And what about the certificates of the pilots?

[John Baker]

Everything is more expensive in San Diego, including check rides. I agree, The local FSDO should be allowed to offer no cost check rides, since we pay their salaries anyway. In a jurisdiction that needs private DPEs to cut down their workload, then they should do all they can do to support those individuals, if they want to keep them around.

Earning a government salary, then in your free time selling your services as a DPE is not helping, nor is it supporting the local private DPEs. It is blatant unfair competition. You are taking needed work away from them.

If that was legal, and was approved conduct by the FAA, then what is to stop any of us from flying commercially without a commercial certificate? The FAA would be de facto approving unfair competition, so we should all be able to join in on the new cash cow.

I could start a little air taxi service on my days off from work.

John

 

[shenanigans]

I take it instructors generally don't know, and aren't expected to know, that FAA rules state that an FAA inspector can't accept gratuities of any sort in performance of their duties?

I knew that long before I became an instructor. So the question for the instructors who sent their students to this guy is whether they knew he was charging for the rides?

I'm sure they knew he was charging and I assume they would know he can't charge when he's acting as an FAA inspector, but he was doing them on weekends and days off. If he told them he was doing the rides independent of his role as an inspector (and likely the evidence confirmed that), should the CFIs be expected to know that wasn't ok?

Doesn't mean there wasn't some collusion going on, but I think it's quite reasonable for someone to know he was charging and not realize it was illegal.

 

[shenanigans]

Earning a government salary, then in your free time selling your services as a DPE is not helping, nor is it supporting the local private DPEs. It is blatant unfair competition. You are taking needed work away from them.

I think it only counts as unfair competition because it is apparently illegal for an inspector to give rides outside their official capacity, without some sort of official approval. ... but if they have that approval, what's the problem?

If that was legal, and was approved conduct by the FAA, then what is to stop any of us from flying commercially without a commercial certificate? The FAA would be de facto approving unfair competition, so we should all be able to join in on the new cash cow.

I'm not sure i understand the connection you're trying to make. We would be stopped by the fact that it's still against the rules to fly commercially without a commercial certificate.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm sure they knew he was charging and I assume they would know he can't charge when he's acting as an FAA inspector, but he was doing them on weekends and days off. If he told them he was doing the rides independent of his role as an inspector (and likely the evidence confirmed that), should the CFIs be expected to know that wasn't ok?

He had no authority to conduct practical tests other than in his capacity as an FAA Inspector. Therefore, he could not conduct those tests "independent of his role as an inspector" no matter what he told anyone. And yes, I think a CFI should know who s/he's sending a trainee for a practical test, and that Inspectors are not permitted to accept money from applicants.

 

[midlifeflyer]

And yes, I think a CFI should know who s/he's sending a trainee for a practical test, and that Inspectors are not permitted to accept money from applicants.

Absolutely. But not knowing is not surprising. That's a failure of our educational system generally. We should all know that federal officials (and my WAG state officials in every state) are not allowed to take compensation for performing acts in their official capacity.

Does anyone there think it would be ok for a mechanics shop or airline to pay off its POI? Or a restaurant owner the city health inspector?

 

[TMetzinger]

I'm sure they knew he was charging and I assume they would know he can't charge when he's acting as an FAA inspector, but he was doing them on weekends and days off. If he told them he was doing the rides independent of his role as an inspector (and likely the evidence confirmed that), should the CFIs be expected to know that wasn't ok?

YES. I'd expect a CFI to know that an FAA inspector cannot charge for checkrides, whether he's on the FAA clock or his own.

It seems to me that anyone who's climbed the ladder to CFI-dom would know enough about the regs and the FAA mode of operations to know that when you have an FAA employee putting money in his pocket for something related to aviation, there's something potentially smelly going on.

They're so cautious about the potential appearance of a conflict of interest that they don't let ASIs instruct in their own districts (at least that's the policy at Washington and Baltimore), even for free. They won't let ASI's act as FAA Safety team reps, either, unless they're assigned to that job, usually as a FAASTeam program manager.

As R&W said, there's a lot we don't know.

 

[shenanigans]

Absolutely. But not knowing is not surprising. That's a failure of our educational system generally. We should all know that federal officials (and my WAG state officials in every state) are not allowed to take compensation for performing acts in their official capacity.

Does anyone there think it would be ok for a mechanics shop or airline to pay off its POI? Or a restaurant owner the city health inspector?

This is not at all the same as paying off the health inspector unless you consider the fee given to an examiner to be "paying off" the examiner. You have the option of a practical test adminsitered by the FAA or one done by a private citizen. This guy represented himself as being allowed to act in both capcities, with his role as a private citizen being done outside of his working hours.

Assuming the CFI knows the guy also works as an inspector, the failure is in not realizing that a federal employee wasn't allowed to also act as a private citizen in this role. I think that's understandable. It's not the CFI's job to know an FAA inspector's conditions of employment.
Give this the duck test:
Do we know the guy is qualified to give practical tests? yes
Is it run like any other examiner's checkride? yes
Do the people who pass their test get their certificate in the mail from the FAA? yes

If you didn't happen to know that inspectors aren't allowed to do exams outside their role at the FAA, where's the giant red flag?
This isn't implausible. And if the CFI had a concern, someone with the authority to answer it is telling him it's OK.

YES. I'd expect a CFI to know that an FAA inspector cannot charge for checkrides, whether he's on the FAA clock or his own.

I guess i wouldn't expect a CFI to know the off the clock part.

 

[LearDriver]

Can you point me to the reg which says you have an obligation to someone you trained 10-15 years agos, and what obligations that reg says you have? I sure don't know of such a reg.

That one I feel is a personal obligation. Which will vary instructor to instructor.