A friend from our department said he dashed off letters to all the US reps for our state, giving his views on all this "no aircraft" sentiment, as applied to the automakers. He's drafting a new one highlighting the employment impacts that will follow if all this crap continues.
I'm joining him in doing this, and would ask that everyone of us do the same, writing to your respective reps and tell them that this isn't helping. Obviously, the NBAA either isn't lobbying hard enough, or they're turning a deaf ear in Congress/Senate. Maybe letters from those of us who they work for will help enlighten them. Can't hurt (much).
Someone on a pilot board wondered why the automakers had to give theirs up, but the banks didn't. With this crap afloat, he may just get to see that happen. To the detriment of many more professional aviators, including myself.
The prospects for survival look mighty slim for me if our department takes a hit.
I feel bad about these pilots losing jobs due to the bad press. But lets let balme fall on those who deserve it. The press is just letting the cat out of the bag on the blatent lack of policy within certain company's. The blame falls on the back of the mgt and boards of these businesses. Keep a company jet for company business. Let the CEO charter a plane to go on vacation or whatever they choose-they can afford it. There is one CEO who rides the corporate jet from his house in Florida to Detroit for work. Move to your job site like the rest of us. Do those poor automakers need a fleet of planes when they can't even break even? The lack of accountability is outrageous. Now those poor banks that cried broke are giving 1.6 Billion in cash and bennies to upper level mgt. Do you know where your Trillion dollars went?
The govt is not clean of this either. They opened up the gates of fun and let these guys do what they want. The senator or congressman on the hill should not blast the execs for corp jet travel when they themselves will be on one too. It is a huge mess and they all can start with accountability.
I agree with all of your points. Mine is that no one (except the one Time mag article) is painting corporate aircraft in a fair light. You get Joe average riled up (and they mostly have a right to be), and jobs start falling, because no one has the balls to step up and explain how these are tools to make income, which in turn pays loans back, shareholders, etc. And keep people employed.
I agree that the sins of a few are really starting to screw alot of pilots. It galls me to see what the top brass gets away with. We talked about this in the office yesterday, and the thought came out that the heads of those flight departments should have pointed out the bad idea it was to take all those planes to DC to ask for money. Maybe they aren't in that kind of environment, but I bet they regret it now. Both our director and chief pilot echoed the thought, and in our environment, I'm thinking they would have.
I'm fortunate that ours are truly used for business, 100%. BUT, what I don't know is if the harsh glare of publicity will change the resolve that we NEED them (a sentiment that has been expressed in our co.)
I keep throwing out this story about the company my Dad flew for. Major US company, comes on hard times, sells airplane, closes department, adds the coin to the pot to try to make the dividend promised. My Dad stays on part time to set them up with a charter company, and is in the office one day when the leading salesman comes in. He looks like crap, loaded with bags, rumpled, and obviously beat. Dad asks how it's going, salesman replies, "I have to work twice as hard to produce half as much since we lost the airplane." And this was only a KingAir 90.
The gluttony that is there is also a problem. Do they really need to take a G4 from Detroit to DC for 1 pax if they have a fleet of 15 planes? I watch one of the major health care providers use a global capable aircraft for flights that carry 1 or 2 and never leave the US borders and they are centrally located. A CJ3 could be used save a bunch of fuel but it doesn't carry the status. For the privatly held company of individually owned planes go for it. I am sure Oprah doesn't mind paying for her G. But for a company who has a goal and responsibility to make a profit can a 12 million dollar plane do the same job as a 45 million one? Stop flying the Boss's wife to NY to go shopping. If the Boss has to go anyway than no big deal but at least keep it business like.
It used to be about the workers first. Now we feed the FAT CATS first and the rest scurry for scraps. If the govt can not or will not get control of this issue then perhaps a modern day Boston Tea Party is needed.
This is the point and the number of companies abusing the system has been increasing. Claiming personal use flights are required for security reasons is bogus in most cases. This argument came into being a few years ago because it was the only way companies could maximize the tax benefits of the aviation department.
Horrible public relations by the aviation industry and not getting any better. Claiming the benfits of business aviation is falling on deaf ears because there are too many instances of personal use of the a/c that simply are not warranted (i.e commuting, running a shuttle so a CEO's child can go to high school in CA (Qwest), bridge tournaments (Lehman), etc.). Now is not the time to draw attention to the industry.
Barney Frank, the rest of Congress, TSA, and the IRS are fed up and will implement regulations that will strangle Part 91 operations for public companies.
Watch the TSA's security program (LASP) process and how the NBAA and NATA handle it. Arguing we are special and different will not work and will bring another rash of negative news. The arguements presented are weak.
We need to pick our battles carefully and I believe mgmt is finally getting the point that things have to change.
"Barney Frank, the rest of Congress, TSA, and the IRS are fed up and will implement regulations that will strangle Part 91 operations for public companies."
It's funny though that Barney "Lollipop" Frank, Nancy Pelosi and Dingy Harry Reid will jump at every opportunity to catch a ride in a private corporate jet from a "Fat Cat" donor. It is time for Congress to practice what they preach...What does Nancy P. fly on from DC to SFO? A 757!!!! That's right a taxpayer funded 757!!! courtesy of the US Air Force SAM flights out of ADW. She refuses to fly to CA on their new G550...she b*itched to the Air Force that the plane was too small for her. Hypocrite!
"Watch the TSA's security program (LASP) process and how the NBAA and NATA handle it. Arguing we are special and different will not work and will bring another rash of negative news. The arguements presented are weak."
It's gonna be another waste of $$$ just like TSA. It's gonna suck for the companies that go international. What a goat rope this will be.
"We need to pick our battles carefully and I believe mgmt is finally getting the point that things have to change."
Some in Management are really bad apples and need to go. There are still some very good managers and awesome companies out there. The real change is needed in our National Government. It's a real shame that the Democrats won't do a thing to make it better. Some change there Obama. The fun is just beginning.....George Orwell was right and 1984 is now!
How many of us hauled around politicians during elections. We certainly did. Time to tell them to walk. Luckliy we are privately owned. No shareholders. So far still in business. So far that is. Anyway guys/gals Merry Christmas and all the best to all of you.