Logging Piaggio Time

[transpac]

I never said anything about changing the certifiaction of the plane. Thats EXACTLY what i said, an operator.

If the ops specs say the operation needs a SIC....then you get an SIC.

Exactly true! One example: Back in its early days, Comair crashed a Navajo being flown single-pilot and killed 8 folks. After the dust settled Comair's Part 135 autopilot authorization was withdrawn and a qualified SIC was required on every Part 135 flight.

 

[brokeflyer]

thank you



and to all you managment types who think you're being cute by flying single pilot and just "throwing" anothe guy in the right seat to satisfy your customers insurance SIC requirement?


if you crash just make sure they dont hear your "sic" on the radio or touching the flaps and gear.

you may snowball the FAA but the customers insurance carrier will sue the ******************** out of you and win every penny by not having a fully "qualified" sic.

To all you single pilot pilots out there.....management accepts crashes as a cost of doing business. But you as pilots have to uphold a higher standard. Out of ALL the airplane crashes, there are 2 that i can think of that were commanded by managemnt.....and nearly everyone was killled....and nearly everyone was killed......the first was Tenerife.

That is why you need a contract. Avaintair should be next, get those pilots paid and watch how the level of professionalisn increases.

 

[corpflunkie]

How can the FAA change the certification of the plane based on the operator? I could follow you if you said a company can require an SIC. I have never heard of the FAA requiring an SIC in an Single pilot certified plane, unless the PIC's have licenses that state "SIC required" which is what I had when I flew 1900's many years ago. There are/were two types of type ratings at the time and all PIC's had the SIC required type.

If you look in FAR91 (subK), it states that all turbine aircraft (even if type certificated single pilot) operated under said part must have a qualified sic, and capt must have an atp. Now, take that same aircraft and operate it under 135, single pilot with commercial ticket is good to go.

 

[glasspilot]

thank you



and to all you managment types who think you're being cute by flying single pilot and just "throwing" anothe guy in the right seat to satisfy your customers insurance SIC requirement?


if you crash just make sure they dont hear your "sic" on the radio or touching the flaps and gear.

you may snowball the FAA but the customers insurance carrier will sue the ******************** out of you and win every penny by not having a fully "qualified" sic.

To all you single pilot pilots out there.....management accepts crashes as a cost of doing business. But you as pilots have to uphold a higher standard. Out of ALL the airplane crashes, there are 2 that i can think of that were commanded by managemnt.....and nearly everyone was killled....and nearly everyone was killed......the first was Tenerife.

That is why you need a contract. Avaintair should be next, get those pilots paid and watch how the level of professionalisn increases.

who are you talking to? Avantair? You brought up Tenerife. Avantair wasn't there. We are not single pilot. We have a management that backs pilots. WTF are you talking about!?!?

Are you really saying we are dangerous cause we don't have a union and Tenerife is proof? Please tell me that is not your argument and I am WAY off base. If I am I apologize in advance. If that is your point then... well I don't know what then... That's so crazy I haven't thought that far out of the box.

 

[brokeflyer]

who are you talking to? Avantair? You brought up Tenerife. Avantair wasn't there. We are not single pilot. We have a management that backs pilots. WTF are you talking about!?!?

Are you really saying we are dangerous cause we don't have a union and Tenerife is proof? Please tell me that is not your argument and I am WAY off base. If I am I apologize in advance. If that is your point then... well I don't know what then... That's so crazy I haven't thought that far out of the box.

no im NOT talking about avantair.....im talking about all those ******************** bag charter operators out there.

 

[hangarrat]

That is why you need a contract. Avaintair should be next, get those pilots paid and watch how the level of professionalisn increases.

Did you just say that all pilots who dont fly under a contract are less professional than those of you who do?

:angryfire What is your freakin' problem? :angryfire

I don't know about the rest of you uncontracted pilots, but that doesn't sit well with me.

 

[glasspilot]

no im NOT talking about avantair.....im talking about all those ******************** bag charter operators out there.

Oh, my bad.

 

[Paradoxus]

Did you just say that all pilots who dont fly under a contract are less professional than those of you who do?

:angryfire What is your freakin' problem? :angryfire

I don't know about the rest of you uncontracted pilots, but that doesn't sit well with me.

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. A contract, I think any will agree, fosters a higher level of professionalism by providing a layer of protection (of professional integrity) that simply isn't there otherwise.

The interests of the skilled laborer, generally, is in performance of duties to the highest standard possible--for as much compensation as possible. Generally, (and, boy, do I NOT mean to imply this is necessarily the case with Avant) the interests and functions of management are such that they are set up in opposition to the interests of the skilled laborer.

That's simply the way it is. Are there exceptions? Always.

Unification of a skilled labor force under negotiated contract is fundamentally a way for professionals to say "we're here to play ball."

 

[rettofly]

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. A contract, I think any will agree, fosters a higher level of professionalism by providing a layer of protection (of professional integrity) that simply isn't there otherwise.

The interests of the skilled laborer, generally, is in performance of duties to the highest standard possible--for as much compensation as possible. Generally, (and, boy, do I NOT mean to imply this is necessarily the case with Avant) the interests and functions of management are such that they are set up in opposition to the interests of the skilled laborer.

That's simply the way it is. Are there exceptions? Always.

Unification of a skilled labor force under negotiated contract is fundamentally a way for professionals to say "we're here to play ball."

