I think that both systems, (FAA & EASA) have their merits, but I think that the FAA are closer to the mark. Not only do you have to be able to retain a bit of knowledge, but you have to be able to show that you can DO the job also. Not just remember a load of stuff and answer some multi-guess questions.
On one hand I think that EASA/CAA were foolish to get rid of the Oral examination, on the other hand I have seen too many blo*dy good engineers passing all the exams, and then not been able to get through the oral.
There are certainly bad apples in every barrel, and the unfortunate thing is that I think that the EASA system breeds them. There are engineers out there who can pass exams every day of the week, but with a spanner in their hand, they are quite literally, and honestly, LETHAL!!!!
I would agree again with SASless and say that these people, individually, have done nothing wrong, and are not at fault. The companies that employ, and approve them however, are. But there is a problem, in one breath we are saying that there is a shortage of engineers, and that the guys who are retiring are not being replaced, then in the next breath we are condeming these people who are perhaps a little mechanically challenged, for going out there and getting their licences!!
The other problem that we face is that as companies become more and more short staffed, they are being pushed into employing contractors, which can be, for the engineer, significantly more financially beneficial. This then takes engineers from permenant employment, leaving their company short staffed. Here begins the viscious circle.
It is a very difficult time we, as an industry, are entering, and only time will tell.