Letter to Jean Francois Mathieu TC Chief enforcement officer

[Prairie Chicken]

Why can't these insiders just tell their colleagues and their boss Martin Eley, that the FLVCs are illegal and that Transport Canada erred in issuing them in the first place ? The fact that they can't says a lot about the way Transport Canada is run.

Transport Canada promotes SMS to the airlines but Transport Canada inspectors are afraid or unable to speak out when they think FLVCs are issued illegally and have to resort to sending me anonymous messages or asking me to hide their identities ?

Gilles, I strongly suspect they have done so--but they are the working folk, and were over-ruled. I know with SMS management were told time and time again, but to no avail. Those who agree with you do so strongly, and are taking a chance in communicating with you. They're prepared to help the cause, but not at the cost of their own jobs.

[Sasquash]

gonnabeapilot:

Access to information is a process whereby any Canadians has THE RIGHT Under section 4 of the Act, and shall, on request, be given access to any record under the control of a government institution. You can read the legislation here: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-1/.

How it works is that you determine which federal department is involved in your request. Let's say you have anu issue with Transport Canada. It could be a refusal to issue a document, an enforcement action, etc.

You then find out who the access to information and privacy coordinator is for that department from the Treasury board website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/atip-aiprp/app ... ex-eng.asp. In our case, the coordinator would be under the letter T and you see:

Transport Canada
Shaun O’Reilly
Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator
Place de Ville, Tower C
330 Sparks Street, Room 827
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5
Telephone: 613-993-6161
Facsimile: 613-991-6594
ATIP/AIPRP@tc.gc.ca

At this point, you can file an access to information request that you can find at:

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbsf-fsct/350-57-eng.pdf

Follow the steps outlined on the form. Include $5.00 payable to the Receiver general for Canada and send her off to good old Shaun and you're off to the races. Within a couple of months they will send you back, basically, the information you requested. The will blank out third party names but generally speaking you get a fair amount of information. If the information you require has a large volume, they might require an extra fee in certain cases.

The medias use that process every single day, that is how they come up with a lot of the stories that are embarrassing to the government.

Hope this helps!

Sasquash

[gonnabeapilot]

Thanks very much for the information! It does help. I'm surprised that personal correspondence between officials is included in that but happy to see that it is!! It really helps lend some insight into the workings of the government departments. Cheers!

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Thanks very much for the information! It does help. I'm surprised that personal correspondence between officials is included in that but happy to see that it is!! It really helps lend some insight into the workings of the government departments. Cheers!

Personal correspondance?
They are not conversing about their wives or cottages. They are scheming on how to avoid addressing the concerns of hundreds of Canadian Airline pilots, on how to dodge their responsibilities and avoid being accountable to us.

[complexintentions]

It isn't personal correspondence. It's their business email being used to discuss TC matters.

There's a reason they're called "public" servants. Although they seem to be doing their utmost to conceal what they've been up to, the public still has a right to know what the people the public employs, are doing. Legally AND morally. Don't like it, work in the private sector.

I think perhaps gonnabeapilot is just surprised at just how UN-private email really is!

Keep up the good work Gilles. Never, ever give up.

[rudder]

Given the expanding SW pilot seniority list, things seem to be trending in the right direction albeit at a modest pace.

There is an ALPA National update that spoke fairly clearly on the issues, status, and direction that is evolving on wet-lease, TFWP/FLVC, and reciprocity. One can reasonably presume that SW will be increasing permanent pilot positions in the future which is something that all parties (CAW included) seem to want.

Canjet on the other hand may be trending in the wrong direction. Given its uncertain commercial future post-2014, that is not surprising as many CJ pilots have already departed due to that uncertainty. The fact that AT and CJ did not entertain or reach a crew interchange agreement is a disappointment and perhaps symbolic of the state of the commercial relationship between the two companies.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

The fact that AT and CJ did not entertain or reach a crew interchange agreement is a disappointment and perhaps symbolic of the state of the commercial relationship between the two companies.

I couldn't agree more.

Am also very happy about Sunwing hiring so many Canadian pilots. My hope is to see them come down to an all Canadian crew, save for a number of foreign crews based on true and balanced reciprocity.

If the present reciprocity legislation does not work, perhaps now would be the time to propose new ideas for a new type of reciprocity that would satisfy all parties.

