airsupport
You're banging your head against a brick wall with this bloke. He has been indoctrinated to the attitude that because he can kick the tyres, move the flight controls up and down and pull the birds nest out of the intake of a bugsmasher, he is now qualified to make airworthiness decisions regarding vastly more sophisticated and complicated machines and with far more at stake. The pilot carrying out the daily is traditional in GA not RPT. If he doesn't see the difference then you've got to wonder.
Some people seem to think this is just an exercise in exerting industrial muscle. That is absolute bull$hit and to suggest so is to approach the argument with your head firmly embedded up your @rse . There certainly is a lot of concern amongst engineers about their futures, but the crux of this argument is safety and whether or not safety is being compromised by removing LAMEs from the transit inspection (which by the way checkerboard is TRADITIONALLY done by a LAME in RPT) and attempting to make airworthiness determinations with people not qualified to do so - no matter how qualified they 'think' they may be. All to save some dollars.
As the saying goes, ' if you think safety is expensive, try having an accident'