CAA standards
Why is it big companys that are correctly run and abide with all required legislation required from governing bodies eg. the CAA seem to get punished when audits are carried out. Last audit at my place of work everything was good until the CAA man looked at a work pack and decided we should make an entry in the work pack for the removel of an engine cowl on a Piper PA28 so it can be signed off as refitted on completetion of work carried out in case some one forgets to refit it. If this was a 747 then fair do but its quite obvious on a puddle jumper if the cowl is missing.
Then you get these little maintenance organisations on airfileds in the sticks that do things their own way one instance an aircraft in one hangar with its engine missing the other parts on a rack in another hangar with no labels as to what aircraft they came off and seem to get away with it. Nothing in their workpack saying engine in hangar 1 cowls on floor in hangar 2 at opposite end to the above mentioned aircraft.
I used to work for a little place in East Yorkshire and was shocked as to how much the CAA turned a blind eye to everything. If this had been a bigger company all hell would of broken out.
Also when we need a duplicate inspection we have two licensed engineers who look and sign for it. The smaller company has got permission from the CAA to have a fitter been able to sign off duplicates with the engineer that owns the company.
In the past year two MORs have been presented to the CAA about this company for fitting vital parts the wrong way round and they seem to do nothing.
I think its unfair how it seems to be one rule for one but not for the other.
Am i alone for thinking this i would like to hear your views.