Part 135 First Officer Intern Wanted

[avbug]

Folks have tried to pin the original poster with not having ops specs, not me.

Tried to pin the original poster? Tried? Hardly. The original poster stated for the record, as quoted here, that his or her operations specifications do not require a SIC. Asked and answered.

It is my understanding that the interns are given training and check rides as an SIC and can log SIC time. Our ops don't require an SIC, but that doesn't mean you can't log it.

This was the statement by 8inman...who has buried his or her head in the sand and wisely faded to black.

Care to revise your statement, then?

Both 8inman and timebuilder offered statements of ignorance showing gross misunderstanding of the regulation regarding the logging of time, the requirement for a SIC, and so forth. Timebuilder's contribution was a far-afield guess:

For passengers, it's required for a plane with a configuration of 10 or more pax, the BE99 can be configured for 15.

Inapplicable in a freight operation, and what the aircraft can be configured to hold is irrelevant...only the present configuration for the aircraft. If the airplane is configured for freight and not for more than 10 passengers...the SIC isn't required, particularly for a freight operation using operations specifications not requiring a SIC...nice try, though.

Timebuilder also offered as justification...

As far as cargo goes, no operator is going to schedule a captain for more than 8 hours flight time (in 24) without a hired and paid FO. The FO is required for a 10 hour day. In this case, having the "intern" FO opens up the opportunity for a captain to accept an extra leg or two that wasn't previously scheduled.

Also irrelevant...as timebuilder points to a paid FO...and this thread is about FO's who pay for the job and don't get paid. However, having the first officer aboard is irrelevant without the authorization to operate in that manner, therefore the argument is also irrelevant. Baseless, factless conjecture and justification...again.

I can, however, see clearly in my company ops specs how my BE99 FO is justified.

You state in Post #25 that your company has been issued operations specifications for your SIC program. All good and well...if the company were in the habit of hiring and training a SIC...which they're not. They're in the habit of having a SIC hire them...very much the act of defecating in your own bed and they rolling in it, as you're wont to do.

Wow avbug, a mostly factual debate, I'm proud of you

It's not a debate, it's an indictment, and unfortunately you have been unable to respond with facts or answer questions asked of you. Nobody here is proud of you.

Yes they are considered employees to the extent required to meet the regs, thus they will get a part 135 checkride/training, drug testing, a PRIA report etc. What they won't necessarily get is an interview, a route schedule that they are required to comply with, a paycheck etc.

This completely destroys any credibility to your assertion that these raped prostitutes are interns, doesn't it?

It does.

The suggestion that they fly when they want is to put to rest the idea proposed by you and others that this is some sort of a scheme to get workers for free,...

This "puts to rest" nothing. You've repeatedly argued that these "employees" or "interns" (they meet neither defintion) are necessary in order to fly 10 hours. They're not. They're unreliable and can't be considered available to ensure 10 hours are available to the employer, as you've just clearly noted...as they have no responsibilities to the company.

Hard for you to call them employees when they have no responsibility to show up, isn't it? Hard to call them interns when they have no responsibility or obligation to show up, either. Even if they do show up, they've still not met either definition, which means you're still perpetuating the big lie. This we know.

What you're doing is getting paid labor, but with laborers paying to work for you. Whether another pilot is displaced is irrelevant. Whether they are obligated to work a given line, day or fly with a particular captain is irrelevant. Whether your aircraft can be configured for 15 seats is irrelevant. Whether you actually have operations specifications pertinent to your program is irrelevant. You caw and cry about irrelevant points, perhaps in the hope that someone will be slow enough or foolish enough to be misdirected by your banter, and miss the big picture: what you're doing is immoral and wrong. You're a snake oil salesman who justifies your sodomization of "employees" who buy their jobs by pontificating on where they might end up after you've kicked them to the curb.

Do you lack the intelligence to see yourself and your operation as others do, and to know enough to shut up and slink away? Clearly so, and it's unfortunate for you. Dig deeper, by all means.

 

[bizjet800]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8inMan
If anyone is looking for a way to gain some great part 135, all-weather experience in multi-turbine equipment, this would be a good opportunity. Get the experience now so when things turn around, you'll be in a good position to land a decent job. If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.

