Or everyone with a UK issued licence could simply convert to an Irish EASA licence and leave the UK with nothing.

I totally get why EU citizens would be pretty peed off at the way "the UK" is behaving.

However, please bear in mind that only 17.4 million people voted in favour of Brexit, and very few of those expected other than "sunlit uplands".

Most people in this country are victims of a far right wing cult. As I said, I totally get EU citizens' frustration with the UK, but the more entrenched positions become, the more people lose sight of the fact that we are all humans, the harder it becomes to eventually reverse this madness.

The government's decision not to stay with EASA is frustrating and damaging for UK aviation, but now we're seeing how Europe is weaponising any remaining influence it has, you can see how leaving the ECJ as a cornerstone of UK aviation could have become a true nightmare.

I have looked for the aer Lingus advert and can't find it, but presumably, it is open to British citizens, but they must have an EASA licence - and that is the beef amongst the Brits in the middle East. Surely though, there are loads of British pilots with EASA licences, many of whom converted in the run up to 2021, enough to fill the vacancies at any rate?

I am surprised that there is not a legal challenge to this. Essentially we all do the same job. If you fly a B737 for Lufthansa or Jet2 it is all the same and the same standard. This is really Alice in Wonderland stuff. I am not interested in controversy or having an internet spat. This whole situation is beyond stupid with a spectacular lack of common sense. It is not fair on professional pilots either side of the channel who have their employment opportunities taken away. I do not have the inside track so have no idea whether the CAA wished to stay in EASA or not. My experiences with the CAA over a 40 year career have not left me with a warm feeling. Essentially the CAA, Balpa and the governmental protagonists have let the pilot community down. As already said I have had a long career mainly unhindered by politics. This is a real shame and I still hope common sense in the form of reciprocity can occur. My sympathies are with all posters whether they voted for Brexit or not, Brit or European.

A legal challenge before the ECJ? See, therein lies the problem.

olster

That is the point. We do indeed all the same job, whether we fly with a FAA license, an EASA one or a UK one. The thing is that a rather large change happend to the UK. The UK has now a lesser status than our US colleagues, imply due to choices made by the UK government. And yet, all three of us do the same job. But there is no escaping the fact that the UK is now a third country and not in the EU anymore, which does, inevitably, have consequences on both sides. And in the case of europeans, they did not have a say in that at all, even if they lived and worked in the UK.

As to a legal challenge, the question is, in front of what court? On which side?

That is fairly obvious: In an EU court by an EU citizen who has been disadvantaged by an EU decision.

At the end of the day it's common sense that the 'spirit' of EASA is that there should be a common standard - so to revoke recognition for purely political reasons is wrong. Ok, so the CAA has left EASA, they can't now issue new EASA licences, but their old ones were done to EASA standards, in many cases in EASA countries with EASA examiners so to say that they somehow no longer meet that standard is farcical.

Is it fair on doctors, engineers, taxi drivers, factory workers, cleaners?

Of course not. It would not be fair on other professions in the same circumstances. Firstly, this is a pilot (hence no requirement to discuss other jobs) rumour network and secondly why does everything have to be disputed or an argument on the internet? I am not interested.

rude-stuff

Which would lead british pilots still with just a british license. Based on nationality there is a case to be made for EU citizens, as i posted several times above. They were disadvantaged, though with ample, very clear and precise, three years of warning by EASA. British pilots and british resident pilots are not disadvantaged, they still hold a british license.

And of course, you completely dismiss the element of oversight, which is crucial to any safety sensitive area.

That said, there was a clear advise from EASA to switch to EASA licenses as early as possible. And everyone could start that process until the end of last year where EASA oversight was still present. There is a clear reason why bigger players like the orange bunch switched their continental crews to non-UK licenses (more than two years ago already), and supposedly even quite a few UK based trainers as well. All based on publicly available advise. In the end, there will always be some who miss out on a deadline issue, but judging from the number of posters on this thread compared to the many SOLI threads, it is actually quite a small number.

Of course one can try a legal case, which, in any case, will take at least 3 to 5 years, a time probable better spent on just getting on with it and regaining the license the "normal" way if one needs it right now.

