Lawsuit!

[xsbank]

WCB is suing Beechcraft, Pratt and Whitney, Raisbeck and Transport Canada (for fires after crashes and loose oil caps despite TSB recommendations) for negligence in the crash and death of Luc Fortin and his copilot. How else will they get things changed?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Has this ever been done before ?

[Rowdy]

The Gubmment is suing the gubbment?

Just goes to show you how corrupt and greedy workslowbc is...

[xsbank]

To be fair, it was a news article in the local rag. The paper said WCB was 'suing on behalf of the families' (not an actual quote, the paper is in the bin). In fact, they don't even call it WCB any more. A cynic might suggest that Worksafe has been nailed as Luc was killed on the job so they are trying to recover their costs. Suing Transport makes me happy (even though they will probably put up my medical fees).

[The Mole]

"This aircraft meets safety standards set out in 1955ish, it does not meet modern safety standards, fly at your own risk, oh and in California it causes cancer" and the lawyers make millions......

[ODA]

That is quite standard. WCB sues the companies to recoup the payments they have to make for years to the families or the injured party. They only go after the insurance money from what I understand. Basically our government work insurance company suing other companies insurance money.

Lawyers making lots of money.

[xsbank]

You should have been a lawyer then you could have owned your own airplane.

In fact, corporate lawyers are on salary, like we all should be.

[ODA]

WCB hires outside firms to sue, so I can't imagine they just pay a flat rate. I could be wrong, but I would imagine most firms charge by the hour.

[xsbank]

WCB has doctors on staff, why not lawyers?

Why does it annoy you that some lawyers are paid well? I know a pilot who was making just under $400,000 US, tax free. His employer paid his tax. Does that annoy you? Should people who become good at their profession or have worked hard or perhaps just got lucky annoy you too? Many lawyers do not make a lot of money but those who do put in years of difficult education and they put in the same duty days that lots of us do, they just won't work for nothing like many pilots will.

They have a very strong professional organization that regulates them too.

The fact is, modern life is very complicated and the interpretation of the rules that run it is beyond most of us. I have friend who has his own law firm and he works as hard at his business as anybody I know. He is commonly at work on the weekends, in early and not out til late. Court days are worse. He's not a rich man but he lives in a house in Vancouver so you know he's in debt. He loves his work, surprisingly more so than many pilots I know who have chosen to be under-employed and under-paid. He has all of the issues of his job plus he employs a dozen others whom he supports.

Re-examine your prejudices. Corruption should annoy you, dishonesty should annoy you. Law-breakers should annoy you. Mike Duffy should annoy you, but why should an officer of the court annoy you?

[The Mole]

Its not that lawyers are well paid, its that lawsuits usually change nothing. Same old planes, blame the crew and chalk it up to more training.

[single_swine_herder]

Actually Mole, suits change a great deal in the industry, but unfortunately you and most of the aviation group don't follow up on the significance of precedents, judgements, and jurisprudence and carry on doing the same old stuff in the same old way, not having learned what happens when somebody messes up on the job, or sends an aircraft load of people out in poor wx, missing training, lousy condition, ..... the list is endless on stupid things being done because the people concerned are ignorant of what they are gambling with.

[Old fella]

"Re-examine your prejudices. Corruption should annoy you, dishonesty should annoy you. Law-breakers should annoy you. Mike Duffy should annoy you, but why should an officer of the court annoy you?"


Good point.

[JBI]

"Re-examine your prejudices. Corruption should annoy you, dishonesty should annoy you. Law-breakers should annoy you. Mike Duffy should annoy you, but why should an officer of the court annoy you?"

Good point.

*sniff - This brings a tear to my eye - someone actually sticking up for lawyers.

It is a pretty standard thing that WCB will look at bringing an action against potential tortfeasors who are not protected under the Worker's Compensation Act (i.e. manufacturers, regulator and those not considered a 'worker' or 'employer'.