I thought this needed some editing. The corrections are in bold type:

If anyone is looking for a way to gain some great [by great I mean indentured servant] part 135 [more like 134 and a half], all-weather experience [chief said he doesn’t care if there’s 250 miles of thunderstorms and no way around, you go!] in multi-turbine equipment [Two of our engines really only equal one and a half—what I meant was MEL turbine, as in at least 14 Minimum Equipment List Items] this would be a good opportunity [If by good you mean paying for your own slavery…sure]. Get the experience now so when things turn around [when Wal-Mart is hiring greeters], you'll be in a good position [everyone will know you paid for your time] to land a decent job [If you’re not dead from this one] . If you have any questions, feel free to PM me. [I am earning a commission for each sucker, oops I meant dumba$$ pilot I bring in the door]

 

[JAFI]

You can’t log SIC if an SIC is not required. You can't log PIC if you are not the - Required by regulation under 135 - PIC. So exactly what are they selling????

Where have I heard an "Offer" like this before?

I was walking through an open hanger and stopped for a moment to look at a common corporate jet I use to fly years ago. A little mental trip back in time. A line boy walks up and says: "you have to wash the aircraft for two years before you can fly right seat" he says. I said I did not want a job in the right seat, I do have some time in the type, and I was just looking at the plane. He followed me as I walked away repeating "you have to wash it for two years before you can sit in the right seat". I wondered how many times he was told that by his boss and I wondered if he was paid for the wash.

Twice (at different companies) I was told by a boss that if I had sex with them they would "help me get a better job". The first one started with talk of a hot tub and drinks. I said that there was not enough alcohol in the world or enough soap to clean up later. I did not keep that job long - thank God.

Speaking of getting screwed, that is what I think of the pay to sit in the right seat concept of this thread.

------------------------------------

I know it can take a great amount of effort to build time. It will come at it's own sweet pace. You never know what the cards hold. I met a TWA Captain years ago that told me "You never know what is going to happen in an aviation career. Just do the best you can and accept what happens."

I watched pilots I knew that had great breaks then went bust. Others fell into a pile of furtlizer and came up with the golden ring. One died of cancer too young. Others had nothing but hard luck. Some held out and did well. Some left to other careers.

IMHO forget the "quick" way. It may not work out like you hope. Become the best at what you want to do and always keep learning. The rest is just noise and to be forgotten. There is always some slime ball out there that will try to steal you blind. It's a rough world.

JAFI

 

[brokeflyer]

Wow avbug, a mostly factual debate, I'm proud of you (please don't take this as sarcasm either).

Anyone considering a cargo FO program should consider these arguments, and if they do so, they should know how to justify themselves against such claims. Hence, I think this kind of online debate is productive, thanks for participating, avbug! Again, no sarcasm intended.

Folks have tried to pin the original poster with not having ops specs, not me. I've said otherwise, but maybe you missed that part.

Yes they are considered employees to the extent required to meet the regs, thus they will get a part 135 checkride/training, drug testing, a PRIA report etc. What they won't necessarily get is an interview, a route schedule that they are required to comply with, a paycheck etc.

The suggestion that they fly when they want is to put to rest the idea proposed by you and others that this is some sort of a scheme to get workers for free, like I said, it's their investment, most do want the hard IFR time, so they do come on board, I can't force them to though, and on this matter I can't speak for other companies, or even for mine, so I only speak for myself.

dude, you can give them the keys to the city and call the avon lady, THEY CAN'T LOG THE TIME. Regardless if they have a checkride, training, drug testing and given up a kidney as well. They can't log the time that they are being charged for.

Do you understand?

 

[Secret Squirrel]

I really love all the Jr. Lawyers and their expert advise on the Regs. They are discussing a program that is almost as old as the profession itself. A program that is administered by some reputable companies (airnet, ameriflight) with oversight from the FAA. With many people who have have taken their experience to every airline in the US.

I can tell you how Ameriflight justifies their program. In their Ops specs they have the ability to train SIC's for all their aircraft for training purposes. They have this requirement because it allows them to do online training while flying freight under 135. I got a sic check ride (as an employee) in all the planes I flew at Ameriflight including the piper lance. A single engine airplane that I am sure does not have a SIC requirement. So the Ops Specs say there can be SIC's and the FAA signed off on the program. These guys are just buying a couple hundred hours of training.

This discussion is like talking about abortion. It usually comes down to a discussion about morality. I think these programs take advantage of people that don't know any better. But that is the great thing about this country. You have a choice. Every day on the TV pitch men try to sell you their crap and you have the choice to buy it or not. Do you know what I think is seriously ignorant? Someone that would spend over a $100,000 to get a useless degree and their flight ratings at one of these aviation schools.

