in me roiling my eyes and laughing?

I see the same when I see FAA cases in which folks are representing themselves. To be sure, there are those with enough savvy and presence of mind to go it alone, but more often, people need some solid advice and assistance. When I talk about getting legal advice vis a vis the FAA, I'm not talking about "lawyering up" in the sense of hiring a mouthpiece to run interference. Quite the opposite; it's to help someone unfamiliar with the process navigate it and avoid digging a hole like our friend the defendant. By far, and especially beginning with the FAA's ramping up toward what is now the Compliance Program, it's rare for the FAA to even know I'm involved. (@AdamZ, that's what I'll be speaking about at the meeting).
 
Ideally, bacon should be fried until it is crisp. Unless it is Canadian bacon. Hope that clears things up.
 
midlifeflyer said:
At some point it gets hard to separate the two. Knowledge is knowledge. To use a non-aviation example, I was in court one day waiting my turn and watched a criminal assault trial in which the defendant represented himself. His cross examination of the victim was brilliant. "How could you identify me? You can't identify me! Your back was turned when I hit you!" Was that the lawyer or nonlawyer in me roiling my eyes and laughing?

I see the same when I see FAA cases in which folks are representing themselves. To be sure, there are those with enough savvy and presence of mind to go it alone, but more often, people need some solid advice and assistance. When I talk about getting legal advice vis a vis the FAA, I'm not talking about "lawyering up" in the sense of hiring a mouthpiece to run interference. Quite the opposite; it's to help someone unfamiliar with the process navigate it and avoid digging a hole like our friend the defendant. By far, and especially beginning with the FAA's ramping up toward what is now the Compliance Program, it's rare for the FAA to even know I'm involved. (@AdamZ, that's what I'll be speaking about at the meeting).
Click to expand...

What's the "Compliance Program"?
 
Zeldman said:
Now I am even more confused..... What do they call Canadian bacon in Canada.??
Click to expand...

The confounding thing is that Canadian bacon is a primary ingredient in Hawaiian pizza. You would think if anything it would be called Hawaiian bacon.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Ideally, bacon should be fried until it is crisp. Unless it is Canadian bacon. Hope that clears things up.
Click to expand...

I have Grilla chimp smoker, been thinking about making my own bacon and jerky, anybody got some recipes?
 
Chip Sylverne said:
What's the "Compliance Program"?
Click to expand...
Start reading here. https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/cp/
https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/cp/
basically, the FAA decided enforcement via certificate suspensions for unintentional deviations from the FAR was not the best way to get compliance. Education, counseling, retraining, and determine cause for mistakes were better. The result is an FAA generally more interested in pilots doing the right thing than in beating them up. Whatever the real reasons (I haven an opinion in that, but you have to go to one of my WINGS programs to hear it) overall it is working (old presentation on SlideShare)
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Start reading here. https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/cp/
basically, the FAA decided enforcement via certificate suspensions for unintentional deviations from the FAR was not the best way to get compliance. Education, counseling, retraining, and determine cause for mistakes were better. The result is an FAA generally more interested in pilots doing the right thing than in beating them up. Whatever the real reasons (I haven an opinion in that, but you have to go to one of my WINGS programs to hear it) overall it is working (old presentation on SlideShare)
Click to expand...
In addition to the positive safety culture of the philosophy that encourages identifying risks and correcting them (as opposed to a culture of covering up issues for fear of retribution), enforcement action is time consuming, expensive, and ties up resources that are already in short supply.
 
Brad Z said:
In addition to the positive safety culture of the philosophy that encourages identifying risks and correcting them (as opposed to a culture of covering up issues for fear of retribution), enforcement action is time consuming, expensive, and ties up resources that are already in short supply.
Click to expand...
Yep. I think that was a big part of it. It was happening before the announcement.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Start reading here. https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/cp/
basically, the FAA decided enforcement via certificate suspensions for unintentional deviations from the FAR was not the best way to get compliance. Education, counseling, retraining, and determine cause for mistakes were better. The result is an FAA generally more interested in pilots doing the right thing than in beating them up. Whatever the real reasons (I haven an opinion in that, but you have to go to one of my WINGS programs to hear it) overall it is working (old presentation on SlideShare)
Click to expand...

Hopefully a more productive approach than continuing the beatings until morale improves.
 
The OP mentioned in one of his posts (apparently deleted) that the FAA "arrests" an average of one airline pilot a month.

These actions usually make the news and most are the result of things like a TSA agent smelling alcohol on the breath of a pilot going through security on his way to the gate, or database matches between the FAA medical certificate database and another agency like SSA or the VA which reveal the pilot is collecting disability benefits for a potentially disqualifying condition (PTSD, chronic depression, suicide ideation, bipolar disorder) without reporting it on the 8500 medical application. These are legitimate violations that could compromise aviation safety, indicate fraud, or both. We've discussed many of these cases here.

The OP never cited examples of the "unconstitutional" or "capricious" enforcement actions he's complaining about.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top