Denti, mate, your attitude stinks:}

How is that so? You could have been with an employer that expressly prohibited it, one such employer did, and they went bankrupt dumping 600 pilots on to the market.

I would sue the administrators of that employer then. And of course, it would mean, that that employer went bankrupt in 2021, in 2020 there would have been still time to start the SOLI transfer.

Why is it not possible to simply apply for a new EASA licence off the back of training / licences held pre-Brexit when said training or licences would have met all EASA standards, regulations and oversight? I understand the UK is now recognised as a third country and anything issued from 1st Jan 2021 onwards suffers a different fate but I’m unable to find any regulation that would not make this possible. Infact EASA adopted that when JAR became EASA:

Is it simply because this wasn’t negotiated by the UK in the TCA agreement? As far as I understand it there is still scope for further adoption of Annexes by both sides into said agreement:

Understandably there is a lot of heat on this topic so presumably it’s politically driven but theres little to be gained in all reality. Regardless of what licence you may have Brexit has removed certain fundamental working privileges from both sides of the channel which remains the biggest hinderance.

The whole thrust of the Brexit argument was to "take back control" and "to control who has the right to work in the UK". Once the UK Govt . indicated they really were going ahead it was clear that there was great risk that we would finish up where we are now. People warned on here several years ago that the CAA had no people or resources to do anything quickly and the Govt sure as hell weren't intending to provide them. The risks were clear and there was a way to protect yourself if you moved with any speed at all. It was also a certainty that the EU wouldn't continue licensing after a hard Brexit - legally they can't and there is zero political will or benefit for them to change things. Politicians mouthing off about "having or cake and eating it " only poured petrol on the flames.

Fairness doesn't cut much ice with lawyers I'm afraid. Pilots aren't the only sufferers either

Field Required the UK, as you know, adopted all EU law before exit day and amended it with the Aviation Safety Act, which effectively repeatedly deletes the terms 'EASA' and 'member state' and replaces them with 'UK CAA'. Thus it is bound by Article 8 of EU decision 1178/2011 which says that, absent a two way agreement between States, the UK can convert foreign licences giving, in the case of ATPLs, credit against approved training but requiring all 13 TK exams to be taken and an ATPL skills test on type. EASA is bound by their equivalent, which is now amended to Article 3 of something else - can't remember. This means that licence reciprocity needs either (i) a bilateral agreement between UK and EASA, which is apparently being pursued but even if successful may take years, or could be done in a day if there was political will or (ii) a change in the law on both sides of the Channel. Obviously (i) is easier, but depends entirely on the political will being there on both sides.

rudestuff

It wasn't an EU decision, it was a UK gov decision based on 'the will of the people'.

How can EASA oversee the licences of current personel if the CAA, having withdrawn from EASA, can not be forced to comply with EASA regulation, should it change over the next few years? The UK has decided it does not want to be told what to do by the ECJ. By default that means EASA cannot tell the CAA what to do either.

It s a bl00dy mess and the UK has only itself to blame for allowing a populist opinion to get out of hand. But lets save that for Jet Blast.

??? We’re talking about the EUs refusal to acknowledge that training done under EASA is still valid. That is *entirely* an EU decision. The CAA have done the decent thing, the EU are refusing to allow a common sense approach.

TURIN

As rudestuff points out it is an EU/EASA decision not to recognise or validate pre-Brexit EASA training / credentials.

EASA cant oversee anything the UK does from 1st Jan onwards, thats accepted, but what I struggle to understand is why/how EASA doesn’t recognise training or UK issued licences / medicals pre 31/12/20 as meeting EASA standards/regulations for the purpose of gaining a new licence in a member state.
All of my training documents from course completion through to skills tests and PC checks state clearly that said course/test was conducted and met EU regulation No 1178/2011 as amended and issued in accordance with Part FCL.

So you have a situation whereby (Pre-Brexit) individuals completed an EASA course, in an EASA country, in an EASA aircraft, with an EASA examiner, meeting all EU standards and regulations, completed all EASA paperwork but can’t now apply for a new EASA licence.

