Knowing that this is the case (and also that many people have claimed their endo despite that fact that it clearly does not meet these criteria), why then cannot the employers be a bit more flexible about how they offer employment so that the burden transfers to the ATO to some degree?
Example - offer a "training contract" to the prospective new hire with a virtually non-existent pay rate. This means the pilot is technically employed during endorsement training and can claim the expense.
Would that be feasible/legal - any punts?