Gilles

[ea306]

The fact that AT and CJ did not entertain or reach a crew interchange agreement is a disappointment and perhaps symbolic of the state of the commercial relationship between the two companies.

I couldn't agree more.

Am also very happy about Sunwing hiring so many Canadian pilots. My hope is to see them come down to an all Canadian crew, save for a number of foreign crews based on true and balanced reciprocity.

If the present reciprocity legislation does not work, perhaps now would be the time to propose new ideas for a new type of reciprocity that would satisfy all parties.

Gilles

Your comment peeked my interest. Wondering what ideas you might have for a "new type of reciprocity"?

Genuine question.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

The legislation on both sides of the Atlantic must allow pilots from the other side to perform the same tasks.
If FLV are required, they must be allowed on both sides on equal terms.
If work permits are required both sides must issue them.
The exchanges must be equal and on identical terms.
One side must not prohibit something the other side allows etc.

If reciprocity is to be encouraged people on both sides of the Atlantic need to sit together and agree on how to make it work.

Etc....

[rudder]

The legislation on both sides of the Atlantic must allow pilots from the other side to perform the same tasks.
If FLV are required, they must be allowed on both sides on equal terms.
If work permits are required both sides must issue them.
The exchanges must be equal and on identical terms.
One side must not prohibit something the other side allows etc.

If reciprocity is to be encouraged people on both sides of the Atlantic need to sit together and agree on how to make it work.

Etc....

Gilles,

I doubt that you will ever see things evolve the way that you have described as it involves other governments and other regulators. I do however believe that the window on TFWP/FLVC is closing on this side of the Atlantic and within three years that option will no longer be available to Canadian carriers.

I believe that the only arrangement left will be wet lease. Whether the government agency responsible is prepared to insist on a balance in that regard remains to be seen.

[SymbolA310]

What if the foreign companys let their pilots apply for a canadian ATPL ? Its just a written test and a ppc in the
simulator. With the knowledge level of EASA ATPL the difference isnt a big deal.

[rudder]

What if the foreign companys let their pilots apply for a canadian ATPL ? Its just a written test and a ppc in the
simulator. With the knowledge level of EASA ATPL the difference isnt a big deal.

Licensing is the least of the issues. FLVC is just a shortcut to a CDN ATPL. It is the whole TFWP matter that needs resolution. Certainly seems that the agencies responsible are making it clear that winding it down over a reasonable time frame is the direction that it is headed. Good news for SW as the permanent seniority list will continue to expand with all of the associated upgrade opportunities. As for CJ, with the expiry of the Transat contract in 2014 there will no longer be a seasonality to their operation and will negate the requirement to bring in TFW pilots. And in the realm of unintended consequences it is entirely possible that Groupe Transat will manage the seasonality of its own flying by supplementing its CDN operations with wet-lease arrangements.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

What if the foreign companys let their pilots apply for a canadian ATPL ? Its just a written test and a ppc in the simulator. With the knowledge level of EASA ATPL the difference isnt a big deal.

That is what the regulations require. To fly as pilot under Part VII on revenue flights, one needs a Canadian licence, even if some people at TC are in denial of the obvious, for all too obvious reasons.

It is true that for an EASA licensed ATPL pilot, obtaining a Canadian ATPL is a walk in the park, a mere formality. Personally, I think its way too easy, but that issue falls outside my mandate. But here is what I discovered, to my amazement:

If a foreign licensed pilot wants to obtain a Canadian CPL with multi IFR, he needs to do a commercial multi engine IFR test in a gas burning aircraft as pilot in command. If the same pilot wants a Canadian ATPL, all he needs to do is an IFR ride, and such ride can be done in the right seat of a multi engine simulator and it can even be done as SIC. So the CPL test is harder and more restrictive than the ATPL test...... Go figure.....

I think this ridiculous regulation needs to be modified, but again that is just my opinion and one that falls outside my mandate.

Gilles

[old fart]

Not quite that simple to get an ATPL.
All 3 written exams must be completed. Then the IFR ride (usually part of the PPC they would be doing). Then lets not forget the experience requirements. That is the big difference between the CPL and the ATPL is the experience. A lot of F/O's from Europe will not have enough PIC to obtain a Canadian ATPL.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/russia-f ... e-licenses

The Russian pilot who sent a Boeing 737 into a near-vertical dive, killing all 50 people on board, might have had a fake license, Russian investigators said Friday.

