Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Hold on tight

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Your right of course but whats the fun of a message board if we cant speculate? I have read the Options contract and it looks like they would have a pretty good case for single carrier status with FLEX. Your mostly right on your second statement but I'm pretty sure the American pilots are ok with how the TWA integration went.
 
Your right of course but whats the fun of a message board if we cant speculate? I have read the Options contract and it looks like they would have a pretty good case for single carrier status with FLEX. Your mostly right on your second statement but I'm pretty sure the American pilots are ok with how the TWA integration went.

How so Flex is not an air carrier and the 135 certificate is completely separately owned and operated.
 
How so Flex is not an air carrier and the 135 certificate is completely separately owned and operated.

It's not cut and dry and i'm surprised the FAA went along with it in the first place but FLEX has and continues to operate flights under part 135. In addition, Options has in their contract that any fractional flying done under the Directional banner will be operated by Options. It would be up to a judge to decide the outcome but if either FLEX was judged to be an air carrier for the purpose of integration or the Options contract holds up in court, an integration would occur. If Flex was judged not to be an air carrier and the Options contract holds up, an integration might occur outside of the McCaskill-Bond guidelines.
 
Has the FLOPS union had an official response to the Flexjet acquisition?

Phone-in meeting with the 1108 this evening. I will be very surprised if we hear anything other than the usual "support your Union, pay your dues, we have no further information at this time". It's not that our Union leadership doesn't try, it's just that management doesn't tell us squat.
 
I have read the Options contract and it looks like they would have a pretty good case for single carrier status with FLEX.

As it currently stands, they would have ZERO chance of winning a single carrier case.

Four years ago, with the company SUPPORTING the single-carrier petition, the NJI flight attendants WON their case stating NJI and NJA WERE NOT a single carrier. And NJI and NJA were a whole lot closer to one company than Flex and Options.

The accelerated integration debacle that followed was a direct result of the court's decision.

Jussssssss sayin.
 
It's not cut and dry and i'm surprised the FAA went along with it in the first place but FLEX has and continues to operate flights under part 135. In addition, Options has in their contract that any fractional flying done under the Directional banner will be operated by Options. It would be up to a judge to decide the outcome but if either FLEX was judged to be an air carrier for the purpose of integration or the Options contract holds up in court, an integration would occur. If Flex was judged not to be an air carrier and the Options contract holds up, an integration might occur outside of the McCaskill-Bond guidelines.

Flexjet does not operate under 135 only 91k. All 135 flights are done under Jet Solutions LLC and we pilots act as agents for them. Completely seperate that's why we have an agency agreement with Jet Solutions LLC.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top