Fwd: FW: Elections
William Scott
From: Steve Purvinas <purv...@bigpond.com>
Date: 27 May 2010 14:59
Subject: FW: Elections
To: Steve Purvinas <purv...@bigpond.com>
G’day All,
I can’t issue a notice for the ALAEA regarding ALAEA elections so I thought I would send a personal update to those friends via my private email list. Feel free to forward to others who may be interested as I am hearing there are a lot of rumours out there.
I think you will all have heard that the Australian Electoral Commission has knocked back the nomination forms of Steve Re who is an ALAEA Trustee and myself for the Secretary job. The bird from the AEC advised me that this has come out of a complaint from a member regarding our eligibility. Nobody else is running for the Trustee position but some guy from Avalon has put his hand up for my spot and it wouldn’t take Einstein to work out where the complaint may have come from.
The first I heard about this was when the AEC phoned me and asked for a copy of my current LAME licence. I immediately said that the rules don’t require you to hold a current licence, they require you to hold certain qualifications. The lady appeared to be well versed even before this initial conversation and attempted to correct me stating that I needed a current licence. I read her the rule and she wasn’t interested in my view. They then wrote to us demanding the licence, we explained the situation in writing and they knocked us back.
Without our knowing, it appears that the fun and games had begun before then. To put this into context I need to go back a bit. Three years ago a joint application by an ALAEA official and channel 7 under the freedom of information act was lodged for CASA to produce any document related to audits of oversees maintenance facilities. The ALAEA have been battling them for 3 years in court rooms and in the press to get this information released, the court ruling will come down in a couple of weeks. I am thinking that CASA would love to have the ALAEA leaders replaced. In April this year, CASA received another freedom of information application seeking personal licensing details of Steve Re and myself and the application for that info indicated that we may be booted from our positions if our licences had expired . That applicant didn’t have to wait 3 years for the info he requested, within a few days CASA had released our personal details to him without contacting us. I don’t even think they respond to aircraft crashes that quickly. We have lodged a complaint against them for breaching the privacy act.
So from my perspective it appears that CASA and the AEC have conspired with others to have us removed. That of course doesn’t mean we will be removed. The rule that is the centre of this debate is one introduced in 2001 rule 22(e). It reads –
An Officer of the Federal Executive as defined by Rule 11 sub-Rule 4(d) must hold qualifications as a Licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer to be eligible for the nomination to that Office.
As all LAMEs would know, when you re-apply for a licence you must demonstrate 6 months out of two years on the tools. Of course Steve and I have been representing the needs of our fellow members for 4 years and aren’t on the tools. Do we still hold the qualifications? This is what CASA AAC 9-0 says –
As the holder of an expired AME licence has previously been assessed as being a "Qualified Person" (as defined by CAR 31(4)) by virtue of previously holding a licence, it can be assumed that he/she is still a “Qualified Person".
So we think we have a fairly clear case. Steve and I have engaged our own legal team to press our claim and an application has now been lodged with the Federal Court. The first hearing is at 0930 on Thursday the 3rd of June. This is a directions hearing where a date for the substantive hearing will be set and any appropriate interim orders issued. We have called for all matters related to the election be put on hold until final determination.
What would it mean to our union if the AEC decision is not overturned? It would mean that no LAME could ever leave his job to work for our Association impartially as a Senior Official. The list of duties in the ALAEA rules for the Federal Secretary is lengthy and includes –control and manage the office and employees of the Association. How this could ever be done by a person who also holds down employment elsewhere is beyond me. From what I know, all Federal Secretaries since the registration of our Association in 1964 have either been released from their employment for lengthy periods of time, or simply worked for us as I do. The very first Fed Sec, Don Coleman did so for 12 years. The consequences of the AEC decision could effectively leave our union leaderless and must be corrected.
Most of you do know me in some capacity and will be well aware that in my view, no mountain range exists without a pass. Steve Re and I have identified a few and if one is blocked, rest assured we will find another.
Cheers
Steve Purvinas