Independence of Examiners
Breaking off from the "FE Insurance" Thread due Thread creep.
A PPL Student (for example) can collect all the paperwork from their
ATO, including the all important "Recommended for Test" signature, and
then go to any airfield they like and be tested by any Examiner they like.
An ATO has no official involvement in the Test.
Usually a student will ask, or even expect, for the ATO which they did
their training to also help organise their Test; and ATOs will probably
approach Examiners they know, which would also include some who are
employed by them as an Instructor. I have no problem with this - It is,
after all, how the world works.
An Examiner should be an independent and impartial judge of a candidate's
performance on the day.
EASA seem to agree with this given the Part-FCL.1005 "Vested Interest"
section - perhaps even too strictly given the No Training, no matter how
little or how long ago clause.
Therefore no Examiner (in my opinion) should be employed, as such, by
any ATO and no Examiner should be "Approved by", "Associated with" or
"Nominated by" any ATO - as this all leads to a reduction in perceived, or
actual, independence.
Over 18 months ago the UK CAA requested permission of all UK Examiners
to publish their details. This National list should be published, with ATOs
allowed to (or even told to) arrange Tests, for their students, using anyone
they like from the National list and NOT having their own, limited, list of
nominated Examiners.
If the CAA still require a monthly return of Examiners used - no problem.