This is an example of why the Canadian lawmakers wrote the Regulations in a way restricting the use of FLVCs to a short duration and for limited specific purposes.

Canada Gazette Vol. 135, No. 4 — February 14, 2001

CAR 401.07 (Validation of Foreign Licences)
The amendment to CAR 401.07 (Validation of Foreign Licences) prevents an applicant for a foreign licence validation certificate from being a permanent resident of Canada. Under existing regulations, the holder of a foreign flight crew licence issued by a contracting state(see footnote 2), other than Canada, must satisfy only the applicable requirements in the Canadian personnel licensing standards upon applying for a foreign licence validation certificate. This amendment adds the prohibition that the applicant may not permanently reside in Canada. The change emphasizes the transitory nature of the foreign licence validation certificate. Personnel Licensing and Training Standard 421.07 (Validation of Foreign Licences) limits the maximum duration for which such a certificate may be valid to one year from the date of issue. This Standard also sets forth the list of purposes for which such a certificate may be issued. While the issuance of the foreign licence validation certificate accepts the standards of training and operations within the original licensing country, these restrictions upon the duration and purposes of such a certificate minimize the potential exposure of Canadian operators and the Canadian licensing system to possibly less stringent standards.

If Transport Canada continues to issue FLVCs to any foreign pilot who applies for one to fly commercial revenue flights in Canada, it is bound to backfire, and when it does, there will not only be major lawsuits, but also most likely criminal charges against those who failed to do their jobs.

Wake up people !

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Cross posted from Pprune:

http://www.pprune.org/canada/524863-her ... ost8256919

Quite a number of Brits used to come over each Winter with the aircraft to do flights for Skyservice ( 7-8 years ago).
It was a reciprocal arrangement with the Skyservice guys bringing aircraft over to Europe in the Summer.
Of course the unions on both sides howled and whined . The year I did it Transport Canada decided to limit the number of validations and and Skyservice paid for around 50 of us to do a course to obtain a Canadian ATPL as well as a Work permit .
It was a great experience and we loved it. The vast majority of Canadians were very welcoming and a pleasure to fly with. The aircraft were reregistered and a half-hearted attempt at a respray. They were cleared to fly two tonnes heavier than in UK ( A320) and then back down two tonnes when back home.
Of course a Canadian pilot should have first crack at a Canadian flying job but , in this case, with the aircraft moving backwards and forwards , there would have to be a lot of hiring and firing.
As the world becomes more global, perhaps it is appropriate that pilots can lead the way.

So 7 or 8 years ago, Transport Canada had decided to limit the number of FLVC and required that the Brit pilots who came over for Skyservice obtain a Canadian ATPL.

This is most interesting for that is in fact what the regulations require.

It seems that that year, someone at TC tried to do their job properly and was later overrulled.

Does anyone have dates or specific info on the above so that I can try to obtain the information through an Access of Information request ?

[Gilles Hudicourt]

I received an email from an Ex Skyservice pilot this morning. He states that he does not recall that it was TC that requested that the Brit pilots obtain a Canadian ATPL but that rather it was Skyservice who was being pro-active. He also stated something that surprised me and that I do not quite understand:

He states that some of the Foreign F/Os did not have the PIC hours required to obtain a Canadian ATPL and that for those pilots, it was easier to get an FLVC from TC. If true, it means that FLVCs were obtained to circumvent Canadian ATPL requirements. Maybe this is still the case. Can anyone explain ?

[newcomer]

He states that some of the Foreign F/Os did not have the PIC hours required to obtain a Canadian ATPL and that for those pilots, it was easier to get an FLVC from TC. If true, it means that FLVCs were obtained to circumvent Canadian ATPL requirements. Maybe this is still the case. Can anyone explain ?

That would not surprise me: most of european pilots start on an airbus or boeing right after flight school,so they don't have 250 pic (especially if they do an integrated course) if they don't follow a "pic under supervision" program within their airline,and also you have to take into account that contrary to Canada, in the rest of the world your hours in the right seat count 1:1 towards the atpl requirements. So if the FOs that were coming to Canada had let's say 2000h tt all in the right seat,they did not have enough hours to get the canadian ATPL (plus they were probably missing some pic time regarding the 250h requirements).