You’re wrong on this big John. Here is the quote:

”The agency hired former staffers from its Office of Aerospace Medicine to help review the cases as contractors, but told them the nature of their work was secret, according to people involved in the project.”

If the reporting is correct, then overall effort was kept secret. Not specifically targeted investigations based on credible information.

You can type a million words in obfuscation which seems to be your MO so that you can win an argument by attrition, but secret means secret. That should not be the business of a government agency with no law enforcement authorities…certainly when they are targeting a specific minority group.

Also, still don’t understand the personal attacks. Do you work for the FAA and I have offended you?

 

OF COURSE REVIEWING THEIR MEDICAL RECORDS WILL BE KEPT SECRET. IT’S Required by law.

Hiring back previous medical and administrative personnel to help sort the wheat (actual threats to flying safety like an unreported seizure disorder - yikes) from the chaff (the guy didn’t report his 10% disability for flat feet….meh). Is a totally reasonable way to do this since they are already familiar with both HPPPA and the issues involved, not some Machiavellian plot. Who do you think they ought to let go through these peoples medical records and how transparent do you think it should be?

And I don’t think you have so much offended him personally as offended common sense with your paranoia and attempt to make this something it isn’t.

 

This was not a reporter’s adjective. It is in a quote that was sourced to multiple people from a reputable newspaper. Here is it is again for you John:

“The agency hired former staffers from its Office of Aerospace Medicine to help review the cases as contractors, but told them the nature of their work was secret, according to people involved in the project.”

I welcome your breakdown of my post. I try to be a fair guy, so if you have a differing opinion that doesn’t involve blanket insults, then make your argument. I’ll read it with an open mind.

ad·jec·tive /ˈajəktiv/ - a word or phrase naming an attribute, added to or grammatically related to a noun to modify or describe it.


quote /kwōt/ - repeat or copy out (a group of words from a text or speech), typically with an indication that one is not the original author or speaker.
"he quoted a passage from the Psalms"

 

Really? Travel vouchers are reviewable years after they are filed. Pay inquiries (at least for the DoD) can be initiated by a simple pay clerk. You really don’t think that a federal pension holding entity cant reach out and touch your wallet?

 

Not according to the law. The law specifically states their records may be used for “judicial and administrative purposes” or “to prevent a serious threat to health and safety.” You may not LIKE that, but it’s STILL the law.

 

If you mean that there is a statute of limitations on fraud, and you can be prosecuted if it’s discovered in that timeframe, then you are absolutely correct. Do you believe there should be no statute of limitations on fraud? That if you sneak it by the pay clerk initially you ought to be home free- even if your fraud is discovered a year later?

 

One of the three people I personally know just received a permanent airman certificate revocation and is now expecting charges. The other two are still in the records submission process with the FAA. The pilot who received the revocation had a 100% disability rating and was being compensated for service connected sleep apnea, PTSD and depression that he did not report on FAA medical application for the past several years since receiving the rating. I think part of the decision was based on how many prior medical certificate applications were submitted without checking the disability benefits block. I’m guessing here but as I understand his description of logic was a recent award where one maybe “forgot” or didn’t think to check the block could be explained/negotiated but several years of not checking it while continuing to receive compensation indicated willful behaviors in not disclosing potentially disqualifying conditions. We’ll see what the future brings. I think after this initial run, the FAA may become even more aggressive if folks aren’t being up front. I also agree with previous statements that the FAA is pursing the fraudulent applications versus necessarily actually exercising airman privileges with potentially disqualifying conditions.!

 

why do you always assume nefarious intent? Ever make a topo? I make them all he time.

 

No doubt people who dishonestly fill out a VA or FAA document should suffer appropriate punishment when it comes to light. But because there is a ver small number of people who do that, shouldn’t give the FAA blanket authority to investigate a pilot group in secret and apparently outside the scope of due process. Your painting with too wide of a brush.


On a side note, why would you be “disgusted” with someone who doesn’t share your point of view and disagrees with you? You’ve never met me yet your default seems to be vitriolic outburst because I think you’re wrong. I hope your life gets better for you because you seem to be missing something in the empathy department.

I’m also still not clear on why you think I have lied to you.

 

That is egregious and should be harshly punished after an administrative process where the accused can have an opportunity to present a case. But it doesn’t sound like they have much of a case.

If that’s how the facts played out then yes target the individual.