OK folks, time to take the tin hats off!
I only "suggested".
Of course, I am an examiner who doesn't get his ratings paid for by an employer!
The famous libel trial between the artist James Whistler and Oscar Wilde also comes to mind.
Whistler was asked how long it took him to 'knock off' The Falling Rocket. He said that it took him two days to paint it . He was then asked whether 200 guineas was not too high a price for only two days work. To this he replied that it was not too much for the 'knowledge of a lifetime'.
Perhaps since examiners don't get paid for signing revals, some don't take it seriously enough to spend a "lifetime" acquiring the knowledge to do it in a few minutes!
That might explain the lack of "professionalism".
As someone who runs his own business, it is amazing how much time and money people who are "employees" - ie don't have to pay their own and others' bills - think can be given at "no cost".
If I "gave away" half a day a week, I would be giving away my entire profit.
ps. I actually don't charge for revals, don't charge for advice when buying aircraft, don't charge for inspecting aircraft clubmembers are thinking of buying, don't charge for advice on where to fly, don't charge for petrol runs (spent more than 1700 on petrol in the last week for Fly-UK people and actually undercharged on 20l by 19p!), don't charge for the 40 phone calls on Sunday because of crap weather around Oban and the airfield there panicking..... etc etc.
Of course, that is don't charge "directly". Still need to pay the bills somehow. So last week a propective student whose instructor has had to leave his field for a few weeks and then will be abroad for a month or two came to see about flying here.
But my hourly training rate - at £20 an hour more than his absent instructor's - was too much.
Perhaps if I charged for all those things that are free, I could charge £20 an hour less.
Or should student pilots subsidise trained pilots who - often - don't read the AICs?
Discuss.