The left seat requirement seems onerous and unnecessary.
This might take some concerted research to find out exactly what other nations do with ATPL tests. NZCAA I'm fairly sure, does not require LHS occupancy. What about EASA, FAA, TC, even China?
If no other ICAO conforming state requires LHS status for an ATPL candidate, one would have some ammunition to take to the new CASA director to have that requirement removed. After all, if no-one else does it, how can it be a "safety requirement"?
As to approaching airline management... I have approached different managers with different ideas over the years. Sometimes I was laughed out of the room. However I tended to have some success when I lined my pins up properly beforehand.
- Don't ask for stuff when the rules have just changed. No-one has understood the full impact yet, so you come across as premature or a bit panicky.
- Make sure the proposal is constructed to show how reasonable it is. The reaction you want is "well, yes of course, that's only fair".
- Make sure the costs to the company are minor and clearly identified. Think like Alan Joyce.
- Make sure the benefits to the company are more significant than the costs and clearly identified. Think like Alan Joyce.
- If the benefits to the company are negligible, make sure you have huge social pressure behind you (that is, the union). Even so, you'll probably lose the battle. Fight hard by being very professional, very courteous and being the person that management really want to keep.
All of this applies when appealing to DAS for a rule change too of course, but x10!
So those dwindling number of over 5700 Kg aircraft still on the Australian register, like the Citation 550, no longer require an ATPL,
Correct. Unless it's being used for RPT. Not many RPT AOC holders are using single pilot aircraft >5700kg. If you're one of the few affected, I do sympathise.