Air Canada Captain didn't have required license

[Tbayer2021]

While it wasnt a good look for AC in the eyes of the public. The news cycle has already moved on from this. Didn't even last a hot minute.

[yycflyguy]

While it wasnt a good look for AC in the eyes of the public. The news cycle has already moved on from this. Didn't even last a hot minute.

It was the lead story INTERNATIONALLY when it broke. The raging debate with continue with his court appearance and then it’ll be closely followed if it goes to trial (and the rumour mill has it getting a lot messier before it’s resolved)

[Tbayer2021]

While it wasnt a good look for AC in the eyes of the public. The news cycle has already moved on from this. Didn't even last a hot minute.

It was the lead story INTERNATIONALLY when it broke. The raging debate with continue with his court appearance and then it’ll be closely followed if it goes to trial (and the rumour mill has it getting a lot messier before it’s resolved)

Yes. When it broke*. Good thing the pilot rumour mill is known for usually being right, eh?

[Old fella]

While it wasnt a good look for AC in the eyes of the public. The news cycle has already moved on from this. Didn't even last a hot minute.

It was the lead story INTERNATIONALLY when it broke. The raging debate with continue with his court appearance and then it’ll be closely followed if it goes to trial (and the rumour mill has it getting a lot messier before it’s resolved)

Help me out yycflyguy, when this pilot was hired by AC in the ‘90s wasn’t an ATPL a requirement. I don’t think there was a massive hiring binge during that era, if this pilot only possessed a Rotary ATPL how did he get through the screen process.

[yycflyguy]

While it wasnt a good look for AC in the eyes of the public. The news cycle has already moved on from this. Didn't even last a hot minute.

It was the lead story INTERNATIONALLY when it broke. The raging debate with continue with his court appearance and then it’ll be closely followed if it goes to trial (and the rumour mill has it getting a lot messier before it’s resolved)

Help me out yycflyguy, when this pilot was hired by AC in the ‘90s wasn’t an ATPL a requirement. I don’t think there was a massive hiring binge during that era, if this pilot only possessed a Rotary ATPL how did he get through the screen process.

I can’t explain it. It’s a failure both of AC and TC IMO. Even though you can technically sit in the right seat with only a commercial licence there are very few cases where AC hired without it (it helps that his Father was influential in this regard. Nepotism has always been a thing at AC). How did TC attach multiple type ratings to a non ATPL-A licence without drawing interest?

It certainly does not absolve the criminal actions of what was done to conceal it. I’m unclear if it was simply altering the H into A or if he had sophisticated printing equipment to do it but we do document checks every four months plus your yearly OE. 25 years of not holding the ATPL and passing scrutiny is unfathomable yet here we are.

He also held several high powered union positions. Makes one wonder doesn’t it?

[pelmet]

Does AC fail?

Apparently, many years ago, a pilot from a company that I was working at went to Air Canada.

At some point after working there, it was discovered that she had false entries in her logbook. This pilot was not fired but of course, the pilot was also from more than one group for which AC has boxes that can be checked when one fills out their application.

Loads of confidence in them.

[PostmasterGeneral]

It was the lead story INTERNATIONALLY when it broke. The raging debate with continue with his court appearance and then it’ll be closely followed if it goes to trial (and the rumour mill has it getting a lot messier before it’s resolved)

Help me out yycflyguy, when this pilot was hired by AC in the ‘90s wasn’t an ATPL a requirement. I don’t think there was a massive hiring binge during that era, if this pilot only possessed a Rotary ATPL how did he get through the screen process.

I can’t explain it. It’s a failure both of AC and TC IMO. Even though you can technically sit in the right seat with only a commercial licence there are very few cases where AC hired without it (it helps that his Father was influential in this regard. Nepotism has always been a thing at AC). How did TC attach multiple type ratings to a non ATPL-A licence without drawing interest?

It certainly does not absolve the criminal actions of what was done to conceal it. I’m unclear if it was simply altering the H into A or if he had sophisticated printing equipment to do it but we do document checks every four months plus your yearly OE. 25 years of not holding the ATPL and passing scrutiny is unfathomable yet here we are.

He also held several high powered union positions. Makes one wonder doesn’t it?

The ATPL-A is a blue sticker. The -H is not. I think it's green.

[careerpilot?]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

You are correct of course. But the end result will be us pilots waiting even longer for TC to process license applications. My ATPL-H application is well behind the service standard (2.5 months and counting) with nary a peep. Good thing I don't need it right now. When the time comes to put in my ATPL-A (which I will need right away since under the new rules I won't be able to apply until I have an upgrade number and a Captain PPC), I don't even know how that delay is going to affect things.