Seems to me that the interests and functions of management, by definition, are in opposition to the interests of labor (skilled or unskilled). The function of a bargaining unit on the property is to establish and codify the conditions under which the two opposing interest conduct business.
I have worked at both union and non-union operations. My union shop employment had no more or less of a level of professionalism than my non-union gigs. The primary difference was that the players at the union shop had more lucrative overtime provisions and the opportunity to invoke Big Brother if they didn't get their way.
Professionalism is a state of mind, NOT a hammer to wield against your employer. The real professionals are the folks who do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

 

[hangarrat]

The real professionals are the folks who do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

I can agree with that statement, Rettofly. Generalizations like the one Broke threw out there are inflammatory, ludicrous and erode the post's writer's credibility.

 

[Paradoxus]

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. A contract, I think any will agree, fosters a higher level of professionalism by providing a layer of protection (of professional integrity) that simply isn't there otherwise.

The interests of the skilled laborer, generally, is in performance of duties to the highest standard possible--for as much compensation as possible. Generally, (and, boy, do I NOT mean to imply this is necessarily the case with Avant) the interests and functions of management are such that they are set up in opposition to the interests of the skilled laborer.

That's simply the way it is. Are there exceptions? Always.

Unification of a skilled labor force under negotiated contract is fundamentally a way for professionals to say "we're here to play ball."

Seems to me that the interests and functions of management, by definition, are in opposition to the interests of labor (skilled or unskilled). The function of a bargaining unit on the property is to establish and codify the conditions under which the two opposing interest conduct business.
I have worked at both union and non-union operations. My union shop employment had no more or less of a level of professionalism than my non-union gigs. The primary difference was that the players at the union shop had more lucrative overtime provisions and the opportunity to invoke Big Brother if they didn't get their way.
Professionalism is a state of mind, NOT a hammer to wield against your employer. The real professionals are the folks who do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

Strike what I said, I completely agree. :beer:

 

[B19 Flyer]

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. A contract, I think any will agree, fosters a higher level of professionalism by providing a layer of protection (of professional integrity) that simply isn't there otherwise.

The interests of the skilled laborer, generally, is in performance of duties to the highest standard possible--for as much compensation as possible. Generally, (and, boy, do I NOT mean to imply this is necessarily the case with Avant) the interests and functions of management are such that they are set up in opposition to the interests of the skilled laborer.

That's simply the way it is. Are there exceptions? Always.

Unification of a skilled labor force under negotiated contract is fundamentally a way for professionals to say "we're here to play ball."

I don't agree. Unions have consistently watered down critical safety programs such as ASAP and FOQA and prevented other safety programs such as cameras on the flight deck. Then, they have built safeguards into the grievance process that let pilots think they can get away with things that they otherwise couldn't. As broke agreed with me on a different thread, the grievance process will protect pilots that should be driving dump trucks rather than flying airplanes.

Any thoughts of professionalism isn't because it's unionized, it's because the hiring process and culture is better. It doesn't take a union to be professional. Unions will impede good safety programs for the sake of privacy. If their pilots were as professional as they make them out to be, there would be no reason to have privacy concerns.

 

[glasspilot]

I don't think it's fair to say unions are anti safety or impede safety either.

ALPA fought hard to get TCAS. Airlines didn't want to pay for the expense.

ALPA does not support cockpit cameras and neither do I. Sure it would be nice to see the video on some accidents, but that is way outweighed, in my opinion, by two facts;

1. They will get released. They swore CVRs would never be released to the public and just be used for accident investigation. Guess what, CVRs get released. It's bad enough a pilots family has to have a lost loved one but to have to hear their final moment is too much. Imagine if they got to see Daddy die too.

2. We work as a crew. We need free comunication and any fear that the boss / fed may be sitting our shoulder will do nothing but interfear with that communication.

Regardless, it's not fair to say unions are against safety.

 

[Paradoxus]

I don't agree. Unions have consistently watered down critical safety programs such as ASAP and FOQA and prevented other safety programs such as cameras on the flight deck. Then, they have built safeguards into the grievance process that let pilots think they can get away with things that they otherwise couldn't. As broke agreed with me on a different thread, the grievance process will protect pilots that should be driving dump trucks rather than flying airplanes.

What a sad attempt at levity. I say levity, because that has got to be, hands down, the goofiest justification for railroading pilots yet submitted on these fora.

I would have preferred honesty of intent. Despicable. uke:

Any thoughts of professionalism isn't because it's unionized, it's because the hiring process and culture is better. It doesn't take a union to be professional. Unions will impede good safety programs for the sake of privacy. If their pilots were as professional as they make them out to be, there would be no reason to have privacy concerns.

Yes indeed, and an honest, law abiding citizen ought to have nothing to fear in government raping of privacy either, eh? After all, if you're conducting yourself in a proper manner, what would you have to fear in surveillance?

 

[DelphinDriver]

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. A contract, I think any will agree, fosters a higher level of professionalism by providing a layer of protection (of professional integrity) that simply isn't there otherwise.

The interests of the skilled laborer, generally, is in performance of duties to the highest standard possible--for as much compensation as possible. Generally, (and, boy, do I NOT mean to imply this is necessarily the case with Avant) the interests and functions of management are such that they are set up in opposition to the interests of the skilled laborer.

That's simply the way it is. Are there exceptions? Always.

Unification of a skilled labor force under negotiated contract is fundamentally a way for professionals to say "we're here to play ball."

Seems to me that the interests and functions of management, by definition, are in opposition to the interests of labor (skilled or unskilled). The function of a bargaining unit on the property is to establish and codify the conditions under which the two opposing interest conduct business.
I have worked at both union and non-union operations. My union shop employment had no more or less of a level of professionalism than my non-union gigs. The primary difference was that the players at the union shop had more lucrative overtime provisions and the opportunity to invoke Big Brother if they didn't get their way.
Professionalism is a state of mind, NOT a hammer to wield against your employer. The real professionals are the folks who do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

Best dang post of this whole thread