B19 Flyer,
Thank you for your lesson!
But ... You have not answered my questions!
1. You claimed Air-Carrier Certificate holders operate under OpsSpecs, as well as, MSpecs. Would you mind consolidating your "sentence of 7 words," and the above lesson?
It was actually 2 phrases with the "and" splitting them, but IMAC and the others didn't understand
The original statement was:
I expect there will be a lot more misery before there is happiness in heavily union based certificated carriers with opspecs and management specs.
What could I expect though from a bunch of guys that let other people speak for them? I should have known better.
2. Now we know that most, if not all, fractional ownership operators operate under both Air-Carrier Certificates issued under part 119, as well as, under MSpecs issued under sub part K of part 91. Why do these operators have to be viewed differently? Are those operators still not Air-Carrier Certificate holders in your opinion?
That wasn't the original intent, but we all kind of figured that would happen. There is no such thing as a 91K operating certificate. So, there is only one certificate for operators who operate under both 91K and Part 135.
3. You explained some of the intricacies affecting operational control at fractional ownership programs in the above lesson. However, please answer the following two questions:
A. Would it be in the best interest of a fractional ownership operator to limit itself to operations under subpart K of part 91? Would that be consistent with the kind of service such an operator is supposed to offer?
Of course not if it's a large entity, but the working group was geared toward dealing with stabilizing fractional cowboys more than the established 135 operations.
B. What does the discussion of operational control, or, the discussion of which rules an operator is operating under have to do with the discussion of labor-management relations?
It doesn't, but IMAC didn't seem to understand the simplicity of what I wrote and the rest of you decided to jump on his bandwagon to correct what was correctly written in the first place. That's classic union for you, correct what isn't broken.
Thanks
IDEtoNJA