[airway]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

It appears that it was AC who discovered the possible forgery during a regular check of his documents in 2025, probably on a line check or a simulator event. Shortly after that, he retired, and AC informed Transport about the discrepancy in his paperwork. Also, the police were informed.

[pelmet]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

It appears that it was AC who discovered the possible forgery during a regular check of his documents in 2025, probably on a line check or a simulator event. Shortly after that, he retired, and AC informed Transport about the discrepancy in his paperwork. Also, the police were informed.

If so, I wonder if it was something that previous check airmen had been missing.

[CaptainP8]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

You are correct of course. But the end result will be us pilots waiting even longer for TC to process license applications. My ATPL-H application is well behind the service standard (2.5 months and counting) with nary a peep. Good thing I don't need it right now. When the time comes to put in my ATPL-A (which I will need right away since under the new rules I won't be able to apply until I have an upgrade number and a Captain PPC), I don't even know how that delay is going to affect things.

Not that we should have to do this…but when I was waiting for my medical sticker after coming back from disability, I spoke to a TC lady in licensing. For $40, she emailed me a paper copy of my medical in a day, just like the paper documents we used to have. They had no idea how long it would actually take to get the sticker…

[flying4dollars]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

It appears that it was AC who discovered the possible forgery during a regular check of his documents in 2025, probably on a line check or a simulator event. Shortly after that, he retired, and AC informed Transport about the discrepancy in his paperwork. Also, the police were informed.

How did it take this many years and checking events to finally notice it? I wonder what it was specifically that raised the alarms

[lostav8r]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

It appears that it was AC who discovered the possible forgery during a regular check of his documents in 2025, probably on a line check or a simulator event. Shortly after that, he retired, and AC informed Transport about the discrepancy in his paperwork. Also, the police were informed.

How did it take this many years and checking events to finally notice it? I wonder what it was specifically that raised the alarms

Him probably having a (helicopter) ATPL made it harder to find during checks?

[Canoehead]

Not sure of exact timeframe, but recently (past couple of years), TC has moved into the electronic PFTR. This didn't happen overnight (it was airline by airline doing it at various times). Essentially what has changed for checking events is that the check pilot is no longer reliant on the candidate's documents solely to fill in information on a paper 0249. Now a Check Pilot logs into the ACP website and enters the pilot's file number which in-turn populates some information.

I know AC is AQP, but I imagine a similar type of electronic form. Is it possible that this had some sort of connection to the discovery?

It's the only thing that really changed recently that made things "more" paperless with TC. Coincidence? Timeframe?

[careerpilot?]

TC owns this not AC. There is a presumption that a government document that is presented is valid and correct. Therefore I don't think that it is reasonable that AC should be held accountable for accepting a document that the presented fraudulently altered. What should never have happened is that it took TC 17 years to figure out what Mr. Wall was doing.

This is telling the world that Canada can't control the aviation documents that it issues. Instead of running away and pretending that there is nothing to see here, TC should be doing a deep dive into the process failures that allowed this to happen and showing how they have been improved to make this impossible in the future.

You are correct of course. But the end result will be us pilots waiting even longer for TC to process license applications. My ATPL-H application is well behind the service standard (2.5 months and counting) with nary a peep. Good thing I don't need it right now. When the time comes to put in my ATPL-A (which I will need right away since under the new rules I won't be able to apply until I have an upgrade number and a Captain PPC), I don't even know how that delay is going to affect things.

Not that we should have to do this…but when I was waiting for my medical sticker after coming back from disability, I spoke to a TC lady in licensing. For $40, she emailed me a paper copy of my medical in a day, just like the paper documents we used to have. They had no idea how long it would actually take to get the sticker…

That assumes they've actually processed it - my application is sitting in someone's inbox, not even looked at yet as far as I can tell. It's not showing in GALRO and therefore hasn't even been issued / processed yet.

I had the same with my first Cat I medical - didn't show up in GALRO for 8 months, on a medical valid for 1 year

I don't think you can get a temp if it hasn't been processed and issued yet?

[CaptainP8]

You are correct of course. But the end result will be us pilots waiting even longer for TC to process license applications. My ATPL-H application is well behind the service standard (2.5 months and counting) with nary a peep. Good thing I don't need it right now. When the time comes to put in my ATPL-A (which I will need right away since under the new rules I won't be able to apply until I have an upgrade number and a Captain PPC), I don't even know how that delay is going to affect things.

