Well yes, that's exactly the point. The idea that making the licence transfer stupidly expensive, time consuming and stressful beause that "protects British pilot jobs for British pilots" and "stops European pilots from just transfering their EASA to a CAA and stealing jobs" doesn't really stand up.

I see some UK airlines are sponsoring pilots for work permits in the U.K due to a lack of applications from Uk based pilots. Perhaps they should raise the salaries on offer?

Stop being so 'precious'!

There are many, many professions where moving from one country to another requires even more than just sitting a few exams! Depending on the country, I know of nurses, pharmacists, accountants and lawyers who face huge retraining and exams to be accepted in another country. If you want to move to another country for a job, just do what is required in that country and quit moaning about it! (I feel that I am entitled to say just that having sat the full ATPL exams in two different countries. I just got on and did it!)

If there’s a shortage of pilots for certain UK based airlines to recruit from, they could simply introduce FUNDED training courses and recruit as many cadets as needed. Just a BA, TUI and Jet2 have done. There’s no shortage of people wanting to join this career after all

I forgot your British registered 737 was different from a French registered 737.

But there are also many many countries that recognize qualifications across borders and that helps to facilitate both ease of recruiting workers and opens up beneficial training opportunities. With reference to pharmacists, accountants and lawyers... of course you need to retrain to work in other countries, regulatory and legal frameworks for those professions vary widely country by country.... when it comes to nurses and doctors, the same applies, and in most cases it is nurses coming from countries with lower standards of training that need to prove they can operate in more highly regulated jurisdictions. Aviation is deliberately not like this... it is the point of ICAO and the SARPS, because aviation is by nature an international endeavour. But having sat both (I assume) EASA and CAA ATPLS, you tell me... can you spot the massive difference in standards and regulations that demand that you needed to prove to two different regulators that you can operate under their (presumably) massively different standards and norms? Or did you just participate in a bureaucractic waste of time and money?
For reference, I have an airline job, based in the UK... I don't need to do anything to get a job, I have one. I just think its absurd that the CAA take the position they do, it helps no one.

It's absurd that you can have two people flying an identical aircraft on the same day from LHR to JFK yet one requires a CAA licence and one an FAA certificate, simply because of where the aircraft is registered.

The rules for these qualifications vary hugely from one country to another: I know of a pharmacist whose qualifications were not accepted in one country but were perfectly acceptable in another (both being highly respected 'first world' countries). Similar happens with other professions. Life is like that.

No, I never sat EASA ATPLs. Actually, the other ATPLs that I sat were more difficult than the CAA ATPLs that I subsequently sat. I don't "participate in [any] bureaucractic [[i]sic] waste of time and money", I chose carefully.

It has always been "absurd". Many thousands of people have just got on with it for many, many decades. I suggest that you learn to do so too.

Don't panic, I have both anyway.

5 years ago the UK CAA was a pillar of the EASA regulations. Overnight they switched to “EASA? What’s that?”. So your examples do not make sense.

When I gained my UK CAA ATPL, EASA did not exist. Neither did the JAA. So yes, “EASA? What’s that?”

Live with it!! ;)

Pretty much exactly my point. The rules for a pharmacist, or a lawyer, or a teacher, or a nurse, vary by country because they have very different approaches, laws and regulations by country. Aviation does not have massively different rules and standards across jurisdictions, for the most part, they are purposely kept similar.

If you never sat EASA ATPLs why are you engaging in a conversation how people should just accept they are different, when you have no knowledge to back that up?


So because you gained your licneses many year ago at a time when everything was much more convoluted and difficult, people should just suck it up and live with it being more convoluted and difficult again for no reason because "how'd ya like them apples"? To be honest, exactly the "I'm old enough for it to not effect me" attitude of the average ignorant Brexiteer... live with it! ;)

Self-proclamed "more difficult" if I may add...

Reciprocity
 

I think any decision by the UK CAA to recognise EASA licences would need full reciprocity.
The UK behaved in a much more cordial and gown up way than EASA in that the UK recognised EASA licences for 2 years. As far as I know there was nil recognition the other way round. Rather childish I thought.

Remaining in EASA would have meant that a small number of UK citizens would, for limited purposes, be ultimately subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. A prospect completely unacceptable to the Conservative government.
Then the Conservative government signed up to the Windsor Framework for Northern Ireland which meant that a small number of UK citizens would, for limited purposes, be ultimately subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

From a personnel licensing point of view, I would suggest that the easiest solution is one which is used in most of the rest of the world - an endorsement on one's licence. EASA licence holders would be given a UK CAA endorsement on their EASA licence once they are given a job in UK on a G Reg aircraft. The licence would be for a fixed period (2-3 years) but renewable with contract renewal. But, similarly, that means that UK CAA licence holders would have to be given an EASA endorsement on identical terms if they were offered a job in the EU. Issues such as which TRI/TRE can carry out check/training and on who and in which sim should be fairly simple to resolve. It keeps the UK CAA licence 'sovereign' but gives each host country control over the continued use of the respective licence as it would control the endorsement. It would also keep UK licence holders out of ECJ jurisdiction and allow for a larger/shared pool of pilots to work throughout EU/UK - subject to residency etc. No technical reason for it not to work easily but politics is another matter!

You don't need to be a member of EASA to recognise it. The CAA director (is that a job title?) could determine that an EASA licence is valid in UK aircraft with a stroke of a pen.

Actually it is not. You could be operating said aircraft in a totally different environment. For example, operating an A320 in Europe with almost total radar coverage and in controlled airspace is completely different to operating the A320 in Australia with CTAFs, operating in the open FIR (not in controlled airspace), extreme weather variations on any given day, or operating the same aircraft in Asia.
If you are going to base yourself with a local carrier based overseas from where you are, then it’s essential to at least sit a series of conversion exams and a skills test. Maybe not the full 15 exams, but enough to make you competent in your new area of operation

It would have to be written into the regulations.
The problem is, too many regulators appear to act in their own interest rather than in the interests of aviation. In many cases, this may be down to inexperienced staff.

Thats what the OMC is for. It covers ITCZ , icing, local winds etc. Ultimately anyone operating a big jet IFR globally should have broadly the same knowledge and experience. They certainly can't be expected to hold a licence for every country they operate to but for some reason we tie them to a specific registration and expect them to get a new licence to switch registrations even if they're operating to exactly the same places. A wing is a wing, a cloud is a cloud, bernoulli works the same everywhere. Air law or some kind of AIP exam should be the global standard for conversion between ATPLs.