D.o.m. Missing?

[jetbox]

Anybody else notice how many operators are looking for Directors of Maintnenance?
It's funny how up to 10 or 15 years ago, a chief Engineer's position was something a lot of engineers aspired to, but now it seems they can't give those jobs away! I wonder if the ridiculous amount of red tape and responsibility has anything to do with it??

 

[cyclic monkey]

D.O.M. stands for Director of Maintenance ?????????????

I always thought it was Drunk Old Man. It seemed more appropriate at many places I worked.

 

[skullcap]

Must have been quite a combo---a drunk old man and a pilot with his feet in his mouth.

 

[sharkbait]

Head for the hills boys!!! :wacko:
Methinks the Dam has burst and the excrement is about to impact the rotary air movement device. :blink:
Have fun with this one - until the moderater arrives to restore order.
I am outa this thread.

 

[widgeon]

isnt the official title now PRM . person responsible for maintenance under the new TC rules ?.

 

[cyclic monkey]

Skullcap, I will take my foot out of my mouth to apologise for any offense caused, that was not the intent.

Fly safe & have fun guys.
Cyclic Monkey.

 

[RDM]

No lines crossed here .. yet.

No names and no companies mention.... appears to be just a general dicussion.

Actually thought that things have improved drastically over the last few weeks

 

[jetbox]

Widgeon, there's actually a difference between a P.R.M. and a D.O.M.
If a company has its own AMO, then the P.R.M. is usually also the D.O.M.
For a small operator that hires a contract AMO for its maintenance, they can't have a D.O.M. but they must still have a P.R.M. to assure the contract AMO fullfills its contractual obligations.
Confused yet?? 😀 😀

 

[jetbox]

Cyclic Monkey, your interpretation of D.O.M. (taken as harmless humor of course) isn't technically that far off the mark if you go far enough in the history of some operators. I could probably name a few guys that, although are no longer among us, would pretty much fit that description to a T!! 😀 😀 😀
No offence to any drunk old men out there by the way!!! 🙄

 

[Rotorhead]

CM,

I spotted this one today and thought you might want to check it out...

http://www.ircuser.org/files/monkey.swf

RH

 

[Elvis]

 

[Charles W.]

To get even more confused.

If you are the owner of a small air service such as a small charter service or flight school with only one airplane, you are required to appoint a PRM.

This person is put in place with the approval of your regional M&M gurus to make sure that your AMO can fix the airplane that the PRM has detemined needs fixing.

Here is where I get lost in the shuffle, the PRM can be eighteen years old and have never operated nor fixed anything more complex than given himself a hand job when an as yet not fully understood sexual urge makes things feel like they need fixing.

Here is what I can't understand, if your AMO is so devoid of understanding of how to fix your airplane and identify such exotic things as re-occuring inspections how did TC approve your AMO in the first place.

Only a bureaucrat or a group of same could put such utter nonsense into the system and sit back and smugly feel they have accomplished something useful.

Then again maybe the bureaucrat gets his ideas sitting in his dark cubicle "fixing things "

Chas Reverend Chas

 

[amodao]

A potential PRM must me the requirements of CAR 726.03. TC will interview applicants to make sure they meet minimum standards.
On another note, our PMI told us that in the future TC will not be approving MCM's and MPM's. It will be up to the operator or maintenance organization to ensure that their own manuals meet CAR requirements. TC is washing their hands of any potential liability issues and they will only be providing auditing services. Fines and pulled certificates are the wave of the future.
DOM's and PRM's responsibilities are expanding and with the potential of increased liability it will be a position most people won't want to hold.
What ever happened to the Accountable Executive? :hide:

 

[skullcap]

Amodao

I understand your frustration, have the same, but quite frank the accountable executive?

I happen to be the only person who is accountable in our company, the ops manager, chief pilot, PRM, so not sure what you mean.

sc

 

[Charles W.]

Amodao :

You must also be aware that M&M can and will cull anyone they wish to from holding the position of PRM.

They can and do cull people who do not cow to their Gestapo like methods.

The interview is a sham, pure and simple because they can and do deny regardless of the quality and knowledge of the applicant.

If you are denied by M&M they will not give you any real reason with verifiable cause for the simple fact that they do not have to.

They have an internal policy document that states clearly that you cannot get your interview notes and record, even under access to information laws.

These slimy bas.arts use the excuse that the information contained in the interview contains sensitive information and will be sealed in an envelope marked " not accessible under access to information. "

Just another example of just how corrupt these people truly are.

I have a copy of their document...marked.......Protected, destroy after reading.

The Regional Director General Transport Canada, Pacific Region when I handed him the " Protected " internal policy document from M&M would not comment, except to confirm that...yes the document was genuine.

So much for fairness and transparent interaction between the regulator and their client.

Rev.