Your right to a review of a failed PPC is not extinguished by passing a subsequent PPC

[photofly]

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/tatc/doc/2 ... tce52.html

This pilot failed a PPC on December 14, 2021. On December 21 he took and passed a subsequent PPC.

Transport Canada tried to argue that because he passed the second test, he was no longer able to appeal the result of the first test.

In fact TC went to (what seems to me to be) extraordinary lengths to try to deny him that right of appeal, throwing all sorts of legal arguments at it, including the infamous "modern principle of statutory interpretation when reviewing the meaning of the relevant legislative provisions, which requires that “the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament" which is brought out whenever a government lawyer wants the law to mean what he thinks it ought to mean that day instead of what it actually says.

Aside from arguments about jurisdiction, TC also tried to argue that because the pilot's flying privileges were never interrupted, he had suffered no effects from the failed PPC, and therefore the appeal was moot and the tribunal should elect not to hear it.

Luckily the tribunal member didn't buy any of that, and upheld the pilot's right to appeal the decision as unambiguously provided by the law.

You might imagine, if you imagine these things at all, that the MInister might welcome the opportunity to find out if the PPC conducted in his name was done fairly and properly, the better to uphold the reputation of the system. But no, apparently he preferred to try to squash someone's legal rights, and as a result, a year and half later the issue has still not been heard, let alone decided.

Shabby.

[digits_]

That's nasty.

I'd also like to point out there most certainly are negative effects. Being able to answer 'have you ever failed a check ride?' with an honest 'no' during future job interviews.

Or if we extrapolate this to private IFR renewals or flight test, it costs quite a bit of money as well to do a second test if the first one wan't performed according to regulations.

Nice find, and happy to hear he can appeal!

[Capt. Underpants]

That's interesting. Not that it should matter, but I'd be curious to know if the PPC was conducted by a TC inspector or was it a designated examiner? Having been indirectly involved in TATC cases a few times, I never ever heard anyone from TC say that a subsequent pass was grounds for dismissal. Given this is usually the case, a ruling in TC's favour would all but decimate the rights of pilots to an appeal.

[AntiNakedMan]

Good topic!

I am guessing that after TC got a look at a PPC system they approved, with scripts that did not align with the SOPs and unfair rides (see case below), their appetite to have failed PPC rides reviewed was reduced. Nice to see the Tribunal is keeping TC’s feet to the fire.

https://canlii.ca/t/jrlg8

[FL030]

So did the captain he was flying with also lose his PPC when they failed to reject the takeoff?

[Bede]

So did the captain he was flying with also lose his PPC when they failed to reject the takeoff?

Most likely, but he probably realized that he wasn't going yo be successful before the TATC. Remember, once you apply to the TATC, your failure becomes part of the public record.

[FL030]

So did the captain he was flying with also lose his PPC when they failed to reject the takeoff?

Most likely, but he probably realized that he wasn't going yo be successful before the TATC. Remember, once you apply to the TATC, your failure becomes part of the public record.

Sorry, I meant the seat filler captain not the PPC candidate FO. Is your license on the line as a seat filler? According to the Georgian SOPs the candidate FO did everything right but the captain failed to reject.

[digits_]

So did the captain he was flying with also lose his PPC when they failed to reject the takeoff?

Most likely, but he probably realized that he wasn't going yo be successful before the TATC. Remember, once you apply to the TATC, your failure becomes part of the public record.

The transcript seems to imply the CPT didn't fail, but the FO did, so the concept of 'failing as a crew' was brought up as well.

[FL030]

The transcript seems to imply the CPT didn't fail, but the FO did, so the concept of 'failing as a crew' was brought up as well.

I can see certainly why they didn't show up for the tribunal

[Speedbrakes]

Sorry, I meant the seat filler captain not the PPC candidate FO. Is your license on the line as a seat filler? According to the Georgian SOPs the candidate FO did everything right but the captain failed to reject.

A seat support pilot is not in jeopardy during a PPC.

[Bede]

Sorry, I meant the seat filler captain not the PPC candidate FO. Is your license on the line as a seat filler? According to the Georgian SOPs the candidate FO did everything right but the captain failed to reject.

A seat support pilot is not in jeopardy during a PPC.

I think the ACP manual says something about that but clauses in a CA are not applicable.

https://decisions.tatc.gc.ca/tatc/tatc/ ... 6/index.do

[Speedbrakes]

I think the ACP manual says something about that but clauses in a CA are not applicable.

From the ACP Manual:

6.11 Flight Crew Jeopardy - PPC

(1) Generally speaking, a team either succeeds or fails together.

(2) Where two candidates are being assessed in a normal operational crew setting (i.e., a pilot-in- command paired with a second-in-command), both
candidates are equally subject to flight crew jeopardy during both assessments.

(3) Exceptions to Flight Crew Jeopardy
(a) Pilot Flying (PF) Induced Errors
(i) Pilot flying (PF) induced errors where it would be unreasonable to expect the pilot monitoring (PM) to have the opportunity to take control or
take action to manage the error.
(ii) PF induced errors where PM’s support has been appropriate will also be assigned to the PF rather than both candidates.
(iii) An example of this includes a loss of control during an engine failure during take- off (aeroplane) or a tail rotor strike upon landing
(helicopter) where all PM actions and calls have been appropriate.
(b) Seat Substitute
(i) If a seat substitute has been assigned to support a PPC, flight crew jeopardy will not apply to that individual.
(c) Non-Standard Seat and/or Duty Position