Dear Editor,
I write regarding recent public comments concerning the Mustique Company’s selection of an Accountable Manager.
Some of these comments have been understood as questioning the fairness of the process. I believe this view overlooks important operational and regulatory realities.It appears the former Prime Minister is seeking to support local candidates, Everett and Gregory, which is understandable.
However, appointing either of them to the Accountable Manager role would create significant difficulties for the airline.If the position were given to Everett, he would no longer be able to continue training the company’s pilots. Replacing him in his current training and examining role would be extremely difficult, as the regional pool of suitably qualified pilots does not contain an equivalent candidate.
In addition, moving Everett from his present position as Chief Pilot to Accountable Manager would ground the airline until a new ECCAA-approved Chief Pilot could be appointed. Hiring from within would therefore create multiple regulatory and operational problems for the Mustique Company.SVG Air invested heavily in Everett’s development.
The company funded numerous courses that enabled him to become an ECCAA-approved Training Captain and Examiner.
He was sent to England, Singapore, and the United States for specialised training, including two jet courses. SVG Air also made one of its aircraft available to the ECCAA for a week so that Everett could complete his examiner training.
The Mustique Company has selected the candidate it considers best suited for the Accountable Manager position.
Changing this decision by moving Everett from his current critical roles would create larger problems than it would solve.
Without an ECCAA-approved Accountable Manager (and Chief Pilot), the airline cannot legally operate.The decision is based on safety, regulatory compliance, and operational necessity. These practical considerations should be taken into account when discussing the matter.
