CL300Pilot
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Posts
- 322
You bring up some interesting theories, however, I will only attempt to shed light on one, the BJS/LXJ similarities.
Why are our manuals so similar and why does it appear the BJS holds more weight? Because it does. Does it not make sense to anyone that if you have 2 separate and totally independent companies operating the same equipment using the same pilots as "Agents" to a 135 operator to be reading out of the same book? The reason for this is simple even to the most simple minded such as myself. If they read the same, then you are not flying either 91K or 135 trips different, minus small things like raft rules, but we won't go there. This should actually make our jobs and does in my opinion, much easier because I don't have to remember the differences of 2 separate manuals. For this, I absolutely applaud Flex.
Flex has done a very, very good job of making sure that BJS and LXJ are completely separate. Them being in the same building as us is a convenience thing. Per the regs, the dispatchers must be trained under our 135 side so that they are also able to act as agents for BJS with inflight needs. that is why when we were booming, we would call to open up and a dispatcher was unable to do so due to them not being trained under BJS. The one thing that Flex/BJS did was to have an FAA swat team come in and does so I believe on a regular basis to ensure that we have true separation of the 2 entities. The issue with TAG was that it was obvious to even the simple minded such as myself that there was no separation of operational control. This is why we must on every 135 flight state, "This flight is being operated under the control of Jet Solutions LLC." Is BJS and LXJ intertwined? Absolutely. Are they separate entities? Absolutely. Does the FAA approve of how the 2 entities work together? ABSOLUTELY! The last statement is all that matters to me and most of the rest of the work force.
I hope this helps clear up the BJS/LXJ issue.
One last item. My checks all say "Bombardier Aerospace Corporation" on them.
Why are our manuals so similar and why does it appear the BJS holds more weight? Because it does. Does it not make sense to anyone that if you have 2 separate and totally independent companies operating the same equipment using the same pilots as "Agents" to a 135 operator to be reading out of the same book? The reason for this is simple even to the most simple minded such as myself. If they read the same, then you are not flying either 91K or 135 trips different, minus small things like raft rules, but we won't go there. This should actually make our jobs and does in my opinion, much easier because I don't have to remember the differences of 2 separate manuals. For this, I absolutely applaud Flex.
Flex has done a very, very good job of making sure that BJS and LXJ are completely separate. Them being in the same building as us is a convenience thing. Per the regs, the dispatchers must be trained under our 135 side so that they are also able to act as agents for BJS with inflight needs. that is why when we were booming, we would call to open up and a dispatcher was unable to do so due to them not being trained under BJS. The one thing that Flex/BJS did was to have an FAA swat team come in and does so I believe on a regular basis to ensure that we have true separation of the 2 entities. The issue with TAG was that it was obvious to even the simple minded such as myself that there was no separation of operational control. This is why we must on every 135 flight state, "This flight is being operated under the control of Jet Solutions LLC." Is BJS and LXJ intertwined? Absolutely. Are they separate entities? Absolutely. Does the FAA approve of how the 2 entities work together? ABSOLUTELY! The last statement is all that matters to me and most of the rest of the work force.
I hope this helps clear up the BJS/LXJ issue.
One last item. My checks all say "Bombardier Aerospace Corporation" on them.
You asked me to be specific so I will try to better explain my concerns regarding the BJS LXJ situation. I consider myself pretty well read on the TAG situation but as a non pilot I am the first to admit I don’t necessarily understand the way daily operations may or may not play into this. But how can you say with a straight face that BJS is a completely separate entity from the foreign owned entity of LXJ? There may be separate floors and door locks, but it is definitely a combined enterprise at the same convenient address.. Everything from human resource & administrative issues, to scheduling, long range planning, owner & in flight services, ground ops, dispatch, maintenance decisions and issues, hiring decisions (well maybe not lately), firing decisions, training etc it’s pretty clear there are some gray lines. Up until a little while ago your paychecks even came from BJS for jake’s sake. And if I’m not mistaken I’ve been told some of the language that’s been added to the manuals over the past year give the implication that BJS has more and more control over “in flight” issues because they have more flexibility in the way things get handled from a regulation perspective. But that’s way out of my league as I barely understand V1 rotate.