This world is ripe with people willing to take advantage of the ignorant. Half our economy is based on this fact. I actually think these programs can work for certain people that have a clear understanding of the benefits and liabilities. You can spew your hate for these people but many of these are not illegal programs (I do not know about the original poster). But just like these overpriced universities there are success stories and there are people making payments for things that will act like an anchor around their necks for many years to come.

 

[brokeflyer]

yes, but this sh1t hole DON'T have a provision in the ops specs for an SIC.

read the rest of the thread before you comment, then you won't be ignorant on the subject.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

I don't think anybody has a copy of their ops specs. Do you have a copy? I am not promoting the program nor have any evidence on its legitimacy. But this discussion has gone way beyond the original poster and their company.

 

[brokeflyer]

yeah I hear that. The point being they are charging people for flight time that can't legally log.

If they could log the time they were paying for then it would be diffrent, still sh1tty, but diffrent.

 

[time builder]

Avbug, you did exactly what I expected you to do. You couldn't respond to the legal justification of 135.267 and ops specs, so you turn back to your logic and morality arguments. You can call it what you want, but as with safety pilots and instructors splitting time, it's legally justified.

I never used 15 passenger configuration as legal justification for an FO on a cargo plane. That's absurd. To assert such only shows your own desperation. I only stated it as it was, justification for passenger operations. You've twisted enough, now you're trying to put words in my mouth. I've been trying to build on common agreements throughout this thread, now you're trying to use that against me? Doesn't surprise me.

Another thing, exactly who do you think I work for? I made the disclaimer a couple pages ago to cover my butt with my own company. I've veered away from mentioning my company's name for that reason. I don't fear the mob gathered here, however, I do respect my company. And if you do figure out who I work for, go to their website, dig up as much dirt on the FO program as you can, and put their own words against them.

As for the OP, his company cuts the FO a deal by running it "in house," their captains start at over $42K per year, which, if I'm not mistaken, is the best in the country for BE99s. They're still justified under part 135. Where's my motivation for attacking them? As far as I'm concerned they're raisng the bar, not lowering it.

You switch to the ops specs (their lack therof) as your primary objection to legal legitimacy, yet you provide no regulatory justification for your legal objection to them taking advantage of 135.267. I mean really, if a passenger operation wants to get 10 flight hours in 24 out of their captains, they can by putting an FO on board. What makes you think Frieght Runners can't? And leave your morality police badge on the table, let's just talk legally. Brokeflyer continues to assert it's illegal also, yet his best argument thus far is that he "used to be an inspector." Even if he were current, there's still inspectors who disagree with him and leave the programs alone.

On the subject of morality, if anyone still buys into Avbug's "rapist" analogy, you'd better open your eyes. You've been exposed to such things since your childhood. It's common practice for a student teacher (intern) to pay their program who in turn compensates the school and the (mentor) teacher for their liability and services in order to get real world experience teaching a real class. And you know what? It's at a higher rate than a BE99 captain is being compensated.

Don't kid yourselves that there's not more such internships throughout this country. Just because no one has bothered to research the specifics more than typing "internship" into a search engine and posting the wiki definition, doesn't mean there's not plenty of examples of cases similar to the subject of this thread.

Rationalizing, I think not. Students have a firm understanding that they do internships for the experience and education, not the pay. The mentors are compensated for their educating and liability. What more can I say than it's mutually beneficial. Yet the opposition comes from third parties who have little or no involvement.

It's the third parties that are rationalizing. The end justifies the means. After all, if they can stop internships, employers will be forced to pay for the on the job training. And isn't that the sentiment of the anti-pft mob? Some "rich kid" is getting an edge on his career because of his money and not his qualifications. We need to "level the playing field" for those who can't afford it. The ignorant continue to attack the "rich" for their percieved evils. This last element may not be avbug's argument, but it's certainly fuel for the masses.

 

[brokeflyer]

you can't legally log the time. Ill save everyone the time in reading.

no SIC is required per ops specs, aircraft cert or FAA requirement. No SIC can log the time.

the only way these people can log the time is to be sole manipulator WITH a multi-engine rating and instrument, ON AN EMPTY LEG, means no freight on board for you slow people.

So in other words, you can't LEGALLY log the SIC time with this dirtbag operation..period.

You can log it if you want, just dont let the FAA find out.