Pax on Cargo Only Flight?

[low&slow]

Here's the deal, I fly on-demand 135 cargo in a Seneca. We have a mechanic that commutes on my flight to work once a week. I know I can bring him with me because he is an employee of the company (135.85), however he now wants me to bring his wife up as well. I told him I would be unable, due to the fact that we are cargo only. Our Ops Spec indicates that the Seneca is approved for Pax & Cargo operations, however, I believe that the mechanic's wife isn't allowed under the Pax portion of the flight. This is due in part because we are single pilot, and an example of a rule that would be violated would be 135.101 (SIC), in addition to others. I have told him I can not bring his wife, and he has responded that the boss had approved his wife to ride along on the flights. I told him I don't care what the boss approved, that we are still not legal to bring passengers on the flight.

Am I correct in my interpretation of this situation? Any other insight I can use in my defense?

Thanks

 

[pilotyip]

You are right

On a part 135 cargo only flight it would be a violation to carry that mech's wife. You would be moving a passenger for compensation between two points. The compensation would be the mech's saving of an airline ticket. If you had a passenger certificate you cold carry her as a non-rev with company approval

 

[jergar999]

Check your op specs. If you have a functional 3-axis autopilot you may be able to substitute that for a SIC, and since the wife will not directly compensate you or your employer I would think it would be okay.

 

[embdrvr]

I would not take any pax that I was unsure about. Lots of guys get fired for that kind of stuff. Talk to your chief or DOO and get their explanation. If they give you a legit explanation and show you where in the Ops Specs it's permitted than you load up the mech's wife and go.
There is no compensation involved. The fact that she doesn't have to buy an airline ticket is not part of the equation.

 

[pilotyip]

Check FAA findings

They have violated in the past on this very case, money does not need to change hand to meet the FAA's defination of compensation.

 

[low&slow]

So far I have told him I can't take his wife with me, until someone at the company can show me in writing where it says it's ok. So far I don't think it is, so I'm taking the safe road and not bringing any passengers.

He was getting desperate the other day, and quoted the rule where it says I can bring a passenger necessary for the safe handling of animals (which would have been his cat). I laughed at him and told him that wasn't gonna work on me.

I would like to help him out, but not at my expense.

Oh and by the way, a functional 3-axis autopilot on a cargo plane?? Yeah right, I wish.

 

[A Squared]

Re: Check FAA findings

They have violated in the past on this very case, money does not need to change hand to meet the FAA's defination of compensation.

Can you provide some reference for this? I'm kindd curious about this issue and would be intersted to read about enforcement cases.

regards

 

[Airpiraterob]

pax

here's how it works in my reference world of freight.

where i was working. We could not carry any passengers that were not company employees. this is a normal operation theme universally.

to carry passengers the company must be insured to carry passengers. this is what allows AIR NET to carry jumpseaters. if im incorrect about them doing this let me know. to my knowlege up to last month they were still allowed to. For us to insure ourselves to carry passengers would cost $1000 per plane for the year and its plane specific....since we rotated planes on the routes for maintenence scheduling....we would have to insure all of them at once.

now if youre allowed to carry passengers by the ops specs of your company, and the insurance is there, and you can verify the safety of the flight then it is all 100% legal. BE SURE TO CLEAR IT WITH YOUR OPS THO.....dont for get the security/safety issues too. saving the cost of a normal ticket is not compensation. the plane has already been compensated for by the customer who is paying for the freight to be moved. dont forget. its a cargo flight. under 135 its a charter. already being compensated.

whoever got busted on the grounds "it was saving the cost of a ticket " must have been asking for it from that FED for a long time....unless he/she was getting ramped in the northeast by the ALB FSDO....and whoever knows of them....certinly knows what im talking about.

feds love to bust people sometimes....just call their controlling officer if youve got a good gripe, and they get repremanded and back down. friends of mine have even gotten letters of apology form them.