HF(A)
Now then, not wanting to stray off track again but your previous post begs a few answers. With a mighty 100 hours under your belt
, I'm sure I dont have to tell you that there are many kinds of defects. Some of them may immediately effect the airworthiness of the aircraft and therefore the aircraft is grounded until they are rectified. Others may be assessed as allowable but with restrictions placed on the operation of the aircraft eg VFR flight only or No night flying (faulty electrical system indication) until the defect can be rectified. Others have no impact at all on the operation of the aircraft and therefore the aircraft can be flown as normal pending rectification of the defect. The means to judge the airworthiness implications of the particular defect lie within the MEL and AMM. If, using these criteria to judge whether or not a minor leak from a brake cylinder was serious enough to ground the aircraft, the engineer deemed it to be an immediate airworthiness item, then the aircraft would have been grounded with all the implications that would have had to the club's income ie grounded aircraft = no income. If the engineer had, using the same criteria judged it to be allowable, then it would have made sense for the defect to be deferred until such time as spares and/or ground time were available to rectify it. By all means it is your duty to report any defects but it is the engineers judgement in interprepting the defect using the relevant publications, to either rectify or defer as appropriate. Of course you are also free to either accept or reject the aircraft but, the engineer has fulfilled his obligations in declaring the aircraft airworthy.
To answer your other question, I'm sure that he was offered the going rate for a Licensed (Chief) Engineer in a GA environment.