Thanks for the replies...I don't think we are any the wiser as to the original query. I do believe the key issue here is "competency" however and it was never suggested in the original thread that any body get a rating without meeting the required standards and competencies. The appendices to the CAO are quite specific in this regard and without ambiguity at all in my view, even if they are not written in the current "CBT speak" which is gradually finding its way into all our syllabii. Also, I agree with Twist and Shout.... What's unfair about expecting an ATO to assess competency?......Sheeet, what else is there for him to do!
Anyhow at the end of the day, all we are trying to say is that we shouldn't ever have to resort to hiring a bloody lawyer to get an opinion as to what an order or reg really means; nor should we be forced into "just doing it" to force the regulator to take some kind of enforcement action to to make a court make the decision; nor should we be subject to arbitrary varying decisions from different sections and offices of CASA about the same thing....
it was ever thus, I know. Sorry.......