ICAO RULES AND PROCEDURES
May 12, 2004
Author: Creighton Kaye

May I assist you all by describing how ICAO resolutions are come into being? ICAO creates mandatory rules and recommended rules As a result of a vote on the resolutions contained in each Annex so are the rules (resolutions) created or amended. I am not sure whether it is a simple majority vote or a higher percentage to make a resolution applicable to all countries. (Maybe the vote is weighted to give some countries more say. I suspect not but there is nothing to stop more powerful Member States (ICAO’s term for Nation) heavy handing the smaller members – as Japan does over the right to whale in small nation’s waters).



So at the moment contained in the Annex dealing with licensing there is a mandatory resolution which specifies that the pilot in command of an RPT aircraft can not fly in command once having attained the age of 60 years.

Immediately under that there is a recommended rule that co-pilots be retired at 60 also; but this does not become mandatory until they achieve the age of 65.



Now we come to the “Filing of Differences” procedures. Any Member State (Nation) who chooses not to follow a mandatory resolution, for what ever reason, can file a difference in that area. (eg that their R/W lighting may be pink, or, as in the case of the old HKG Kai Tak airport, that the ILS will not be aligned with the centre line of the runway and will be called an IGS.) Thus while 60 remains as the ICAO mandatory retirement age any other nation who wishes to vary their requirements to another or unlimited age must file a difference. Therefore all the EU nations who have chosen 65 will have filed a difference; as has Canada, N.Z. and Australia with their unlimited age.



The end result is that a Member State can instruct their license holders that they cannot operate into a country at night which displays pink R/W lighting. In the same manner the Member State called the USA will have notified all other Member States that they will not allow any pilot to operate into US airspace if the individual pilot is operating on a Filed Difference. In other words they are acceptable only if they conform to the ICAO mandatory rule. That is why the U.K. captain, who trained me on the B707 in HKG in 1987 and has flown since for Virgin Atlantic rising to a very senior position, rather than cease flying, has bid down and flies as a First Officer. He originally intended to stay until 65 but after 2 years is finding it frustrating and demoralizing and may call it quits very soon. He will tell me of his decision when we meet in the UK next month.



I cannot help but add the comment “Americans like to cite to themselves and announce to the rest of the world the world that the good old USA is the land of the free.” So how about getting on to the heels of the judiciary and the legislature and remind them that they are not living up to that slogan and that the rest of the world is becoming streets ahead in this important area. After all you sent John Glenn into space for a second time on a very expensive piece of equipment. I bet he had a medical saying that he could make it safely on a round trip and not come back a corpse. This proves that the Medical Officers can do the necessary examinations if called upon.



Regards,

Creighton Kaye

system? Something is wrong with that system when our U.S. Supreme Court will hear their complaint, but not a 43 year old travesty of justice...the Age 60 Rule. As you recall, PPF was previously turned down on a requested Supreme Court hearing.