Brussels – 27 October 2005 ICAO-Eurocontrol seminar Language Requirements in the Community licence for air traffic controllers Brussels – 27 October 2005 ICAO-Eurocontrol seminar Adoption SES package in conciliation : 9.12.2003 – formal adoption 28.01 by EP and 3.02 by Council –publication 31.03.2004. Reference to article 5 of Service provision regulation: as soon as possible after the entry into force of this regulation, the Commission shall present, if appropriate, a proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council on the licensing of controllers. SES proposals: complete package, including social aspects Implementation of Article 4 of framework: transpose ESARRs: This draft proposal intends to transpose all relevant (on ATCO licensing) and mandatory parts of ESARR5

The Community Directive Community instrument addressed to Member States Regulating all aspects with regard to skills of air traffic controllers Age-education requirements Technical skills Language skills Medical requirements Institutional requirements: certification of training providers and supervision Directive or Regulation: laying down obligations to member states or to public and private parties Direct effect: Coummunity law is itself capable of creating rights and oblidations enforceable beofre national courts, at least if the provisions : are clear and concise are unconditional leave no substantial discretion in its implementation Deals with all requirements necessary to establish competence levels: age, education level, competence structure, training contents, medical requirements, language requirements, institutional arrangements, including supervision and auditing

Language requirements Need for regulation Safety critical Community dimension Very sensitive issue Within a Community context: International air navigation service provision should include any provisions. Language requirements need to be addressed, in addition to safety-critical character, due to particular Community context: freedom of movement – mutual recognition of licences: language should be used as an obstacle to freedom of movement. Discussions in Council and Parliament have been very difficult, until the very last moment: issue has been addressed at Ministerial level.

The Community Directive ICAO requirements = Community requirements? NO False friends Value added of Community licence is: Institutional context Regulation of full range of competencies Reinforcing well accepted international standards Not reinventing the hot water. For language requirements: take ICAO as the source of legislation And ICAO indeed has paved the way for the Community standards

Art. 8: Linguistic Requirements ICAO: Annexes 1 – 10 - 11 PANS: voice-voice CPDLC-CPDLC ATS: ground/ground Recommendations: Air-ground communication Language of ground station English on request On designated airports and routes used by international air services Regions may agree upon other language than EN Operational level Speak RT/C by D + 5 Assessments Endorsement EU Law: air navigation service provision: ability to speak EN Member State may require other language than EN Operational level in principle – can be increased to extended level in specific circumstances 2005 + 2 + 2 Assessments Endorsement ICAO requirements were quite limited as PANS, but mandatory requirements have been considerably extended in April 2003. EN or language normally used by the station on the ground EN must be available at request from any aircraft station Availability of language form part of AIP Appropriate level: ICAO level 4

Friends Identical Classification of levels Operational level as principle Indicated by endorsement It might give the impression of identity As stated earlier, the Community Directive has taken the approach to ensure compatibility with international standards and reinforce their acceptance. So, at first sight, it seems that, when satisfying the ICAO requirements, automatically the Community requirements would be satisfied: Here the similarities are shown – However, this is only a very superficial analysis

FALSE Friends (1) Scope: Which language Level: All air traffic services All types of communication Pilot – ATCO (annex 10) ACC – ACC (annex 11) Internal coordination ATCO – external services Which language Knowledge English is imposed Knowledge local language may be added Level: Operational in principle Extended level in imperative safety conditions There are significant differences between the ICAO and the Community standards

FALSE Friends Community standards go beyond ICAO Quality assurance Approval of language training institutes Genuine test and assessment Certificate Endorsement Enforceable law Directive Complaint by any pilot Community standards go beyond ICAO As you see: we talk about a different beast: Effective application of the language standards could be requested by any pilot, e.g. after a complaint by a pilot.

What is needed? Entrance test : subsidiarity Language test when obtaining a (student) licence Language test for maintaining validity of language endorsement Determination of level requirements per type of communication For EN and any local language For all types of communications What is needed to make the effective application come true? Type of communications: not only pilot-ATCO communications, but also: ATCO – ATCO: internal coordination Centre – centre: ATCO – external services, like fire brigade etc. Language assessments must be adapted to catch all different situations for all languages.

By when/where will this be needed? Formal adoption : end 2005 Entry into force: early 2006 Transposition: 4 years after entering into force In EU + all countries which have concluded agreements with the EU (at least 35 out of the 53 states of EU ICAO)

Mobility and Mutual Recognition Principle: treat all EU citizens at equal footing In practice: Recognition of rating and endorsements only local endorsement training individual training plan approved, including language training Complications: statute, working conditions, knowledge of local language TRUST: member states must be able to trust each others’ system, hence ensurance that all play by the rule Equivalence: notion stemming from case-law on general directives on mutual recognition: Evolution in policy: Recognition if national systems are identical Recognition if national systems are equivalent: shift of burden of proof Possibility of getting complementary training – not start all over again! Here: leap forwards: establishment of EU wide standards This is also valid for language standards. Levels must be established: not too low: this could jeopardize effective communication not too high: this could jeopardize freedom of movement

Builds on and is compatible with ICAO requirements Conclusions Builds on and is compatible with ICAO requirements Nature, scope, institutional context is substantially different Will become European law by the end of 2005 How to help NSA/ANSPs in its implementation? Thank you!