Brexit and the Aviation industry
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umm. No, that is not what it says. It says it is an area where there could be, at some undefined point in the future, a possibility to recognize licenses. Once the UK CAA has a proven track record of being a fully fledged regulator and authority. Usually that takes a few years.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by https://www.easa.europa.eu/the-agency/faqs/brexit#category-aircrew-training-and-licensing-
As of January 1, 2021 licenses and certificates issued by UK will no longer be valid in EASA Member States and will be treated as a third country licences and certificates. Accordingly, as of that date a UK issued ATPL cannot be used to operate aircraft of commercial operators under oversight of EASA Member States.
As of January 1, 2021 in order to obtain a Part-FCL licence from an EASA Member State, UK licence holders must follow a conversion process as per Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2020/723.
As of January 1, 2021 in order to obtain a Part-FCL licence from an EASA Member State, UK licence holders must follow a conversion process as per Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2020/723.
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dannyboy39
The problem is not the status quo. Of course the UKCAA is mirroring EASA rules at the moment. However in the future it will divert from the alignment and therefore it will have to be treated the same way as EASA is dealing with the FAA for example. It was the choice of the British government to leave EASA. In fact you don’t even have to be a EU member state to be part of EASA.
The problem is not the status quo. Of course the UKCAA is mirroring EASA rules at the moment. However in the future it will divert from the alignment and therefore it will have to be treated the same way as EASA is dealing with the FAA for example. It was the choice of the British government to leave EASA. In fact you don’t even have to be a EU member state to be part of EASA.
Sure, and as per the above we need to wait for the full text. It is a completely needless thing to do for the U.K. to leave EASA but I guess if it had EU in the name, the Brexiteers in Chief would’ve been crying foul. EASA being the most rigorous safety authority in the world.
I just think it’s laughable that despite the U.K. having some of the finest certifying staff in the world, a CAA Form 1 for example is not acceptable for a French MRO for instance, or now an aircraft would need to be exported from UK to EASA state and the whole airworthiness review programme started from scratch. Bureaucracy for bureaucracy sake.
I guess there may be instances (flight time directives) that the U.K. may want to divert from, but can you really imagine a Tory government doing something which helps the workers?
I just think it’s laughable that despite the U.K. having some of the finest certifying staff in the world, a CAA Form 1 for example is not acceptable for a French MRO for instance, or now an aircraft would need to be exported from UK to EASA state and the whole airworthiness review programme started from scratch. Bureaucracy for bureaucracy sake.
I guess there may be instances (flight time directives) that the U.K. may want to divert from, but can you really imagine a Tory government doing something which helps the workers?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think you can be EASA without being tied to ECJ.......Ergo.... off we trot to ensure UK aviation suffers and pays the price financially and administratively at every level with delays that will prevent businesses from even beginning the process as CAA will not have enough staff, experience or leadership to help UK aviation prosper.... I'm not trying to diss the CAA but after 30 years of flying, I really hope they can change their monika from 'Campaign Against Aviation' to 'Concerted Aviation Accelerator' ... We will see, but - again as others have said... The devil is in the detail and we will have to wait to interpret the exact text to see how it affects us.
European Court of Justice jurisdiction 34.The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ultimate jurisdiction over EASA rulings. In the case of third country member states, ECJ jurisdiction operates indirectly through arbitration committees. If the ECJ decided that a EASA ruling was inapplicable or had to be modified, EASA would abide by the ECJ’s decision, and a third country member state would have to accept EASA’s modified rules.
European Court of Justice jurisdiction 34.The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ultimate jurisdiction over EASA rulings. In the case of third country member states, ECJ jurisdiction operates indirectly through arbitration committees. If the ECJ decided that a EASA ruling was inapplicable or had to be modified, EASA would abide by the ECJ’s decision, and a third country member state would have to accept EASA’s modified rules.
Miles Magister
Indeed.
Though I suspect that there won't turn out to be much difference from the fairly dire predictions that were being made as long ago as 2017, and most recently earlier this year:
Civil Aviation Regulation - What Future after Brexit?
Civil Aerospace Aviation and Space Post Transition Period.
Indeed.
Though I suspect that there won't turn out to be much difference from the fairly dire predictions that were being made as long ago as 2017, and most recently earlier this year:
Civil Aviation Regulation - What Future after Brexit?
Civil Aerospace Aviation and Space Post Transition Period.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I ask again. With Eastern European ACMIs still allowed to provide ultra cheap services to UK airlines using their own European equipment and staff, are British employees at an even greater risk of never finding employment again? Brits will not be able to work for those ACMI providers without a visa. In theory, a UK airline can outsource 50% of its operation out to a company that doesn't need to hire Brits for those jobs. Why am I the only one getting angry about this? There is no protection for the British workforce in any of this.
Can anyone explain any other reason than the ECJ why Britain made the decision to leave EASA? The RAeS papers certainly don’t seem to support it. In the short term U.K. license holders are disadvantaged if I have understood correctly, while my EASA license is OK in the UK. Looks like there will be some jobs going at the CAA but otherwise I don’t get it. Could not the UK for example have remained an EASA member with the option to review this at some later date?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as is west altlantic
goign to hit the freighters pretty hard by the look of it, the only guys in aviation that still have a job/no pay cuts or redundancies get hit via the back door....
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Narnia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big D thanks for replying but when I click on the link it opens a document without page numbers and which does not obviously mention EASA. There is a link in it to another document with page numbers that at least on my browser do not correspond to the actual number of pages. In short can you just cut and paste the relevant text.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
I think one needs to read the full text before passing learned comment
Pages 221-225 apply.
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/re...X-1-PART-1.PDF
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I ask again. With Eastern European ACMIs still allowed to provide ultra cheap services to UK airlines using their own European equipment and staff, are British employees at an even greater risk of never finding employment again? Brits will not be able to work for those ACMI providers without a visa. In theory, a UK airline can outsource 50% of its operation out to a company that doesn't need to hire Brits for those jobs. Why am I the only one getting angry about this? There is no protection for the British workforce in any of this.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I ask again. With Eastern European ACMIs still allowed to provide ultra cheap services to UK airlines using their own European equipment and staff, are British employees at an even greater risk of never finding employment again? Brits will not be able to work for those ACMI providers without a visa. In theory, a UK airline can outsource 50% of its operation out to a company that doesn't need to hire Brits for those jobs. Why am I the only one getting angry about this? There is no protection for the British workforce in any of this.
Just a thought, there will be 2 contracts to be considered, right? The withdrawal agreement from start of 2020 and the Trade Agreement from end of 2020. I think one needs to read both of them in conjunction. Missing a regulation in one doesn't mean it's forgotten.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, English is not my native language, but I thought the term double drop refers to usually a charter flight, where airline sells tickets to two destinations on the same aircraft, so it flies from A to B, then C and then back to A, dropping and picking passengers at both B and C, but ultimately everyone travels between A and B, and A and C, and there is nobody who just takes the short local flight?
Full text published by the EU this morning.
Pages 221-225 apply.
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/re...X-1-PART-1.PDF
Pages 221-225 apply.
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/re...X-1-PART-1.PDF