My EASA course completion form literally states:

[QUOTE]12. Declaration
-I certify that I have examined the applicants flying log and the entries in them meet in full the flying experience requirements for the grant of the licence and/or rating in accordance with Part-FCL.
-I certify that the applicant has met the pre-requisite requirements in accordance with Part-FCL prior to commencing a course of training and has satisfactorily completed a course of training and has passed a skill test in accordance with Part-FCL for the issue of the licence and/or rating detailed above.
-I certify that the applicant has satisfactorily passed all of the required theoretical examinations, radiotelephony practical test and language proficiency requirements for the grant of the licence as outlined in section 10.

If a SOLI was possible how can a new licence issue not be possible? Does an assessment of competence pertain only to instructor and/or examiner privileges?

UK issued medicals that were transferred before exit day are recognised, and now cannot be transferred because you can't transfer SOLI into an EASA State from a non-EASA state. If you have all the certificates for licence issue, all UK issued before exit day and all still valid, at the last look some Member States would still accept them (it was Austria and Denmark) because the advice from EASA not to do so was not an EU Decision, only an EASA recommendation, it had no legal force. Of course you would need a new EASA Class 1 held in the member State.

For those interested the Danes, very helpful by the way issued me a validation of my U.K. B737 SFE / SFI. This validation is FCL.900c. What that means is that the holder can train EASA trainees but NOT in an EASA member state as of now anyway. Hope that this could be useful info. Very pleasant exchange with the Denmark CAA which as opposed to the passive aggressive, surly and at times downright obstructive treatment from the U.K. CAA was a very pleasing and welcome change.

A validation of a U.K. licence, or at least a quick and easy conversion should be allowed by EASA. Especially from a country that was previously part of EASA. The standards in the U.K. are still a lot higher than in certain EASA countries.

Some non-EASA countries allow operation with a simple validation of an EASA licence, others require a conversion with only a single Air Law exam. EASA can easily apply this for U.K. licences. (Like the U.K. is recognising EASA licences for the next 2 years without any paperwork.)

However, those non-EASA countries recognising EASA licences do this because they are in a need of pilots which can’t be covered by local pilots (e.g. Turkey, U.A.E., Qatar, etc.). So as long as there isn’t a need for non-EASA pilots in the EU, I don’t think this will change soon unfortunately. There are plenty of unemployed EASA pilots available at the moment, so I don’t see EASA accepting non-EASA licences at the moment.

Without sounding pompous, I believe we were provided more than ample time to change state if required. A lot of people were hoping for positive negotiations during the brexit talks. Some of us saw the writing on the wall and had no confidence in the incompetent Conservative government. Any petition going forward should be in regards to incompetence, and not about equal terms.

I am quite sure no employer can prevent their pilots from changing their SOLI. We aren't in China where airlines own their pilots' license. Pilots should grow a pair.

Not really. Having multiple different States issued licences becomes a headache during LPC renewals as each country has their own specific procedure (thumbs up EASA), hence airlines tend to have all pilots aligned on the same State license, especially when employing a few thousand pilots.

That's what my employer says, but the training department has also said they can't prevent us from changing the SOLI of our licence. The downside is that the individual pilot will have to organise the paperwork and advise the examiner in advance.

End of the day, BREXIT and leaving EASA was supposedly the will of the people...

To my knowledge, EASA treat all ‘third countries’ the same. And much like the EU, it is a choice to be in or out. No judgement. But expecting special treatment from EASA, especially given the present political situation, might not be completely realistic me thinks..

To be frank. The information about what would happen to UK issued EASA licenses was both clear and readily available well before each and every deadline subsequently extended during the BREXIT negotiations.

As an EU Citizen living, working and raising a family in the UK until recently, keeping my EASA License was one of many BREXIT flavoured reasons why we did our own ‘exit’.

Leaving a good job and a settled life is never easy, but as has been shown, cakeism doesn’t really work when faced with reality... Staying put (and losing my EASA License) would have been a choice with consequences. Our decision to leave was a choice with other consequences, both in terms of career and family life.

