JAR to EASA to ???
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: By the Sea
JAR to EASA to ???
With the change over from JAA to EASA happening now, my understanding is that it has all been changed to allow for a united standard that encompasses all the EU region, with one that also has some legal foundation. It got me wondering however watching the news on Greece and the possibility of them exiting the EU, and perhaps making it possible for other countries to do the same, fragmenting the UE as we know it.
Would that mean that today a Greek licence is OK for EASA, but tomorrow with no changes in their standards, it is not. Or would that open the door for a non-EU country to still be a member of the EASA group? Any of you legal minded guys got any ideas?
Would that mean that today a Greek licence is OK for EASA, but tomorrow with no changes in their standards, it is not. Or would that open the door for a non-EU country to still be a member of the EASA group? Any of you legal minded guys got any ideas?
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
From: Sandpit
Im not well read in all and whatnot, but the previous poster is correct.
You have the EU (European Union) the EuroZone, the EEC (European Economic Community) etc. Countries such as Sweden are not part of the Euro or the EEC but are still members of the EU and licensed under the JAA. Norway and Switzerland aren't even in the EU!
Greece may leave the Euro, maybe even the EEC, but they will never leave the EU and hence it should have no effect on flight crew licensing.
DB
You have the EU (European Union) the EuroZone, the EEC (European Economic Community) etc. Countries such as Sweden are not part of the Euro or the EEC but are still members of the EU and licensed under the JAA. Norway and Switzerland aren't even in the EU!
Greece may leave the Euro, maybe even the EEC, but they will never leave the EU and hence it should have no effect on flight crew licensing.
DB
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Paris, France
I agree with previous post.
You should also be reminded that non-EU countries can participate to some pan-european programs such as the Schengen Agreement (leaded by EU countries). Switzerland, a neutral country signed this agreement while UK did not.
So in the unlileky event of a sudden Greece "depressurization" they probably will be allowed to sign separate agreements to continue interacting with some EU agencies.
My 2 cents
You should also be reminded that non-EU countries can participate to some pan-european programs such as the Schengen Agreement (leaded by EU countries). Switzerland, a neutral country signed this agreement while UK did not.
So in the unlileky event of a sudden Greece "depressurization" they probably will be allowed to sign separate agreements to continue interacting with some EU agencies.
My 2 cents
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 680
Likes: 3
From: Who cares? ;-)
being a member of EASA does not necessarily mean being a member of the EU as such, as has been already mentioned. A number of countries are not (or not yet) EU members but are still a part of EASA. And there may be one or the other EU country not doing the EASA thing (I'm not sure on that). The EASA homepage should have a listing of countries in EASA (but their homepage is so impossible to navigate! no pun intended 
)
)
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,761
Likes: 6
From: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
er, no it would not. Part of the FAA's role is promotional, and therefore political, and the bubbles have got quite enough political issues already.
If the FAA were not political, and did not do stuff like having a go at BA for a perfectly safe 3 engine flight on a 747, then they might have a bit more credibility.
(Bubble and squeak = Greek)
If the FAA were not political, and did not do stuff like having a go at BA for a perfectly safe 3 engine flight on a 747, then they might have a bit more credibility.
(Bubble and squeak = Greek)
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: by the fire
Well, the only thing we do know is that we don't know, and it's a good bet that the powers that be don't know either. From the UK perspective EASA is a big change in that as it's EU law it supercedes national laws. This doesn't give any wiggle room for national differences - such as retaining expired type ratings in a licence. If a non EU state (or even an ex EU state - we can but live in hope) is signed up to EASA, the primacy of EU law and regulation no longer applies. I appreciate that not all JAR contracting states were EU members but isn't EASA a thing of the EU?
Working in the gulf I do see that my local CAA has cut and pasted the JAR manuals and is to all intents and purposes JAR compliant. I guess the same will happen with the EASA stuff in due course.
Working in the gulf I do see that my local CAA has cut and pasted the JAR manuals and is to all intents and purposes JAR compliant. I guess the same will happen with the EASA stuff in due course.