Not that we should have to do this…but when I was waiting for my medical sticker after coming back from disability, I spoke to a TC lady in licensing. For $40, she emailed me a paper copy of my medical in a day, just like the paper documents we used to have. They had no idea how long it would actually take to get the sticker…

That assumes they've actually processed it - my application is sitting in someone's inbox, not even looked at yet as far as I can tell. It's not showing in GALRO and therefore hasn't even been issued / processed yet.

I had the same with my first Cat I medical - didn't show up in GALRO for 8 months, on a medical valid for 1 year

I don't think you can get a temp if it hasn't been processed and issued yet?

Yeah, that sucks…we sure get our money’s worth for the exorbitant taxes we pay…

When I did my medical, my doctor specifically said to reach out to the RAMO and prod a bit. I guess I got lucky that he processed it so quickly.

[careerpilot?]

Not that we should have to do this…but when I was waiting for my medical sticker after coming back from disability, I spoke to a TC lady in licensing. For $40, she emailed me a paper copy of my medical in a day, just like the paper documents we used to have. They had no idea how long it would actually take to get the sticker…

That assumes they've actually processed it - my application is sitting in someone's inbox, not even looked at yet as far as I can tell. It's not showing in GALRO and therefore hasn't even been issued / processed yet.

I had the same with my first Cat I medical - didn't show up in GALRO for 8 months, on a medical valid for 1 year

I don't think you can get a temp if it hasn't been processed and issued yet?

Yeah, that sucks…we sure get our money’s worth for the exorbitant taxes we pay…

When I did my medical, my doctor specifically said to reach out to the RAMO and prod a bit. I guess I got lucky that he processed it so quickly.

Yup, that $100 processing fee really is worth the price. I emailed them awhile back and was told "contact us again when you've reached the 40 business day service standard, which will be on June 3rd." At least they did the math for me.

Gave it till June 7th or 8th before emailing again, finally heard back yesterday. Now we're into the "we need better copies of your logbooks" stage of the application, even though I provided all my official logbooks to TC Edmonton when I submitted the application.... in March.

To bring this back on topic, I'm not sure if this is additional scrutiny now being applied because of Mr Wall's antics (thanks for ruining it for everyone), or if it's just standard TC slowness. But several months to process an ATPL is unsatisfactory.

As I'm starting as an FO at a regional shortly, still short of the necessary hours for ATPL(A), I fear what will happen when it comes time to upgrade. Under the new rules, even once I have the hours I can't apply for my ATPL(A) until I have a PIC PPC, which means command course. Is the airline supposed to wait 4 months from me doing my command course for the processing of my ATPL(A) before they can actually employ me as a Captain? This is not unique to my situation and is going to be a common problem moving forward, is Mr Wall's indiscretion going to make that worse?

[altiplano]

I really don't get the new ATPL "requirement" - used to be you needed a current group 1 ride for it to be valid. No current ride, revert to CPL privileges.

Now you can't even apply without a two crew left seat done? But you can't be 2 crew left seat without an ATPL?

What if you then go FO for years and years.... does your ATPL become invalid?

What about ATPL holders that have never done a left seat ride?

Every Federal Ministry has their heads so far up their asses these days... complete discontent with reality.

[careerpilot?]

I really don't get the new ATPL "requirement" - used to be you needed a current group 1 ride for it to be valid. No current ride, revert to CPL privileges.

Now you can't even apply without a two crew left seat done? But you can't be 2 crew left seat without an ATPL?

What if you then go FO for years and years.... does your ATPL become invalid?

What about ATPL holders that have never done a left seat ride?

Every Federal Ministry has their heads so far up their asses these days... complete discontent with reality.

This is the issue. For a full ATPL, you now need a left seat PPC on a multi engine aircraft that requires a co-pilot. So for FOs in 705s without an ATPL, they cannot fulfill the skill requirement until they do command course and do a PIC PPC.

You can get a "restricted" ATPL by doing a PIC PPC (or IPC) in a single pilot multi. But what a restricted ATPL allows, other than locking in exams, isn't clear. Depends on if airlines will accept that understanding the restriction comes off with a PIC PPC.

There is no restricted option for a SIC ride on an aircraft requiring a copilot.

There are a few threads on the matter already, hoping to avoid derailing this one.

[rudder]

Not that it is fair (or even logical) but it would appear that TC wants a pilot that does not have the 2 crew PIC PPC to submit all other paperwork in advance for a conditional approval on their file. After that, either wait for the 2 crew PIC PPC or submit the single crew GRP 1 PPC and receive an ATPL with the remark. Remark removed once 2 crew PIC PPC is submitted.

