Airline Pilot Central Forums - If he was your DPE, you must retake checkride

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)

- - If he was your DPE, you must retake checkride (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/130502-if-he-your-dpe-you-must-retake-checkride.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bahamasflyer (Post 3100056)

I sense a ma$$ive lawsuit coming against the FAA. Deep pockets galore.

Even if not going after $$ and simply trying to get an injunction, this certainly meets the “arbitrary and capricious” standard,
since it has nothing to do with a particular airman’s qualification (or lack of).

This is administrative law. Also, USC 49 comes into play. Good luck on taking this to court, and good luck on suing the former DPE. The DPE acted outside the scope of his designation, not the FAA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyDevito (Post 3100095)

This is administrative law. Also, USC 49 comes into play. Good luck on taking this to court, and good luck on suing the former DPE. The DPE acted outside the scope of his designation, not the FAA.

Yeah suing the DPE is probably the only recourse, unless the FAA asks the court to permit lawsuits against themselves :p

When I took my CFI checkride with Puehler he was an ASI for the FAA, not a DPE. At the time, only the FAA was allowed to do CFI checkrides, DPE's could not. I'm pretty annoyed about having to do another checkride after earning my CFII and Gold Seal.

Myself, and everyone I've talked to that's known Puehler highly doubts he ever collected a fee or took a bribe. That is completely out of his character, I don't know where that rumor started but I highly doubt that it's accurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by midwestpilot (Post 3100543)

so what do you think started all this mess?

Quote:

Originally Posted by midwestpilot (Post 3100543)

I didn't see any rumor about him having collected a fee or taken a bribe. Where did you see this? If you are talking about things said in this thread - the ASI who took payments for checkrides was a different person. From the letter that was sent out (read the letter template being sent to pilots affected by the letter) the most likely cause this recheck on his part was accomplishing the necessary items on a checkride;
'...issued certificates and/or ratings to airmen when the airmen did not demonstrate the qualifications to hold the certificate and/or rating for which they were tested.'

My mistake, got my rumors from FB mixed up with the stuff on here and only just saw the template. At the moment I'd really like to see a reasonable basis beyond "did not demonstrate the qualifications to hold the certificate and/or rating for which they were tested" and the evidence associated with that.

I wish it were just the case of "just pass the 709 ride" though. I haven't practiced the CFI/ commercial maneuvers in years.

???

Read the link in the first post of this thread.

If this affects you then you should read every word of it.
TWICE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR (Post 3100902)

???

Read the link in the first post of this thread.

If this affects you then you should read every word of it.
TWICE.

Got it, thanks. Edited the post to reflect it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR (Post 3099091)

On another board, someone did some research and posted three others letters like this one from similar examples.
i work with many ex-ASIs and they told me some stories of similar circumstances too.
The FAA actually has some type of investigative branch. I don’t know how you would catch these DPEs unless it were some type of undercover ‘give me check ride and let’s make sure you are doing it right’ operation or some checked student pilot/upgrade pilot turns the DPE in if s/he even knows what is/is not a valid check.

I know of at least one ASI who was cooking the books.
񺡔—-
Teterboro-based aviation safety inspector Harrington Bishop, 63, entered a guilty plea in a federal court Thursday on charges of receiving illegal gratuities in exchange for what court documents allege were hundreds of unauthorized pilot check rides. Bishop had been assigned to the Teterboro FSDO. On available days off, weekends, and holidays, from May 2004 to February 2011, he allegedly took pilots on check rides at Cave Flight School at Flying W Airport in Medford, NJ. Pilots who flew with him on those occasions ultimately numbered in the hundreds. None of the flights were authorized, each one illegally paid Bishop, and in almost every case a certificate was granted to the tested pilot.
Pilots were allegedly tested for anything from private to airline transport pilot certificates. Bishop allegedly collected tips that amounted to $300 per flight on average from the hundreds of pilots he managed to fly with over seven years. This, in spite of the fact that while acting in an official capacity, Bishop was not allowed to accept payment from pilots in exchange for his services. By Bishop's own account, he passed almost every pilot who flew with him on those occasions. Each pilot then became officially certificated by the FAA as a result of Bishop's work. The official charge against Bishop was one count of receiving illegal gratuities while acting as a public official. He now faces a maximum potential fine of $250,000 and up to two years in jail.
񺡔—
I’m not sure if a DPE would get jail time, but this former ASI got some prison time.

https://www.nj.com/gloucester-county...pemberton.html

He must have had a pretty good thing going at McGuire AFB!

It's not undercover or a clandestine operation, most likely it was discovered through this. The Designee Management System (DMS) is a new computer system, but the policy below from the order is what's been in place for years. The policy was put in place due to previous incidents of DPEs not conducting tests.

FAA Order 8000.95 CHG 5:

Quote:

(2) Interviews of Recently Tested Airmen. Each managing specialist will conduct interviews of recently tested airmen. These interviews are to ensure that the examiner is properly following the PTS/ACS when the FAA is not in attendance. Inform interviewees that the questions are to evaluate the testing procedure and are not a reexamination of their certificates. Conduct a sufficient number of interviews each four quarters (at least five randomly selected airmen or 50 percent of the airmen newly certificated by the designee, whichever is fewer) to provide confidence that the designee is properly conducting the test. If the interviews indicate satisfactory performance by the designee, the schedule for direct observations developed by DMS may be followed. However, if the interviews of recently tested applicants indicate a deficiency with designee performance, the managing office must conduct additional direct observations.

Note: Interview results are risk indicators used to determine the frequency of direct observations. Surveys and scripted interview questions must not be used. Closed-ended questions should be avoided and the ASI should have a relaxed but directed conversation with the recently tested airman about their check ride experience with the designee. Ask followup questions based on what the airman says. The goal is to determine if the designee is giving an adequate test. Is the designee teaching, allowing repeat maneuvers, failing to test all of the required items in the PTS/ACS for the certificate or rating tested? Using interviews properly will give the managing specialist a picture of how the designee is conducting their work on behalf of the FAA.

This is a required action for ASIs overseeing DPEs. This is conjecture, but it's likely that one of the recently tested persons decided to be honest and further investigation showed that the guy was handing out certificates/ratings without testing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsmytime (Post 3099465)

I don’t see why it would be an issue on an app? Have you ever had any certificate action? If I re-take and pass my check ride, no. The only action that will be taken is if I don’t re-take the ride within the time frame.

That depends on how much the interviewer/HR knows and what questions they ask. If you received a certificate that you know you didn't earn...that would probably say a lot more about you than successfully completing a 44709. It's probably going to depend on if you actually had an adequate check and then you'd have to explain that. 44709s are not uncommon in places or sections of the industry where accident rates are higher. They are just a check to ensure the person actually has the skills and proficiency that they are required to have, due to an accident or situation where that may be in question. Just like being involved in an accident or incident. That may happen through no fault of piloting skill.