Typical "I follow-the-rules-and-am-therefore-always-right" reply. How can you justify comparing compliance with defined flight limitations (if you do this , you will crash) with judgemental decisions i.e. chartered aircraft from known customer, known passenger list, therefore = risk of endangering aircraft if passenger on flight deck = zero. I see no similarity.
Both of them them are the same. They are in contravention of the company's Operation Manual which is approved by the CAA as a condition of their Aircraft Operators Certificate. Compliance to the Ops Manual is a condition under which the aircraft is insured. There are mandatory requirements under the Air Navigation Act that must be followed and the prohibition of passengers on on the flight deck on a public transport aircraft above a certain weight is one of them.
It's not jobsworth, IT IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.
Outwith that you are flying an aircraft illegally and it is not insured. You can take your chances but if something goes wrong, maybe something entirely unconnected with what you are doing, you are in it, way up to your neck and beyond. It will not only effect you but also your family, perhaps for ever.
The civil aviation safety record in the developed world has been brought about by the strict adherance to Ops Manuals and SOPs. Go back fifty years to when the captain did more or less as he liked or even now in the third world where the same attitude still prevails and it is a completely different story.
I knew Pablo, briefly, and I have a lot of sympathy for him but he overstepped the mark.
F-e-driver - not so sure.
I obviously wasted my time getting a 38Grp 'A' Category.
Don't walk into Graham Bearham on a dark night.