You are right, however it may indirectly have to do with Brexit, where flying rights may not be guaranteed anymore, bookings drop, and the airline prefers to use the UK-route aircraft in other markets, rather than having them sit idle at Dublin in future. How many aircraft does Ryanair use daily for its Dublin-UK flights?

Isnt that a bit of a reach considering that it was only last month that Ryanair announced they were creating a base at Southend from next year?. Far more likely that this is simply a bargaining (?) tactic by O'leary in his fight with the Pilots union.

Does sound awfully like the arrangement with Switzerland's EASA membership (and maybe other EFTAs - not sure) though doesn't it? Switzerland appears to have issues with ECJ jurisdiction.

Personally I think (and this applies to both sides) that what should be being asked for (at least at this stage) is things that already have precedent, ie. what other non-EU states already get or give. Once you've reached agreement in all the areas where there precedents, then you can move onto the areas where a full-custom-never-done-before solution would be required. Of course I'm not running things so both the sides have gone headlong into "full custom never done before" mode, and a pantomime where the EU says "tell us what you want", the UK says "we want X Y Z cake+eat+knobs-on" and the EU says "that's impossible, tell us what you want".

If, in terms of EASA, the UK did just ask for what the EU already gave someone else then that ought to be progress - the EU can no longer say "that is impossible" for a start. The EU can still say "**** off, you're not having that because we don't like you as much as X" or suck their cheeks in and say "well, that'll cost you...", or whatever, but at least we will have moved from the "impossible" to the negotiable.

Canary Islands
 

We've been thinking of booking a trip to Spain this year and I'm thinking if where in Canary we will go but I think is a good place to see like what I've read in this article

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...a94075ccca.jpg

Job advert for EZS, FYI

Can you state where the above advert is from Airone2977?
Given the terrible grammar, nonsensical first sentence and all current vacancies listed on EZY website specifically state UK licences are accepted (including EU bases). I would bet good money on it being fake.

Directly from EZY careers website...

Link

why not stay in EASA
 

To remain a member, the UK must recognize the authority of the European Court of Justice because that is the ultimate arbitration authority to EASA. The UK government does not want to accept ANY authority of the EJC, and will also no longer have any influence on the ECJ. Therefore, the UK government does not WANT to stay in EASA.

Norway and Switzerland etc do not have such a chip on their shoulder and accept ECJ, even without having a say in it. It's called pragmatism.

Apparently Easyjet is going to have its pilots based on the continent transfer their licences to either Germany or Austria.
Project fear; I fear not.

Given the farcical way the CAA is presently dealing even with the most ordinary task re. licensing, I guess that's the ONLY sensible thing to do. There is very little "Civil" left while the "Authority" has now become synonymous with chaos.

DK

The UK said in the "White Paper" that they actually WANT to stay in EASA.
I think it also said that they could accept the ECJ in this particular area (I'm not sure about this last one, please check the WP for clarification).

But of course, the EU is unlikely to accept the UK "cherry picking", and if they don't sign the withrawal agreement (with the North Ireland backstop, etc.) the likely outcome it's a no-deal with the UK being out of every EU agency. So if we don't see a change in the negotiations (by the way, they are sitting today but nothing new is expected), UK will be out of EASA by April 2019.
Perhaps the EU let's UK license holders transfer to an EASA countrie beyond this date, nobody knows.

How many times must it be repeated. The UK have requested to stay in EASA and changed their red line on ECJ jurisdiction to accommodate that request.

It is now up to the EU to decide whether they will allow the UK to remain or not.

I dont see why EASA membership needs to be tied to any other deal. For example the UAE follow EASA Regulation through their working arrangement with EASA and the GCAA changed their entire Licensing system to align with EASA. OK they are not a full voting member but to all intents they are a part of EASA, so would it really be such a stretch for the UK to remain a member?

"Following a regulation" and "being a part of" do not seem to me to be the same thing.... And GCAA are not a part of EASA at all!
Moreover, although no many and not too much significant, there are differences between EASA and GCAA regulations.

But currently there are no differences between the UK regulatory system and EASA - the UK is just asking that that situation continues.

But the ball is in the EU's court.

Whilst I think your cliche massively oversimplifies a very complex negotiation, I do I agree that's where we seem to be at this point in time.

The problem, of course, is that many of us (on both sides of the channel) are wondering if the EU will just quietly put the ball in their pocket and casually stroll off the court.

I'm sure the EU politicians would love to do that. But the damage it would do to the aviation sector within the EU would be immense, so I'm hopeful that cooler heads will prevail.