Letter Sent To EASA Board Of Management "Expressing Concern" Over GA Fee Structure

The entire aviation world has mounted a concerted challenge to EASA over its scale of fees and charges, which are characterised as inexplicably high and are acting as a major drag on the aviation industry in Europe. IAOPA has joined organizations representing every facet of regulated aviation on the EASA Advisory Body in writing to the Chairman of the EASA Board of Management expressing concern at the damaging effect of EASA’s fees.

The letter singles out for special attention the wholly disproportionate charges levied on general aviation and demands that they be reduced through a program of cost-cutting at EASA.
 
The text of the letter, addressed to Mike Smethers, Chairman of the EASA Board of Management, has been agreed by organizations as diverse as Airbus, the International Air Transport Association, the Association of European Airlines, Rolls Royce and the European Business Aviation Association as well as IAOPA. It indicates that EASA’s overheads are running out of control at a time when economies of scale should be bringing them down and points out that EASA’s labour charge – €246.38 per hour – is wholly out of scale with labour costs in the industry and twice as high as those of other aviation regulators. It also calls on Europe to accept more bilateral agreements which mean EASA would not spend money re-certificating equipment which has already been acceptably certificated by third countries.

Martin Robinson, who represents IAOPA on the EASA Advisory Body which agreed the text of the letter, says: “We are particularly gratified that our colleagues in the airline world, in aviation manufacturing and in other areas which have up to now not identified closely with general aviation are united on this issue. This makes it very difficult for EASA and the European Commission to ignore. From GA’s standpoint, we have always said that none of EASA’s major overheads – big offices, large staffs – would be necessary at all if the organization existed solely for the regulation of GA, so it is unfair that GA should be forced to pay such significant sums towards those overheads.”

The letter, signed by Vincent De Vroey, Chairman of the EASA Advisory Board, also calls on EASA to negotiate more bilateral agreements with third-country regulators in order to ensure that it is not spending time and money certifying equipment which has been adequately certificated elsewhere. In addition, it says, duplication of duties and costs between EASA, Eurocontrol and national aviation authorities needs to be tackled.

With specific regard to general aviation it says: "Last but not least, the EAB would like to re-iterate its concern on the high level of EASA fees for general aviation which are unaffordable for this kind of activity. We believe that the EASA fees for general aviation should be reduced through a complete review of EASA costs, rules, procedures and structures related to general aviation in order to make the fees more proportionate for those kind activities. However, we disagree with cross-subsidies between different kind of activities since we believe EASA fees should be linked to proportionate costs linked to the actual certification activity."

FMI: www.iaopa.eu