One only has to wonder who was actually consulted prior to this rule change or if they simply made it all up over lunch one day. I absolutely support that an AIRLINE Transport Pilot Licence should be in a material way associated with an AIRLINER technical qualification. Whether that is Part 703/704/705 or 604 doesn’t matter. An ATPL that flowed from a Piper Seminole flight never seemed to make any sense.

My opinion is that the ATPL qualification requirement should be satisfied with a Part 705 ride - either seat. We can then quibble over the experience criteria (once again, I believe Part 705 SIC experience is more valid than a single engine instructor PIC time).

However, nobody from TC called to ask my option.

[Outlaw58]

Not that it is fair (or even logical) but it would appear that TC wants a pilot that does not have the 2 crew PIC PPC to submit all other paperwork in advance for a conditional approval on their file. After that, either wait for the 2 crew PIC PPC or submit the single crew GRP 1 PPC and receive an ATPL with the remark. Remark removed once 2 crew PIC PPC is submitted.

One only has to wonder who was actually consulted prior to this rule change or if they simply made it all up over lunch one day. I absolutely support that an AIRLINE Transport Pilot Licence should be in a material way associated with an AIRLINER technical qualification. Whether that is Part 703/704/705 or 604 doesn’t matter. An ATPL that flowed from a Piper Seminole flight never seemed to make any sense.

My opinion is that the ATPL qualification requirement should be satisfied with a Part 705 ride - either seat. We can then quibble over the experience criteria (once again, I believe Part 705 SIC experience is more valid than a single engine instructor PIC time).

However, nobody from TC called to ask my option.

My understanding is that the change to regulation was driven by an audit (IATA?) that found Canada as not conforming to the stipulations of ICAO Annex 1 section 2.6 (2.6.1.3 specifically).

Again, according to my understanding of the issue which may be flawed, failure to conform to ICAO standards jeopardizes Airlines employing Canadian licensed pilots to operate without restrictions outside Canadian borders, hence the requirement to amend regulations.

As Rudder pointed out, this change to regulation was implemented without consultation with the airlines, but also with full expectation that airlines would "figure it out" for them, as recent TC instructions to pilot requesting their ATPL would suggest.

58

[careerpilot?]

It begins.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... no-2026-09

2. Transport Canada is now reinforcing its approach to validation of all new pilot hires. Operators are expected to ensure that all newly hired flight crew credentials are thoroughly verified and aligned with Transport Canada records prior to commencing operations. This measure is intended to strengthen front-end controls and prevent gaps in the system.

Just got contacted by my soon to be employer that I have to provide a license verification letter from TC. Let’s hope the turn around on this is reasonable as my ground school is supposed to start in less than a month.

[alkaseltzer]

It begins.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... no-2026-09

2. Transport Canada is now reinforcing its approach to validation of all new pilot hires. Operators are expected to ensure that all newly hired flight crew credentials are thoroughly verified and aligned with Transport Canada records prior to commencing operations. This measure is intended to strengthen front-end controls and prevent gaps in the system.

Just got contacted by my soon to be employer that I have to provide a license verification letter from TC. Let’s hope the turn around on this is reasonable as my ground school is supposed to start in less than a month.

.

[Outlaw58]

It begins.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... no-2026-09

2. Transport Canada is now reinforcing its approach to validation of all new pilot hires. Operators are expected to ensure that all newly hired flight crew credentials are thoroughly verified and aligned with Transport Canada records prior to commencing operations. This measure is intended to strengthen front-end controls and prevent gaps in the system.

Just got contacted by my soon to be employer that I have to provide a license verification letter from TC. Let’s hope the turn around on this is reasonable as my ground school is supposed to start in less than a month.

I am part of the digital ADB trial and have access to my documents straight from the TC website to download to my Digital ADB.

I know I am not a reference for cyber security, but what I have been trialing appears to be pretty hard to forge or hack. Call me hopeful but when TC goes live with this, it would not only solve careerpilot?'s conundrum but also greatly speedify the issuance of ratings, and Licences (insert ATPL-A here)

58

[digits_]

It begins.

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... no-2026-09

2. Transport Canada is now reinforcing its approach to validation of all new pilot hires. Operators are expected to ensure that all newly hired flight crew credentials are thoroughly verified and aligned with Transport Canada records prior to commencing operations. This measure is intended to strengthen front-end controls and prevent gaps in the system.

Just got contacted by my soon to be employer that I have to provide a license verification letter from TC. Let’s hope the turn around on this is reasonable as my ground school is supposed to start in less than a month.

Lol. Doesn't it completely defeat the purpose if the candidate has to provide the letter?

What's next, a license verification verification letter?