Scroggs: Your points are interesting, and I don't disagree, considering that we study information and procedures which go far beyond what might be required for other 'transport industry' jobs, and there is much more to be aware of. At my last oral (on a 'steam-gauge' turbofan), the Check Airman did not ask us any deep systems questions. As for the potential question regarding whether continuous ignition uses 4 joules or 20 joules, we're fortunate that such rote memorization has no connection with 'real-world' pilot judgement or procedural compliance.
Hopefully, there is enough in our AOM, FOM and COM (along with the liability placed on us, which deflects a lot of it from the company) which could justify our wanting industry-level pay and benefits.
What I can't figure out is why in many countries, pilots apparently seem to study how clearways are designed, how weather forecasting formulas are done, along with other theoretical knowledge. One of our FOs here came from Cathay Pacific, and he could not believe the level of theory which is required to convert from US ratings. It was my impression that aside from that, there is still plenty for us to study and be aware of which separates our profession from others.