In some respects it is simply insurance companies fighting over money, in other respects its an interesting way of allocating risk. Worker's Compensation across the country is considered an "historic trade-off" - if a worker gets hurt at work, whether or not someone is at fault, they will receive benefits. This means that even if the worker is responsible for his/her own injuries or no one is responsible, they will receive worker's compensation benefits. The trade off is that if the employer or another worker could be considered responsible for the injuries, the injured worker is not entitled to sue.

This doesn't mean that the employer will get off scot free if they have made a mistake, WCB's have the ability to increase premiums as well as fine an offending employer.

WCB's are also entitled to subrogate damages on behalf of the injured worker against other parties that may be responsible, or partially responsible for a loss. These other parties are usually insured. While the insurance would likely be responsible for paying out a claim if one was found, it would also likely affect the premiums of the responsible party for their commercial general liability insurance.

WorksafeBC does have their own lawyers, but they are likely using outside counsel for this lawsuit. They often use a plaintiff's firm in BC that focuses on aviation work. While they often act against air operators, they are very good, professional and well respected.

The Canadian legal system, especially when it involves aviation accidents, is not perfect. It's based on an 'adversarial system'. But, in my opinion, compared to some of the other systems out there, its pretty good.

[Rowdy]

WCB has doctors on staff, why not lawyers?

*edited* JBI beat me to it. Thank you sir.

They have quite the legal department actually… It is of no surprise that they would utilize an outside agency specializing or with a standing history of aviation related cases though. It is in the end, all about the money and not at all about the safety.

[cncpc]

WCB has doctors on staff, why not lawyers?

Why does it annoy you that some lawyers are paid well? I know a pilot who was making just under $400,000 US, tax free. His employer paid his tax. Does that annoy you? Should people who become good at their profession or have worked hard or perhaps just got lucky annoy you too? Many lawyers do not make a lot of money but those who do put in years of difficult education and they put in the same duty days that lots of us do, they just won't work for nothing like many pilots will.

They have a very strong professional organization that regulates them too.

The fact is, modern life is very complicated and the interpretation of the rules that run it is beyond most of us. I have friend who has his own law firm and he works as hard at his business as anybody I know. He is commonly at work on the weekends, in early and not out til late. Court days are worse. He's not a rich man but he lives in a house in Vancouver so you know he's in debt. He loves his work, surprisingly more so than many pilots I know who have chosen to be under-employed and under-paid. He has all of the issues of his job plus he employs a dozen others whom he supports.

Re-examine your prejudices. Corruption should annoy you, dishonesty should annoy you. Law-breakers should annoy you. Mike Duffy should annoy you, but why should an officer of the court annoy you?

Well, XS, you probably won't like this and what I say certainly doesn't apply to all lawyers, but the fact that lawyers ARE officers of the court is the most ghastly part of the whole system. I know of lawyers that have condoned perjury and committed criminal offences within their practices. And I don't mean smoking a joint or snorting a line, I mean criminal offences against the administration of justice. And it happens right in front of the judges of the court, they know its happening, and they just ignore it.

There isn't a reason in the world why it should take 8 years to be admitted to the bar. Most lawyers adopt a restricted type of practice, and two of the three years they spend in law school may as well be, and often is, forgotten within a year of settling into their specialty. The four years in a prior bachelor's degree is a waste of time. But it engenders a sense of exaggerated entitlement.

We operate within a common law legal system. That is complete shite. It really means the democratic process has little real meaning. There is a saying that the law is what judges say it is. Judges aren't elected, yet they say what the law is. The myth we live with is that we all decide what the law is. So we have lawyers having to study legal precedents for years, and for days before a case, charging upwards of $500 an hour to represent their hapless clients.

The law is only complicated because lawyers, and only lawyers, get to write it. It is always written to maintain a requirement that the legal profession be perpetuated. Why would a rational society allow IT'S law to be written in a way that ordinary members of that society cannot understand it, and argue it directly before a court.

Civil law, which is the form of law in practically all of the non English world, places far less reliance on lawyers. The law does not require interpretation. Every possible question about what the law means and how it is to be applied in written into civil codes. Precedent is almost non existent. The only issue in a case is what are the facts, and with those facts, what is the legal outcome.

