Monsieur Le Pen is correct when he says that the AWNs and other current regulations give us less freedom to manouver. Recent changes in regulations have been deliberately designed to reduce the individual LAE's authority. Mighty Thor seems to say that we engineering staff are seeking a nanny, but that isn't really the case. We started by discussing the current state of engineering. Why do aircraft depart with so many deferred (officially or otherwise) defects? Why do LAEs sign out such 'heaps' and 'old bangers'? What happened to standards? Why are maintenance errors on the increase, when all other accident causes are on the decline? Occasionally LAEs put their foot down - a certain Acelindic heap of corroded aluminium scrap, masquerading as a B757 comes to mind - but there is genuine cause for concern, and while Scudhunter tries to provoke someone into shopping a specific airline or two, its really an industry wide problem. We discuss it here because there isn't anywhere else. Perhaps if CHIRP really worked and anyone took any notice of what we say, action would already be taken to ensure that sufficient quantities of qualified staff are available to do the job.
That perhaps is the root of the problem. Numbers. Management works in numbers, modern business is after all, just a numbers game. Airline X has so many aeroplanes and only Y number of engineering staff, so we can manage with the same number per aircraft too. Chop! Chop! - out go the redundancy notices, down go the remaining heads, and scribble, scribble go the pens in the Tech Logs. Got to keep paying the mortgage haven't we?
I don't see any solution, but that's no reason for not discussing the problem.
**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema