A Licensed Engineer Is Not Automatically Authorised to Sign Your Aircraft
An aircraft maintenance engineer may hold a valid licence and relevant type experience but still lack authority to certify work for a new organisation. Under EASA Part-145, competence, qualifications, recent experience, training and organisational procedures must be assessed before certification authorisation is issued.
Company authorisation defines what an engineer may sign and does not automatically transfer between employers or regulatory systems. For airlines and MROs, recruitment and certification are therefore separate decisions: licensing and availability cannot replace demonstrated competence and organisation-specific approval.
Published: 6 November 2026
Written by: Shashwat Dwivedi
The recruitment team has got their hands on an experienced engineer. The licence is valid, the aircraft type is familiar, and someone has been found to cover the next shift.
One might assume this settles the question of aircraft maintenance, but EASA’s Part-145 framework takes a different view. They state that holding a licence and being authorised to certify maintenance for an organisation are very distinct matters. Filling the vacancy does not mean an individual is immediately authorised to sign off maintenance approvals.
The Licence Gets You to the Next Check
EASA’s guidance says an organisation must assess prospective certifying staff for their “competence, qualification and capability” before issuing or reissuing certification authorisation. Understanding the relevant aircraft and the organisation’s procedures is also required.
The resulting authorisation defines what the engineer can certify on the organisation’s behalf. Its scope must respect the applicable licence categories and ratings but can be narrower. An authorisation from a previous employer does not, by itself, provide authority to certify maintenance on behalf of a new employer.
This is also not a one-time obligation. EASA identifies recent relevant maintenance experience and continuation of training as ongoing requirements.
Availability Is Not an Assessment
MHC Aviation's analysis makes one thing very clear: experienced unlicensed engineers can possess considerable technical ability. Certification responsibility should not be confused with a simple ranking of who is better at maintenance.
RAS Technic’s Florin Necula raises the opposite concern: a licensed candidate’s availability must not be mistaken for demonstrated competence.
He asks: “Are we always assessing competence or are we sometimes authorising availability?”
His commentary argues that an organisation needs evidence that someone can make sound certification decisions within the intended scope, including under operational pressure.
Different Rulebooks, Different Privileges
The distinction also matters when recruiting internationally.
AeroTech Careers explains that FAA Airframe and Powerplant certificates provide more direct individual privileges than the EASA organisational model. The FAA confirms that certificated mechanics can perform maintenance and return-to-service approvals within their privileges but must possess the knowledge and skill required for the work. The two systems are not directly interchangeable.
As a result, airlines need to look beyond whether a candidate simply holds a licence. They must also consider whether the candidate's qualifications, recent experience, demonstrated competence and authorisation align with the work being assigned.
Hiring answers who will join the team. Certification authorisation answers what they may sign off on.
Those are two different decisions, and no staffing shortage or roster pressure can remove the need for either one.
Key Facts
Holding an aircraft maintenance licence does not automatically give an engineer authority to certify maintenance for an organisation.
Under EASA Part-145, organisations must assess an engineer’s competence, qualifications and capability before granting certification authorisation.
Familiarity with the aircraft type alone is insufficient; engineers must also understand the organisation’s procedures and operating environment.
Certification authorisation can be narrower than the privileges available under an engineer’s underlying licence.
An authorisation issued by one employer does not automatically transfer when the engineer moves to another organisation.
Recent maintenance experience and continuation training remain important after initial authorisation.
Technical experience and certification authority should not be confused: an experienced unlicensed engineer may possess significant practical competence without having sign-off privileges.
Equally, possessing a licence should not be treated as proof that an engineer is competent for every certification responsibility within its theoretical scope.
International recruitment adds complexity because EASA and FAA systems grant and structure maintenance privileges differently.
For recruiters, the critical question is not only “Does this engineer hold the licence?” but whether their licence, type experience, recency, competence and company authorisation match the work required.
Related Articles
Planning growth, fleet changes or seasonal operations in 2026? Contact Brookfield to discuss your staffing and consultancy needs. Email: info@brookfieldav.com
Explore our full range of recruitment services, connecting aviation businesses with skilled pilots, aircraft engineers and industry professionals worldwide.
Author: Shashwat Dwivedi Aviation staffing and consultancy insights LinkedIn
