Glen and AOTW: Please read my post at #2144 again, twice.
The fact that you are unable to write a single sentence explaining HOW APTA would bring ‘rogue’ ‘Alliance’ ‘member’ personnel under control, legally and effectively, highlights the core regulatory issue. I explained HOW it works in a ‘standard’ structure where the AOC holder is the employer of the personnel. Can you identify any flaw in my explanation?
Yes Glen: APTA is ‘responsible’. Yes AOTW: The HOO is ‘responsible’. That’s precisely why CASA took action against APTA’s certificate. It finally dawned, on the adults in CASA, that CASA had been authorising flying training activities under the authority of APTA’s AOC when APTA had no legal and effective means of controlling the personnel delivering the training. It’s that simple.
And that’s the last time I’ll say it.
And, again for the last time, CASA could and should have put the issue of legal and effective control of ‘Alliance’ ‘member’ personnel front and centre at the start of APTA’s Part 142/142 regulatory journey. The issue could and should have dealt with years ago. APTA’s demise was another sacrifice to CASA’s incompetence and complex regulatory system.