On the individual level, this whole EASA vs CAA Licensing issue sucks. But in reality, compared to the grand scale of all things BREXIT, the number of people affected by flight crew licensing sort of pales in comparison.

I sincerely hope that some kind of solution is found in due course. But this ‘EASA MUST RECIPROCATE’ statement is perhaps a tiny bit naive. The UK has unilaterally decided to become a third country to EASA. And now they are. A bit blunt perhaps. But no less true?

I don’t know how big your employer is, but with 4/5K + pilots it’s virtually impossible to handle multiple Licences.

Providing they’re all EASA licences I don’t see why.

My employment contract states I am required to hold an EASA licence issued by a specific authority. Should that cease to be the case, my employment will be terminated.

Would I be able to win an unlawful dissmissal lawsuit? Possibly. Do I want to risk my ability to bring food to the table, and spend thousands of EUR for legal fees to sue my employer, who will categorise costs as "rounding error"? Not really.

EASA Examiner Differences document has over 100 pages. That's the problem. Every EASA member state has their own licencing authority, who interprets EASA regulation in their own way, with their unique procedures, which ultimately achieve the same goal.

A pan-European licencing authority would solve all these problems, but I doubt we'll see that anytime soon.

You’re right about the EDD, but this is bread and butter for a multi licensed airline. This week was LPC on UK and Ireland. Next week it’s Germany. After that can’t remember. You don’t need to remember all 100 pages, just be able to interpret the ones relevant to today’s check.

I suspect you’re also right about the likelihood of a pan European licensing agency!

Bread and butter, sure. But it's definitely in orders of magnitude easier having all pilots with the same SOLI. One set of rules, one set of forms, one authority to deal with. Less complexity, smoother process.

Imagine a hypothetical airline which has 31 pilots. Which one would spend less resources (time = money) - the one where all pilots have licence issued by the same authority, or the one where every pilot has their licence issued by a different EASA member state (there are 31 of them)?

No argument from me on the simplicity front - my life would be a whole lot easier, but I doubt my airline has much to do with individual licences or authorities. The bulk of the work is down to the TREs.

Since I’m doing LPC for my Head of Training soon I’ll ask him!

It’s not just the EDD issue. There are numerous differences between NAAs on all manor of licensing and medical issues. E.g. examiner signature for LPC vs new licence issue; time to issue new rating (days vs months!); different acceptance of medical conditions, to name just a few.
COVID derogation management was also a nightmare with multiple different interpretations of EASA guidance.

I’m sure you’re correct. I just don’t know how we’ve managed over the years. Even now with currently 14 different states of issue.

Anyway, somehow I seem to have drifted the thread so apologies for that. Happy Easter all.

DEMOCRACY
 

That is the basics of democracy, everyone votes and every voter counts the same. I do not agree but.... that is how it is!

Why should it have mutual recognition? do not even have it with the FAA or TC and are commonwealth!

Sounds like the best way to resolve the issue is for the U.K. to rejoin EASA in some capacity. Can’t see any other way forward really.

All hail Boris and his world beating leadership!

deltahotel

As others have said, every country has a different procedure for test notifications, paperwork filling and, most important, license endorsements. Some NAAs are VERY picky and the tiniest mistake in filling the papers or the license can easily get you reported to the NAA that issued your TRE authorization.
Sometimes I do understand the UK will to get rid of all this nonsense.

I think there is not even 1 (one) pilot who would like to xfer from EASA to UK CAA.
The majority of the Brits voted for BREXIT. So now every one in the UK has to live with it. Sorry!
There are too many unemployed pilots in the EU, So take it as it is.
The work permit would be the second hurdle btw.

Few pilots wanted to leave EASA so that’s hardly surprising. This whole “you voted for it, sorry” attitude is something else. Regardless of what people voted for few want this mess.

I’m also not entirely sure why those whining about Brits working across Europe are doing so. From what I see theres far more Europeans working in the U.K. than the other way around. If you exclude Ryr and EJ I’d guess there’s all but a handful of Brits working for EU carriers.