Cemair grounded - wins Appeal yet again!

[Johan.botha]

I see this letter from the CAA to Cemair's lawyers, was shared on AOPAs Facebook page.

Well this is an interesting collection of words. Its a trantrum on paper rather than a reasoned response. What does the repetition achieve?

[CAAworker]

Moderators Message:

Profile details are fake. Content removed. Please see T&Cs

[Jack Welles]

I see this letter from the CAA to Cemair's lawyers, was shared on AOPAs Facebook page.

Well this is an interesting collection of words. Its a trantrum on paper rather than a reasoned response. What does the repetition achieve?

In the legal world it's necessary to not allow averments to go unchallenged for too long because a court could consider that as an admission of the said averments correctness.

Tantrum on paper? As a real lawyer, I think not. Indeed I thought it quite well written and serves it's purpose (see above). However I must confess that I was tickled to note that the letter vindicated my earlier expressed concern with the "interpretation" in re asking for more info while doing their assessment

[Jack Welles]

Moderators Message:

Profile details are fake. Content removed. Please see T&Cs

Hmmm! Why does this not surprise?

[The Hun]

To choose to live in SA today, you have to be a Dreamer, an Optimist, or Corrupt.
( really would have loved to fly a few more years for CemAir)
Roland Raible

[cage]

Hmmm! Why does this not surprise?

That's because you like to look at things on face value and apply your mind.
If you just want to jump on the bandwagon of anything that validates your beliefs then don't let any thinking get in the way.
Likeity..like..like...like.

Anonymous members are pure evil apparently, unless they support your views.

[cage]

.. As a real lawyer, I think not. Indeed I thought it quite well written and serves it's purpose (see above).

Having sent a few, and been on the receiving end, I thought so as well.
They did that old lawyery trick of acknowledging the points but not responding to all of them so you don't provide more ammo or creedance to the request.
If someone thinks this is a tantrum then they haven't spent much time in this sphere.
They should all put the lawyers away and try find a way to move ahead.
Matters of principle and lawyers don't achieve anything constructive, apart from buying the partners a nice house, office and sportscar.

Richard S summed it up well and this thread should have called it quits with his post.

[Wildcat_004]

Why are certain posts just removed?

[Multirotordronepilot]

Moderators Message:

Profile details are fake. Content removed. Please see T&Cs

Hmmm! Why does this not surprise?

Having engaged with many CAA employees where the felling was absolutely identical with regards to everything which that poster had to say but excluding all specific details around the Cemair debacle. It struck a chord with me and I believe those sentiments to be a true reflection of what many SACAA employees feelings around the regulator.

I did however question the specifics mentioned wrt the Cemair debacle and on reading the post wished they could have been separated. As I say for the rest of the content, its was 100% spot on. So whether the originator's details were fake and content designed to influence opinion or not my feelings remain unchanged about everything excluding the specifics to the Cemair issue.

[Multirotordronepilot]

.. As a real lawyer, I think not. Indeed I thought it quite well written and serves it's purpose (see above).

Richard S summed it up well and this thread should have called it quits with his post.

I agree and I think it was but then the gates were opened again for some reason ?

[Jack Welles]

[Richard S summed it up well and this thread should have called it quits with his post.

New info came up that the mods thought was pertinent.

As long as the exchanges are relatively on topic and not too toxic I, for one, see no reason why a topic that interests many people shouldn't stay open. Those that are not interested should just skip the thread.

One aspect to the post that was removed interested me: it showed comprehensively the power of confirmation bias by attracting 15 likes on a first post, despite having no evidence to substantiate the claims made therein (not saying they weren't true or that they were true). But people were immediately content to accept the content as being valid without question because it suited the narrative they have chosen to support.

[Multirotordronepilot]

[Richard S summed it up well and this thread should have called it quits with his post.

New info came up that the mods thought was pertinent.

As long as the exchanges are relatively on topic and not too toxic I, for one, see no reason why a topic that interests many people shouldn't stay open. Those that are not interested should just skip the thread.

One aspect to the post that was removed interested me: it showed comprehensively the power of confirmation bias by attracting 15 likes on a first post, despite having no evidence to substantiate the claims made therein (not saying they weren't true or that they were true). But people were immediately content to accept the content as being valid without question because it suited the narrative they have chosen to support.

Agree absolutely that is interesting.

I've identified exactly what part of it captured me and what did not. I wonder if anyone else separated it at any or a similar level. Still very interested the amount and pace at which it received that level of attention.

[Johan.botha]

The CAA seems to be happy with being in a PR sinkhole. To issue a press statement that says basically that no one will tell us what to do is effectively a middle finger to the DoT, courts, CAAC etc. Words backed up by actions because there is no appeal and no implementation now almost a month after the judgement and this is the correspondence they are issuing.

Whilst the management may see this approach as a show of strength it is probably seen more as a demonstration of the level of decay. Were it a society bound by rule of law one would expect suspensions, investigations, retractions of media statements and much more. For an administrative body to not heed to its higher power shows something is very badly wrong.

South Africa has obviously changed a lot over the last 20 or so years. Everyone has their own view on its future prospects but if there is not seen to be respect for rule of law then the number of optimists will reduce quickly.

The global community is watching this. The judgement is shared far and wide and this is becoming the litmus test for SA at a time of change. Does the gov step in and protect its citizens from unlawful acts or does it let the CAA do whatever it wants.

[PST]

This one is from the SACAA PR social media campaign archives... how times have changed.

CAA Facebook 12 february 2018.jpg

[Jack Welles]

The global community is watching this. The judgement is shared far and wide and this is becoming the litmus test for SA at a time of change. Does the gov step in and protect its citizens from unlawful acts or does it let the CAA do whatever it wants.

Somewhat melodramatic!

The "global community" doesn't give a tinkers what happens in the interplay between a minor regulatory authority and a small, inconsequential airline. They are much more interested in what's going to happen to Eskom (and its debt) and the other SOE's and whether the on-going Commissions of Inquiry are going to produce practical results, basically will Cyril produce the goods.