Thank you for raising the issue of the OML limitation which from a professional pilots perspective is "a kiss of death" in terms of career development, destroying opportunities to change airlines and aircraft type. Effectively it brings to an end a career as an airline pilot unless the victim who has had it imposed on them is willing and able to continue with their present operator until retirement. By handcuffing the pilot to their present operator by making it impossible to change jobs the limitation can be unsafe by potentially exposing the individual to which it is imposed to further harm. It could be that the present job into which the victim is now handcuffed by the OML, is what provoked the medical condition that gave rise to the OML in the first place. The OML is like having lung condition and then having your aero medical authority impose limitations on you which mean you are forced to continue to smoke.
The Basic Aircrew Regulation requires that medical records be kept confidential yet on a public document the medical certificate, the OML limitation is printed for all and sundry to see. Completely discriminatory. Additionally it is a requirement of the regulations that special consideration be given to not imposing a limitation where an individual fails to meet a requirement but were no flight safety issue is involved. This thought process rarely happens and limitations are imposed inconsistently more often as not as a backside covering exercise. I had a discrete one off medical event in Jan 2016. The AMC says that following this event a pilot should be considered unfit for a period of 3 months. I was grounded for 9 months. My medical was returned with an OML limitation and an OSL limitation which was removed following an argument. A colleague working at the same base as me on the same aircraft as me had the same condition and was returned to flying without an OML being imposed while the aero medical section claim that the regulations tie their hands in terms of its imposition on me. The OML is not an effective medical limitation it is a highly discriminatory restraint of trade.
A flying instructor with an OML can teach a PPL trial lesson to an individual with zero flying hours. In the very same aircraft, at the very same flying school, from the very same airfield, in the very same weather conditions the same instructor is banned by the OML limitation from teaching a 300 hour student with a PPL and an IR on a CPL flying course. Even though the flying instructor holds an ATPL or CPL. This is a restraint of trade and not a medical limitation.
I invite anybody who has had an OML limitation imposed on them against their will who believes that the limitation has been imposed on them in an unsatisfactory way, or who has been discriminated against because of it or who has had their trade restricted as a result to get in touch.
If there is widespread evidence of the unsatisfactory impact of the OML we could perhaps join forces to mitigate this adverse outcome.