Civil law has a bad name because the presumption of innocence does not apply, and the presumption of guilt does when someone is charged by the police. So it implies a police state, and the truth is that most of the continental European states are police states, but not extremely so.

Most specialties in the law could be taught in a series of college courses within six months to a year. That might justify a rate of $40 to $50 an hour. At the end of the day, it is up to judges to make sure the outcome of cases before them is just. That's why its called justice.

[xsbank]

Actually, I don't mind what you're saying at all, and I certainly believe you have the right to say it.

Attacking all lawyers because some do drugs or have committed malfeasance is no more reasonable than making all pilots have drug tests - oh, wait, we talked about that...

Lawyers are paid well because they can be. We need their services and in order for them to provide them, we pay. This is something that has been lost in aviation. Oh, they also have bar associations that limit entrance and discipline their members. We haven't even come close to that.

Try and understand the laws, precedents etc. about buying a used boat in BC. That's a good one to start with, I'm just going through that and thank Dog I have a friend who specializes in contracts.

Anyway, know why we wear seatbelts? Know why we have airbags? Why cars and planes are safer? Lawsuits do have a purpose.

[ODA]

Sorry xsbank, didn't mean to offend you.

I wasn't attacking lawyers, my point was someone gets hurt or killed and the insurance companies either government or private sector basically fight over who has to pay the money and pay lawyers from my personal experience in WCB matters a lot of money to do that. The person hurt or injured gets the same amount but huge sums are paid to fight over the initial amount.

Always seemed crazy to me. That's all.

[xsbank]

I'm not offended, reasonable difference of opinions.

Every time I try and accomplish something, I am amazed and boggled that anything at all gets done in Canada, from municipalities taking extra cash so developers can buy better zoning to one-lane highways and giant taxes so we can pay senators and ferry corp bosses and subsidies to every politician's favourite cause. We can't buy a helicopter fleet, build a ship nor patrol our Arctic. The politicians are thieves, the police are brutal, the courts are clogged, we're filling up with illiterate immigrants, you can't drink a beer outside and on and on. If we built anything except strip malls and pipelines, we might have something worthwhile but we built all our multi-unit houses on freeways, tear up roads and put in bike paths for 2% of the population that pay no user fees for it...

This is fun, I could go on and on... Things are so fzcked up that we need highly paid professionals, like accountants and lawyers, just to explain normal everyday tasks. Done your own income tax lately? Neither have I.

I wish I could say there was something we really did right, but we only sort of get it right.

Ok, somebody rebut me. Give me a list of stuff we do well. Indigenous peoples? Uh, no. Military? Hmmm. Health care? No. Six months for a knee operation... Transportation? Fishing? Logging? Highways?

[photofly]

Most likely you have a hot meal every day, somewhere warm to sleep, and nobody kicks down your door in the middle of the night to take your children away or torture your wife.

If you need a new knee, you're odds on to get one.

I'd say, compared to most of the world, Canadians have it presented to them on a plate.

Oh, and maybe you could devote some time teaching illiterate immigrants to read and write, instead of complaining about them.

[Old fella]

Since the topic is law , here is my favorite:

"The law does not impose any duty to speak and so any refusal to do so cannot imply guilt."

[Beefitarian]

You're spot on photo. A long wait for knee surgery beats having to make a sign and hope for alms.

That just does not make me feel better about probable corrupt people, suing everyone like an american to take money for WCB, which then tells people like my co-worker he hurt his knees doing something other than working construction. Sorry, no soup for you.

Canada is pretty good it should be better. I'll try to be thankful for the good parts.

[xsbank]

If the best you can say about Canada is that nobody is trying to steal my family and I have a hot meal most of the time, wouldn't you say that was being damned with faint praise? I mean really, is banality the most we can aspire to?

Did you see that Roman Eagle that was dug up in London a day or so ago? Archaeologists will be digging up Molson empties and McDonald's styrofoam cups when the time comes to sift through what was Canada.